Let's talk about soda...

You all may have heard on the news that New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg wants to limit the sizing of sodas in restaurants in New York. His plan to ban sodas larger than 16 oz. was struck down by a judge in the 11th hour. But I wonder what folks think of this measure to fight obesity. Is it an effective and sustainable plan? If not, what's better?

Here's the answer I posted on the Bariatric Foodie Facebook Page:

I don't think it's an effective tool against obesity for several reasons. Firstly, it's a band-aid. The way to fight obesity is through education and awareness. The law made no sense in that grocery stores could still sell big sodas but restaurants could not (which would end up hurting restaurants but that's a whole other thread!). But really, does simply drinking less soda fight obesity? Or does KNOWING the impact soda have do a better job? If it were up to me I'd use imagery and/or words on soda cups that would get people's attention and that they could understand. It'd say in BIG letters "This cup has 75g of sugar in it. It is the equivalent of four donuts." (with pictures of donuts) and then have disclaimer much like we put on cigarettes that says something like "prolonged ingestion of high levels of sugar can lead to diabetes and other major health factors. One way to prevent these health factors is to limit the size and frequency of sugary drinks." And, of course, have the calorie count for the beverage ON the cup (for disposable cups). In restaurants put the calorie/sugar counts for beverages on the menu like they do for food. It will take a while but if you give the information in a way that has some context, people will start to think about it. That thought is what makes change happen. 

I think it's a ridiculous plan.  It's not like 17 oz sodas are the only thing that lead to obesity, or even the biggest culprit.  And it would be impossible to outlaw all high calorie foods and beverages.  Trying to force people to make healthy food choices is not going to work.

What would work?  Things like making WLS available to everyone that needs it, giving kids healthy school lunches and recess in school so they can be more active, working to make fresh produce accessible to people in "food deserts," providing education about what really works, etc.

Ok this may be a whole other debate point but my head screamed "no!" when you mentioned WLS. It's not that I don't feel like it should be widely available. I think I just believe there's more we can do on the front end. So I guess I agree with what you said even though something about it still makes me feel uneasy. Does that make sense?

Oh, I agree we should do things on the front end.  It would be great if we could prevent people from needing  WLS in the first place.  I just think it should be available to those that need it.

My opinion is that it needs to be confronted in schools if parents don't know and i believe that they don't understand nutrition for growing children...... Education!!!

Some people may have a medical problem that prevents them from losing weigh on a rational, well balanced diet and if the surgery corrects the problem then I think their insurance should cover it.  I draw the line at providing it for anyone that wants/needs to lose weight.  Why not give them discounts for gym memberships.  Or provide classes on nutrition.  To many adults are not being responsible where it comes to limiting the junk they consume on a regular basis.  

Re: WLS  I'm not convinced that the research is complete for RNY and other methods for the long term.  We have several years to go.

Adding:  The surgery is available.  Taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for it.

Your last line intrigues me. My surgery was paid for by the insurance and the premium from that insurance comes from my wages. I think that some people on medical assistance can get WLS. To me I don't mind as a taxpayer. I'd rather pay up front, one time, for the surgery than pay for decades of medical care and medication from resulting long-term obesity. Because in reality people may never change without a catalyst like surgery. So to me it "costs less" in the long run to provide an effective tool that gives the best chance of eradicating the problem.

Just my two cents. 

Why shouldn't tax payers pay for it when they pay for other health care?  For instance, in most states Medicaid pays for WLS, and Medicaid is funded by tax dollars.  Why should that not be the case?  Do you think tax payers should pay for gym memberships or nutrition classes for morbidly obese people instead of WLS, even though data shows that WLS is much, much effective for morbidly obese people than diet and exercise programs?

I believe people should have the right to control their own food and beverages. Yes many make bad mistakes but I do not believe it is governments place to dictate. We have the freedom of choice and I would hate to see us begin to lose our freedoms as the government steps in and takes them away one by one. That is just my opinion. I fear that if the Government steps in and starts putting rules in place on one thing it's just a matter of time until we have forfeited our right to freedom and risk becoming a country that is under dictatorship.

I know people blame McDonalds and other fast food establishments for their weight problem. But those places did not force those people to order 2 large calorie burger with super size fries and full sugar drinks for their meals (yes I have watched many people in these places eat orders like this) . They have healthy options but not many people order the healthy options and go for the high calorie foods instead. There is a place for the super size fries. I used to get them and share them with my family so we didn't have to order complete combo meals for everyone. It was cheaper that way. Plus I used to go grab lunch then I'd want a large diet soda to take back to the office so I had something to drink for the rest of the afternoon.

For me I was happy that it was struck down in the 11th hour.

I think kids would benefit from being taught health issues in elementary grades rather than waiting until their Senior year when they have already gotten an established eating pattern. The schools have already made major changes in their menus but the kids do not understand the whys behind it. They are just given foods that they complain about but aren't being verbally taught how calories and fat grams affect their weight and healthiness.