New Yorkers are headed toward leaner times. The New York City Health Board recently approved
a ban on large sized soft drinks proposed by Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Is Big Government now targeting Big People’s
Big Drinks? Does the government have the
right to restrict free choice 0n what we eat or drink? Does the argument that this is a necessary public
policy initiative pass the smell (or taste) test? Will this edict result in measurable weight
loss? Do we know as fact that weight
loss saves health care dollars or do we assume so simply because the conclusion
appears logical?
First, the policy is riddled with nonsensical exceptions. If banning large drinks is right and proper,
then why not ban them all, not just certain sizes at certain
establishments. Does it make sense to
ban large drinks at movie theaters, but permit continued guzzling at
convenience stores and vending machines?
If the product is evil, then shouldn’t any size of these life
threatening beverages be poured down the drain?
Does it make sense that unlimited refills of smaller size sodas are
permitted? So far, does the policy seem
rational and coherent?
Once the measure takes effect in March, movie patrons can still live
dangerously and stay within the law simply by ordering several smaller sizes of
the poison potions. Thirsty customers
can outfox the ban by purchasing multiple smaller sodas. These folks who are carrying 3 or 4 small
size drinks, rather than a supersize beverage, could easily spill them placing
themselves and other moviegoers at risk of serious injury. Those who adhere to the letter and spirit of
the new policy by purchasing only a single small beverage may not have sufficient
liquid to wash down the palm oil coated popcorn. As a gastroenterologist, I foresee several
cases of clogged esophaguses with popcorn gumming up gullets. I think the
government will have huge legal exposure on this issue.
Popcorn - An Innocent Victim
Do we think that New Yorkers who are forbidden to purchase large size drinks
at certain locales will seek out celery stalks and carrot sticks?
Folks who try hard to lose weight have a hard time doing so. Folks under the ban won’t get slimmer just
because the government restricts one food class at a certain size at some
locations.
Why stop at soda? If pop is the
enemy, then shouldn’t ice cream, candy, cake, doughnuts and fried foods be prohibited? I am sure there are those who would support a
government mandated menu that we would all be forced to swallow. For these do gooders, government knows best.
Explain to me please why banning soda is necessary public policy while
liquor and cigarettes are legal in any quantity.
I want to drink what I choose. But I'm not drinking the Kool Aid.