|Have something to tell us at The Call? Drop us a line at email@example.com and we'll post it to our blog.|
American’s portion control problem is nothing new… or nothing to take lightly. But the fixation on banning sugary drinks is not the solution. Although cutting down on sodas and other sugary drinks is helpful in losing weight, to really make a difference, Americans need to fundamentally change their way of thinking when it comes to food, including plate sizes, exercise and diet. So while I applaud the Mayor for taking a step to keep people healthy, FORCING people to do or not do something will not change their habits, it will just make them resentful. I think a better solution, along with more education, is to provide more healthy and smaller options for less money. Instead of forcing New Yorkers to change, force those restaurants and chains to change instead – make them offer 8 oz. options, which cost what they’re worth instead of just .25 cents less than the bigger cup. Then maybe New Yorkers will do what’s right for them because they want to… not because they have to.
Mayor Bloomberg is defending his plan to ban big sugary drinks, the same day City Hall commemorated the 75th Annual National Donut Day. Some are calling the timing of the Mayor’s pitch hypocritical, but Bloomberg says critics are missing the point: Everything in moderation, and that includes donuts and soft drinks.
On his radio show this morning, the Mayor said his proposal announced yesterday to ban sugary drinks larger than 16 ounces from restaurants, movie theaters, stadiums, delis and food carts isn’t taking away anyone’s rights. He said New Yorkers can still drink 32 or 64 ounces of their favorite sugary beverage, but City dining establishments will have to serve it in two or three 16-ounce portions. This has many firing back, “What’s the point?” Bloomberg cited studies showing if the portion in front of you is smaller, you will eat or drink less. He then went on to criticize federal and state governments for not doing more to combat obesity, arguing public health is a government responsibility. Do you agree?
Should City government regulate your eating and drinking habits? How about federal and state governments? Why do you think Mayor Bloomberg decided to announce this proposal now? If it passes, will it change your drinking habits?
Respond with your thoughts using the link above.
I’m wondering if Mayor Bloomberg hasn’t confused his job description – it’s just mayor, not dictator. Hasn’t it occurred to him that, even if he is able to pass this ridiculous law banning the sale of large size sugary beverages, it would be a pyrrhic victory at best. Haven’t we learned anything from history and the lessons of Prohibition? As it was so aptly pointed out to me by a diabetic friend who doesn’t even drink sugary beverages, anyone who wants to have a larger drink only needs to purchase two of them!
I think they should be addressing the real issue which is the fact that the products contain high frutcose corn syrup and not sugar in the beverages which is not easily digestible?
Do people in politics don't know about this?
The size amount is definetely an issue and I agree it should be restricted so that we don't have to be subjected to buying a large soda when we only want or need an 8- 10oz serving .
They specifically made the drinks bigger so they can sell more soda and they don't care about how much we want to drink or even if it is healthy,(regarding the corn syrup)
I think that this ban on sugary drinks is going to far because we are a nation founded on democracy. How is this democratic to tell people what foods/drinks that they can/cannot consume? Additionally, educate the public not PUNISH the public.
I have solution for Mayor Bloomberg:
Have fast food places offer a small cup for the same price as the large cup but offer refills. Most likely people will not refill. If they do it is their choice.
This idea is based on psychological research where if given a large tub of popcorn you are likely to eat more even if it is so stale it squeaks when you eat it.
So people will drink less because of smaller cup, but feel less anxious about "not having enough" because they can get refills. Fast food still charges what they want.
What a bunch of hogwash this all is.
If the Government was concerned about our health, they wouldn't allow cigarettes, weirdo chemicals in food, modified food, generic drugs, etc etc etc.
This is about The Mayor having control and dictating to people what they can have.
Or it could also be that he is helping the restaurant industry with more income and himself by coming up with yet another fine.
Two people can split one drink, now they would have to buy two - so who is he helping really ? Not the consumer during a recession.
This is all a scam sham.
If it passes. He owns every panel in this city. They have no choice but to please him in every way.
Why the hell doesn’t he just go already with all the other cronies along with him. He keeps throwing all of his money around. Instead of going on WOR why doesn’t he just face us and we will have it out once and for all.
I still would like to know what his grocery bills have on them. I can’t believe this guy lives high on the hog and doesn’t eat or drink anything that he tells us not to.
When he has company at these venues of his I would be curious to know just what does he serve.
WE KEEP DISCUSSING ALL OF THESE PROBLEMS AND NOTHING IS SOLVED. ALL THE REPAIRS HAVE NOT BEEN DONE IN THE OUTER BOROUGHS. WE ARE HURTING IN MANY WAYS IN THE OUTER BOROUGHS AND HE COMES UP WITH THESE DOWN RIGHT STUPID IDEAS. AND EXPECTS A LEGACY.
Public Health has a responsibility to educate - not dictate. This Mayor is a scary. A private jet that uses a lot of jet fuel and carries a few people is also a health hazard. He should look in the mirror.
Drinking less sugary drinks is a good idea. Mayor Bloomberg needs to learn the concept of working from the grassroots up, engaging people, changing acceptable habits as happened with tobacco, and not taking a top down approach. Makes for headlines, but doesn't work.
I can't believe Bloomberg's talking about soda when every other ice cream truck, pizzeria, & halal food cart is selling oxycontin.
The government has no right to dictate what we ingest, imbibe, inhale or shoot up or the quantity thereof.
The sole function of government is to protect individual rights. As stated in the Declaration of Independence, “. . . .all men are created equal, that they are endowed. . . . with certain inalienable rights, that among these are the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” (And the right to property without which other rights cannot be secured.) “That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men. . . .”
Bloomberg’s actions are in violation of our rights. Dictating what people may ingest, imbibe, inhale or shoot up is a violation of rights and is unconstitutional. The constitutionally free individual becomes a slave of government, forced to obey it’s every edict.
So Bloomberg says you can get your big soda by buying two, apparently not caring that the vendor will be forced to dispose of all large drink containers and stock more of the size dictated by his fascist minions. What’s next, restrictions on belt size? Not to worry. If you’re too obese for the government dictated size of a belt, you can always buy two!
Fascism is a system of government under which property is ostensibly privately owned, but which is regulated by government and fascism is what Bloomberg is foisting upon us.
So, you can have a soda, but only in a government authorized size container. You can eat salt, but no more than dictated by the government. But you can’t have any trans-fats. And you better start eating more veggies or look forward to fine. Don’t forget the violation of property rights involved in the smoking ban. Only the owner of the establishment has the rights to set the terms of admission. If you don’t like smoke, go to another restaurant or bar. If there are no no-smoking facilities, build one. Otherwise, take a walk.
I can’t wait to see this fascist buffoon of a mayor out of office. He is destroying the NYC we all know and love. It’s going to take years to restore it.
Bloomberg's statement "New Yorkers can still drink 32 or 64 ounces of their favorite sugary beverage, but City dining establishments will have to serve it in two or three 16-ounce portions" has me a little confused!
I dine out quite often, but I've never been to a "city dining establishment" that served a 32 or 64 ounce "sugary beverage" or non-sugary beverage. Could someone name one establishment that does this?
The timing of the Mayor's ban was unfortunate, but the difference between large sugary soda and doughnuts is valid, even if nuanced. A doughnut is a treat, a "sometimes" food as Sesame Street says. On the other hand, these outrageously sized and very high sugar and high calorie drinks become daily habits. Every corner grocery is stocked with these drinks, and people drink them in place of water or as a regular accompaniment to a meal. A normal weight, healthy individual may have one doughnut a week or month with an otherwise healthy diet and have no longterm negative impact. That same person would never consider a 32 ounce regular soda. I am very fit and personally do not partake of either, but that's a choice. I know a doughnut once in a while will not make a difference. It is regular habits that count. These drinks are habits.
Doughnuts existed 50 years ago before our obesity epidemic while sugary drinks of this size did not. These drinks are not treats, they are daily beverages and part of a whole way of eating and mistreating our bodies. A doughnut may be that for some, but it can easily be a sometimes food. I get it Mayor. Please keep going for our children. I see kids walking to school sucking down these diabetes cocktails every day. We cannot let our kids grow up thinking this is normal. Thank you.
In grade school, a wise teacher once told me of type of government that regulates is a government that thinks it knows better than the people and doesn't believe that the public can be educated. This, he said, is a fairly accurate definition of Fascism. He then asked- "...and how do you think Fascism evolves from a democracy?"
The ignorance of many to not even know what Fascism is! If you want to fight for freedom, it comes through education not by regulations. I would have expected this of others... NOT BLOOMBERG.
Public health, like public safety, is clearly a government responsibility. Does any of us want insects or rodent excrement in our food or lead in our drinking water? Do we want to buy cars that are death traps or that pollute the environment? Do we want to experience massive epidemics because of vaccine shortages, vector-born illnesses like Lyme Disease, or STDs like AIDS, HPV, and, yes, even Syphilis? Obesity, and its sequelae, like hypertension, diabetes, heart disease, and stroke, kill millions of Americans every year, so why shouldn't efforts to combat these scourges also be our government's responsibility?
Sure, government shouldn't regulate personal behavior that endangers only one's self, but
how many personal lifestyle choices are truly without collateral consequences like family
decimation, loss of productivity, increased insurance rates, greater drains on public benefits, and other consequences that affect all of us? A healthier society is a more prosperous society, so why shouldn't public policy work toward this goal in ways that protect the personal freedoms that we all enjoy?
Those who complain about a "nanny state" should consider that, while some laws and regulations do attempt to regulate personal behavior, most are enacted to protect the larger community, and society as a whole, from people and corporate entities that have a responsibility to not endanger it.
Even the Mayor's ill-conceived downsizing proposal is a restriction placed on food merchants, who must follow numerous other health and safety requirements, and not on the right of individual consumers to drink all the sugary sodas they want to.
As for smoking bans in places of public accommodation, these weren't enacted to restrict a smoker's presumed right to smoke, but, rather, to protect the unalienable right of non-smokers to not smoke.
All rights, even fundamental ones, are subject to time, place, and manner restrictions that protect the rights of others, and laws that define our responsibilities to one another, and to our community, form the underpinnings of a free society.
The Mayor's anti-sugar plan is bad for the economy AND the ECOLOGY.
Nothing above 16 ounces? We'll have to double-up buying smaller containers
ADDING MORE CANS, BOTTLES, AND PAPER CUPS TO OUR BLOATED LANDFILLS.
Restaurants will use more glasses requiring EXTRA STOCK, STORAGE, DISHCLEANER AND WATER USE, (costs passed along to us).
Delis will have to DEPLETE THEIR CURRENT STOCK and USE TWICE AS MUCH SHELFSPACE FOR SMALLER CONTAINERS (that display horizontally, rather than vertically).
Bottling companies will have to refit their production lines AND BUY MORE SHIPPING TRUCKS EXPENDING MORE EXHAUST FUMES.
Many businesses may not afford adjusting to the fix.
IT WOULD ACCOMPLISH THE SAME THING EASIER TO SIMPLY REDUCE THE PRICE OF HEALTHIER ALTERNATIVES
ECONOMICAL ALTERNATIVES LEAD CONSUMERS IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
I can't beleive that the most important issue on the Mayors Agenda is sugary drinks!
He needs to start taking serious action against things that are even more dangerous to people, than the amount of sugar you drink, how about taking guns off streets?
How about protecting our neighborhoods from gang violence that is on the rise?
How about creating new jobs in NYC?
I mean, this is just the most ridiculous issue he could be talking about.
And how much extra money is Bloomberg going to make both personally and for the city in taxes when people have to pay for two 16 oz sugary drinks instead of one larger one?
Mayor Bloomberg doesn’t care what he says or does, it’s his last term. He has what the military calls “a short-timer’s attitude”. As in, what are they gonna do to him, bend his dogtags and send him to Germany? He’s reverting to his Republican roots and his Boston accent is coming back.
That said, it would make sense for the city to legislate health matters in government-controlled areas like schools. When people get diabetes and lung cancer from bad habits, it costs public money.
I think this ban is ridiculous and while the intentions are good they are going about it wrong people should be educated about healthier eating but at the end of the day it is the consumers choice to buy that 32 oz. drink. if the mayor is so concerned about the city health and obesity rate why do nyc schools have bad food choices and have the audacity to use this slime product in the meals to cut corners at the expense of our childrens health. Revamp the city lunch menu bring back physical ed maybe ppl will take him seriously.
I think that moderation is the key, just because you are thirsty you don't have to drink 40 glasses of soda. One or two is enough and just because it is national doughnut day it doesn't mean that you have to eat 40 of them just one or two is enough.
Everyone needs to lay off the mayor for trying to protect people that don't want to protect themselves. Try going to Japan and attempt to order a large anything....you'll be highly disappointed when you receive a NY size small!
the cost we all bear for increase in health insurance should make this rule necessary.
Leave sugary drinks alone and apply it to smokary cigarettes. Sell cigarettes in packs of 10 instead of 20 and beer in packs of 3 instead of 6.
I thought we lived in the United States of America and not the Soviet Union
Just another example of Bloomberg's misguided leadership. He would need a huge cool drink if he worked in one of his DOE classrooms earlier this week. Temperatures of 95+ degrees in unairconditioned rooms is unhealthy. Priorities Mr. Mayor.
Totally Agree w/ Caller Gary
El Bloombito has a wicked Napoleon Complex!
Why can't your callers get it? All this vitriol against the mayor in last night's program and again tonight! He's not banning or outlawing anything, just trying to persuade people to be aware of portion size. Why is that so bad?
Maybe they should just consider regulating by limiting the amount of certain ingredients in beverages per size of beverage. You shouldn't limit the selling size of a a company product but consider limiting the ingredient size in a product.
While I agree that New Yorkers should limit our intake of sugar and other unhealthy items, I think it's a little bit over-the-top for the mayor to make such a ruling. I agree with Josh in Flushing that a better approach would be to tax soda. Another approach would be to help make healthier options more affordable.
Also, regardless of any city ruling, I think stores, especially delis, should stock smaller portions. Many times, I have been shopping for a small soda, and the smallest option available was a 20-oz bottle. I do like soda, and it should be easier for New Yorkers to find smaller portions.
I’m all for making ALL portions smaller. Not only is it healthier, but it’s cheaper. When I go to a restaurant with my friends, none of us can ever finish our meals, they’re just too big in size and calories, and we can’t carry doggie bags around all day afterwards. I hope the mayor jumps on restaurants next by making them serve smaller portions for cheaper prices. I’m really tired of being crushed on public transportation by all the super-size fatties out there; pretty soon, they won’t even fit through bus or subway doors.
As Speaker John Boehner said so eloquently this morning "I like Mayor Bloomberg but -- ARE YOU KIDDING ME??!!
People are right Mayor Bloomberg -- you are becoming irrational and abusing the power of your office. You seem to be losing it now.
Upper East Side
Some of these arguments are absolutely ridiculous, especially the caller suggesting a mental illness. I drink soda almost every day but I don't need 32 ounces ever. This is not about my choice to consume as much as I want but rather how much SHOULD be served in one serving. He's not trying to regulate the people. He's trying to regulate the business. And this business doesn't care about negative health effects of consuming so much sugar in one sitting. As long as they get their profits they will keep trying to sell us Super Sized drinks in the name of bargain. Then there is also economic burden on society when so many people suffer from cardiac arrest or get complicated diabetes.
I wish he would run for President. He is brilliant. So, let's toast him with an eight ouncer only.
GLUTTONY AT ITS BEST.shame shame,shame,more, more ,more.......snap out of it.
My biggest problem with the opinion that "people can just buy another soda if they want more" is that then you're wasting more plastic! I think that his motive is wonderful (personally I drink soda probably once ever 2 months). I think that the way he is doing it is wrong. The mayor try a different tactic. It is definitely a government responsibility or at least service to help the population of NY with their super-sized sugar addiction!
I agree with the mayor
There should be a regulation on restaurants to limit the size they target to consumers as most consumers are not educated
And most of the drinks are not even made with real sugar as they use high fructose corn syrup to make most of the soda and non diet softdrinks out there
As a Registered Dietitian, I wholeheartedly believe that Mayor Bloomberg Has made the right decision. Obesity is a national epidemic that is gradually killing us. Working in a surgical weight loss program, the majority of my patients drink at least 500 calories from soda every day. Bloomberg is not removing choices as people may still choose more than one serving. He is trying to help us.
I believe tht the Mayor took the approach to punish those that don't heed his word. Meaning, if I say don't do, and you do it's going o cost you. So the city makes a profit on th misfortune of others. If you get mad at the fact that you can't have a 20 ounce, you buy two sodas and the city now rakes in on the taxes because no you have to pay taxes on both sodas instead of one. Brilliant, but sad.
Mayor Bloomberg needs to understand its not only the drinks with sugar. Is he going to start banning all other things that contain sugar? There are lots of people that are obese and it's not because they drink soda or any sugary drink. When I was young there wasn't so much stuff about foods and things like that and people lived longer. If you don't want your kids to Sri k it then don't buy it or if you do buy in moderation. Just because the smallest size is still big you don't have to drink it all.
Mayor Bloomberg is very progressive person, I don't think everyone can agree to his intension.
But see what happened with cigarette banning in NYC. Now whole country agrees and followed same direction in this country.
NYC is the most advanced city in the country if not in the world.
This initiative is the greatest one so far for this country, more than cigarette issues as cigarette is for only adults but 'sugar drink' is for everyone including children and who can not make self choice of their health.
So this is VERY important step he is taking for the people's health not only for NYC people, even for the country people in the future!!
This is such a big issue and hope it develops more the idea!!
Donuts contain so much fat and sugar that they are one of the un-healthiest foods on the planet. What hypocrisy! Typical bloomberg.
Poverty is driving the obesity rates, sugary drinks are a symptom not the cause. Healthy food and drinks (other than water) cost boku bucks. loaf of white bread, $1. loaf of whole wheat or grain bread, $4.50. cost of large bottle of soda, 99c. cost of large organge juice $3.99. fresh fruits and vegetables, very expensive. what is a family with kids who eat lots of sandwiches to do? the cost of living a healthy life continues to rise in NYC and working families are going to food pantries in record numbers. What kind of food do you think food pantries have? I’m sure that they don’t have $5 loaves of bread.
The arguments to Mayor Bloomberg’s proposed ban on super-sized sugary drinks show the ignorance that proves why the ban is necessary. There is no comparison between the health hazards of a large pastrami sandwich and a giant sugary drink (as Jon Stewart complained). Saturated fat isn’t dangerous, as the linked blog post below explains. Nor does the argument that “donuts are dangerous, too” make sense. A large sugary drink is more dangerous than a solid sugary dessert because of the speed with which the sugar hits the liver. Plus the danger isn’t only obesity – it’s heart disease, obesity, cancer, and more.
Most people are unaware of the dangers of sugary beverages – or the debate from the early 1970s on which dietary factor caused heart disease, sugar or fat (it is sugar, not fat –Ancel Keys is now widely thought to have been wrong).
I believe the Mayor took the approach to punish those that don't heed his word. Meaning, if he says don't do, and you, do it's going to cost you. So the city makes a profit on the misfortune of others. If you get mad at the fact that you can't have a 20 ounce soda, you buy two 16 ounce sodas and the city now rakes in on the taxes because now you have to pay taxes on both sodas instead of one. Brilliant, but sad. On another note, what's next, banning a carton of eggs because it gives you cholesterol, or a loaf of bread, cookies, cakes, potato chips, where will it stop.