NYC bans sale of large sugar-based drinks

Discussion in 'The Lounge' started by gman863, Sep 14, 2012.

  1. gman863

    gman863 MajorGeek

    In New York City, the government is now attempting to watch your weight for you, whether you like it or not.

    http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/national_world&id=8808841

    The law basically bans the sale of sugary soft drinks in cups larger than 16 ounces at restaurants, stadiums and theaters and will go into effect in about 6 months.

    If you read the article, however, you'll see loopholes in the law big enough to squeeze a 300 pound person through, including:

    * You can buy as many 16 ounce cups as you want at one time.

    * Grocery and convenience stores (such as 7-11) are not covered by the ban. Want a 64-ounce Big Gulp? Go for it; it's exempt from the ban.

    * Milkshakes and other milk-based drinks are also exempt. Fat people can still have their 700 calorie mucho grande verde Frappacino at Starbucks with no fear of the diet Nazis busting them.

    Even though I could stand to lose a few pounds, this law scares the s:*** out of me. If the government can regulate portion sizes on soft drinks, what's to keep them from limiting the size or calories of food portions (hamburgers, fries, etc.) or imposing a "fax tax" on any item over a certain calorie count?

    Big Brother is no longer watching you. Now it's Jenny Craig.
     
  2. DavidGP

    DavidGP MajorGeeks Forum Administrator - Grand Pooh-Bah Staff Member

    I have to say the sentiment behind this is good and medically sound as its to stop obesity and diabetes, but you have to then step back from this and say is the end user they right person to judge their life style?

    I agree with you "gman" in that loopholes are the size of the Channel Tunnel and would not stop the determined "fatty bad as hell for you" user.... as they can just buy more, maybe a deterrent in some cases getting off your *** to but more drinks but I doubt it.

    I think personal big brother is being a bit BIG! to be honest if we have medical taxes or payment for bad judgement and lifestyle then you can do what you want, just don't expect the rest of the tax payers to fund your medical bills, we sow and reap our rewards in this life.
     
  3. LauraR

    LauraR MajorGeeks Super-Duper Administrator Staff Member

    I was watching this on the news this morning.


    Government trying to control any of this should scare the crap out of everyone. Are people obese?... yes. Will government controlling the sale of soda size help that?...um, that would be a huge no.

    The only thing that can control people becoming obese are the people themselves.

    Btw, wasn't it NYC that told restaurant Chefs that they couldn't use salt in their food prep?
     
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2012
  4. gman863

    gman863 MajorGeek

    It's interesting that many states in the US have repealed motorcycle helmet laws; yet taxpayers still have to foot part or all of the bill when an un-helmeted rider's head has an unscheduled meeting with the pavement.

    Ditto for alcohol, tobacco and the litany of illegal drugs. From a socioeconomic standpoint, users are often the very people who fall under the one form of government health insurance for people under 65 currently in effect in the US - Medicaid.
     
  5. mjnc

    mjnc MajorGeek

    This topic was discussed in an earlier thread.


    A few things that made the strongest immpression on me were:
    • Mayor Michael Bloomberg tweeted that "More than half of NYC adults (58%) are overweight or obese"
    • The city spends $4 billion a year on medical care for overweight people
    • The Institute of Medicine said: "Although the exact mechanisms of how sugar-sweetened beverages contribute to obesity are not
      fully known, their link to obesity is stronger than that observed for any other food or beverage."

    That last point contradicts the claim from the cited article.
    I'm sure those 'loopholes' are intentional and serve to underscore the very limited nature of the ban.
    Certainly the ban isn't really meant to 'control' peoples eating habits. It just nudges people a bit to give more consideration
    to the consequences of the choices they are making.
    It doesn't actually 'ban' anything.
    It's a pretty l-o-n-g leap to go from that to baning Big Mac's and Whoppers and jumbo french fries.

    I live in a state the has alcoholic beverage control for distilled spirits (liquor) but you can get any kind of alcoholic drink
    in bars and restaurants, AFAIK.
    The sale of tobacco products is also restricted - sale to minors is prohibited.

    Neither of these regulations fully controls any behavior. Adults can still buy and consume as much alcohol as they like, or as
    much as they can stand, and there are still children who get a hold of and use tobacco.

    There are lots of ABC stores around and they do a healthy business.
    I've never heard anyone complain about the ban of tobacco sale to minors.

    These are just my thoughts and I truly don't mean to argue with anyone.
    I hope this isn't offensive to anyone.
     
    Last edited: Sep 15, 2012
  6. DavidGP

    DavidGP MajorGeeks Forum Administrator - Grand Pooh-Bah Staff Member

    Great post and I agree with your premise and text in that why should the general public fund care for those that partake in risky ventures, I see this all the time in the NHS in the UK, our A&E (ER to you American folk) is hammered are the weekends with drunken folk, should they not pay a fee as well as their NI (a tax in the UK) to the system.
     
  7. ASUS

    ASUS MajorGeek

    F... NY :flip
    Communists :kissmy
     
  8. the mekanic

    the mekanic Major Mekanical Geek

    I don't drink the crap anyway, so it really doesn't matter to me. One thing I will say is that obesity is out of control, and I have a cousin who finally laid off drinking easily a six pack of HFCS sweetened soda a day, and dropped a ton of weight.

    Obesity costs BILLIONS of dollars in health related issues, and I think that unless you have a bonafide condition which makes you obese (say, thyroid) you should be in more expensive risk pool that doesn't cost the rest of us.

    Maybe a risk pool would go alot further than attempting to legislate moderation. It's amazing how people start paying more attention when you hit them in the pocketbook.

    BTW, I squeezed two dozen lemons this morning, and used cane juice to sweeten the batch. DELICIOUS!!! :yum
     
  9. mjnc

    mjnc MajorGeek

    I rarely drink any of those. The way I see it, why pay for the stuff when you can usually get water for free.
    If they charge you 25¢ for the water, you'll still save at least 75¢ and it's more healthful.
     
  10. dyamond

    dyamond Imelda Marcos of Majorgeeks

    I can understand where people are coming from, people don’t want to be told what to do. I know I certainly don’t want anyone telling me what I can’t buy or have to buy but since we live in a world where people (seemingly) don’t care about their own well being, then I guess the gov’t feels obligated to step in and try to guide people in the right direction.

    Is this law really any different from the new healthcare law where we will be forced to buy/have insurance or pay a fine? Or to a bit more of an extreme, is it much different from the numerous warning signs placed on literally everything? Aren’t both of these examples telling us what to do? Should we perhaps just remove all obstacles and allow nature to take its course? :-D


    I have to say that I applaud the intent behind this ban, not exact the ban itself. Soda, besides being the number one problem of all dental problems (children & adults), it's nutritionally vapid and that’s not even the worse part. High Fructose Corn Syrup, the main ingredient (in not only soda but about 90% of food products) is downright dangerous. The more research that is done in regards to the effects of HFCS the more damaging to the human body this product is found to be. With now fairly extensive research, HFCS appears to contain mercury, (link 2),It has been linked with several things including; Migraines, Liver disease, (link 2), (link 3), Gout, (link 2), Hypertension, (link 2), Insulin resistance, (link 2), which helps lead to Diabetes, (link 2), Obesity, (link 2) because it blocks the chemical Leptin (link 2) which allows the brain to be triggered when it's full which results in overeating. Last but not least it's also connected to Autism, (link 2). Now isn't THIS a little more scary then someone telling us that we shouldn't consume said product?

    I just don't understand how people either don't care, don't know or don't care to know just what exactly they are putting in their bodies.
     
  11. Rikky

    Rikky Wile E. Coyote - One of a kind

    Now New Yorkers can wash their freedom fries down with a government mandated regulation sized beverage.

    Taste the Irony:cool
     
  12. the mekanic

    the mekanic Major Mekanical Geek


    I concur wholeheartedly.

    Something most people don't realize is that HFCS is produced from fermenting corn, and treating it with an enzyme which a form of eukaryotic bacteria uses to metabolize wood. Xylose isomerase comes from various bacterial eukaryotes like Pasteurella pestis, Lactobacillus brevis, and even alkaliphile extremophile bacteria like Thermophilic Bacillus. The enzyme actually helps certain bacteria metabolize cellulose, a.k.a wood or plant fiber. It has even been extracted from a xerophytic (occupies arid environment) eukaryote such as Opuntia vulgaris, more commonly known as the prickly pear cactus. Your body does not metabolize xylose (type of sugar), but it does have a medical use for the xylose tolerance test. This can tell doctors how well you are absorbing nutrients from your intestine, as it passes through the human body unchanged in it's molecular structure. If you are suspected of having Crohn's, Celiac's, or even a parasite (e.g., tapeworm) such a test would be administered.

    In plain English, do you really want to ingest something allegedly "all natural" produced from fermented corn starch, converted with an enzyme that helps bacteria digest wood, considering it's an enzyme whose sugar (saccharide) your body cannot metabolize?

    I wouldn't think so...
     
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2012
  13. Spad

    Spad MajorGeek

    I believe so . . . and yes, this kind of government regulation scares the crap out of me. Supporters huff and say it's beneficial and filled with good intent . . . but history is sadly full of good intentions that have led to some horrific outcomes. Road to hell and all . . .

    "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help." -- Ronald Reagon
     
  14. the mekanic

    the mekanic Major Mekanical Geek

    The core issue with this was not necessarily the size of the drinks but the type of sweetener used in those size drinks.

    I'm sure that it was cane sugar sweetening the beverages it would be a non issue
     
  15. gman863

    gman863 MajorGeek

    In Mexico and many other countries, Coca-Cola and other major soft drinks are still made with pure cane sugar, not HFCS. In Texas, Mexican Coca-Cola is considered a bit of a delicacy - a single 12-ounce bottle sells for about $1.50.

    In the US, many soft drink makers such as Pepsi are marketing Kosher versions of their products - once again made with real cane sugar. In addition, H-E-B (one of the Texas' largest grocery chains) now offers a store brand line of pure cane sugar soft drinks that sell for only slightly more per 12-pack than the HFCS version.

    Getting back to NYC's ban, I doubt it will have any impact on how chubby New Yorkers are. If you want a 64-ounce soda, simply stop in the quickie mart on your way to McDonald's.
     
  16. dyamond

    dyamond Imelda Marcos of Majorgeeks

    I agree!

    When I did my research on HFCS, (side note: I learned SO much from watching this video, I've watched it probably 10 times already. I posted it in another thread here). I found out that ALL of it goes straight to the liver to be metabolized, where as real sugar goes to the pancreas to create insulin, etc. The job of the liver is to filter the bad things out of your system, so why would you want to continually consume something that your body is already telling you is bad?

    I was just at the doctors office and he asked me if I get migraines. I said I only get them if I eat something with HFCS in it, so I stay away from that stuff like the plague and he gave me a very emphatic "GOOOOD!", I even asked my friend, who is a pharmacist, what he thought of HFCS and he replied "don't take it". The evidence is out there but it leads me back to I just can't understand why people don't/won't care about what they eat??

    For the record, I think all sugar is bad; real sugar, fake sugar, HFCS. Out of it all, real sugar is the least dangerous to the human body if eaten lightly. I usually only drink water but occasionally I'll have a Sierra Mist (the only soda made with real sugar and they have this cranberry version they come out with in the fall and it is sooooo tasty :yum ).
     
  17. the mekanic

    the mekanic Major Mekanical Geek

    I know what you mean about people caring about what they eat.

    You can get sugar from various places like fruits and vegetables. That's pretty much how I run the show. I buy a case of San Pellegrino just about every two weeks, and we have filtered water in the pitcher, and the refrigerator.

    There was a study done years ago with lab rats regarding caloric intake. The rats who were overfed were less healthy, and aged more quickly. The rats fed a controlled calorie restricted diet were healthier, and had much longer lifespans than their peers. In addition, they were not obese like their peers.

    To top it all off, the restricted calorie diet caused cells in the rat's bodies to lose telomeres much more slowly, which resulted in them aging more slowly. A proper caloric intake can acutally increase not only health, but apparently lifespan as well.
     
  18. Phantom

    Phantom Brigadier Britches

    Yep, true, that. The conclusions was, that most of us would live longer if., on average, we consumed 30% fewer calories per day.

    The H.F.C.S. issue is mainly a political one. The U.S produces more corn than it can use. It has relatively few areas that are suitable for sugar cane farming. Cane sugar is many times more sweeter than either Beet sugar or corn syrup. One way to get rid of excess corn that would be otherwise difficult to sell, is to slip it into food and drinks instead of 'real' sugar, caring little whether it is bad for you, which it definitely is.
    Why aren't people up in arms about this? H.F.C.S. probably indirectly kills more people than tobacco, yet little is mentioned about this.
    In Australia, we have plenty of sugar cane from Queensland and no where near as much H.G.C.S. is used. But I have noticed it creeping into more and more products.
    The average fatty couldn't care less if it's good for them or not. It's all about the immediate gratification, you know.
     
  19. Goldenskull

    Goldenskull I can't follow the rules

    I still weight 190.I keep active a lot more then most people do.

    I still eat and drink the high calories Be cause my body need's it.F:*** the government I am more healthy then most people i rarely get sick i have not been to the doctors in over 5 year's.

    The stuff i eat and drink barely phases me any more when you been do this for 30 years then you barely fell it after a while.

    Unless they Ban all Soda and Beer,Wine,cigarettes ant going to happen.There are loop Holes every where.

    I mean look at Moon Shiner's they still do this in this day and age.So if there are Still moon shiner's out there then do they really think they can control these major corporation's that can just pay the government off with a few mill to keep hush hush.

    All it is a Big Scam from the government.:-D
     
  20. the mekanic

    the mekanic Major Mekanical Geek

    If we have a surplus, why is corn so expensive?

    250 in 2000, and just over a decade almost 700?

    Maybe the world needs another gram to get by.

    Sorry, I meant Dollar...
     
  21. dyamond

    dyamond Imelda Marcos of Majorgeeks

    The reason there is so much corn (and corn processed into HFCS) is corn is HIGHLY subsidized by the gov't. It makes far more fiscal sense for a farmer to plant corn and get a gov't subsidy then to plant something else and get nothing.
     

MajorGeeks.Com Menu

Downloads All In One Tweaks \ Android \ Anti-Malware \ Anti-Virus \ Appearance \ Backup \ Browsers \ CD\DVD\Blu-Ray \ Covert Ops \ Drive Utilities \ Drivers \ Graphics \ Internet Tools \ Multimedia \ Networking \ Office Tools \ PC Games \ System Tools \ Mac/Apple/Ipad Downloads

Other News: Top Downloads \ News (Tech) \ Off Base (Other Websites News) \ Way Off Base (Offbeat Stories and Pics)

Social: Facebook \ YouTube \ Twitter \ Tumblr \ Pintrest \ RSS Feeds