SP Premium
250,000-299,999 SparkPoints 277,816

63 calories

Tuesday, July 24, 2012

I read in the health noews about anidea that the New York City administration has come up with.
The proposed rule put forward by Mayor Michael Bloomberg would restrict the sale of sodas and other sugary drinks to servings of 16 ounces. While nutritionists applauded the move, critics see it as another step toward a "nanny state."

The rule would, according to researchers, save 63 calories in a fast food meal (provided you usually drink the larger soda) If you eat that food once a week it is a pound a year. If you eat fast food every day it is almost seven lb/year (very generalised, the other day I referred to this article that showed that our metabolism differs a lot)

i can´t see that it makes enough difference to be worth taking a fight for - or is it the start of actions that might really change the direction obesity is going?

I find the "freedom" discussion silly, America does not get less free because restrictions about soda sizes is declared. In Sweden the rightwings used to refer to USA as a country to follow for "freedom" - weapon laws, tax laws, employment laws etc.
When I was in Texas around 1990 I found this sign in Austin - I can´t find the photo now, but it amused me. It said something like "curfew for youngsters under 18 to be in the city center between six in the evening and six in the morning unless in a compay of an adult" Obviously the citizens of Austin thought that was an ok restriction to have - in sweden such a proposal would have been called "stalinism"...

During world war two our petrol was restricted and some foods also. Research showed that the swedish population during those years lost weight and became healthier - just because they had to...

I m convinced that the "epidemic obesity" is connected to exposure. It is not that we are lazier or more studip or have less willpower - it is a lifestyle that society has encouraged that makes it easy to exercise less and eat more processed foods.

So laws would probably have some effects. But I would prefer if they put more energy into planning - nowadays they do a much better job in creative safe bicykle roads and creating better commuting systems but there is a lot more to do in that area...

Personally I try to expose myself as little as possible - soda is not that much of a danger as I don´t like it but other caloric easy-snacked food I try to keep out of sight. If I was deadly serious about lifestyle I would move closer to work - thus making it able to go to work by bike, today it is not realistic.

My sister worked in Africa with health care for si months - she lost lot of weight, not on purpose, there was simply not that much junk food around and she was working.

It would be interesting to build a "health city" and populate it with obese people and after a year or so find out what had happened to the weight ...

Just fantasizing ...
Share This Post With Others
Member Comments About This Blog Post
    I think it would be great if they reserved the sale of sodas to even 12 ounces. When I buy a 12-ounce can of soda that is satisfying enough.

    Studies have shown that when a person is offered larger portions they eat more. If they are offered smaller portions most people stick to that size portion and don't take more.

    If the sale is for only so many ounces and they want more, they can alway buy another serving, or if at a fast food place they can go back for a refill.

    Nobody is trying to force people to limit themselves. What this new bill would do is to aid people in listening to their body's. What this new bill would do would be to give subtle messages that limit a persons intake to what is more natural to the body. It is the super-sized portions that have undermined a normal level of intake and greated added to obesity, especially when this starts in a persons youth.

    So, I am all for setting limits on amounts, and getting sodas out of schools, and the new changes that are being made to the school lunch menus. What I see happening to the school lunch menus is that they are going back to the type of school lunches that I grew up with: balanced and wholesome, limiting excess carbs, and cutting sweets. YEAH!

    2673 days ago
    I do oppose the intrusion into my food choices..Warning labels would seem more appropriate! although one wonders just how much influence they have had on cigarette packs. I think education is a far better influence than restriction. Then people can make informed choices, or suffer the consequences. More will listen than not i think. When we told and then showed people how bad cigarette smoke was for them, many began to listen and do something about their habit. I was one of them. Been totally smoke-free for 21 years. Praise the Lord!
    The other topic you alluded to was processed food. I was just reflecting today on how few food coupons I use for my shopping now that I eat mostly healthy foods. Most of the available coupons are for processed and junk foods, and that's counting cereals, snacks, frozen dinners, etc. The manufacturers really push their chemically contrived goodies to an unsuspecting public. ONCE AGAIN, people need to read the nutrition labels, which if you are even a little educated/aware on the subject, read LIKE A WARNING LABEL!!! So there you have it. emoticon
    2674 days ago
  • SILLYHP1953
    I love how you can read about something going on in the world and come up with so many good ideas to discuss it. Most big business is not interested in our health, just our money.
    2675 days ago
    Money does talk.
    But for me; it's a matter of choice and personal responsibility.
    Interesting, this past week. Grand kids went to the fair and instead of paying $4 for a soft drink they were stopping at a local spot that had ALL SIZES OF SOFT DRINKS for 99 cents. The two that are not allowed these ordinarily; ordered the Large-32 oz. The one that is not banned from these, ordered a small. Social engineering doesn't work; there are always unintended consequences. No easy answers.
    2675 days ago
    An interersting discussion....

    I think part of the reasoning here is that schools and other institutions that we trust to care for our children should have a higher standard of behavior, whether it is in in ethics or food...I am not sure that restricitng pop is the way to go....it is also a big fight against multinational corporations who will gladly encourage us to wreck our health if they can make a profit out of it.....

    Food for thought....no pun intended!

    2675 days ago
    I was thinking of "Supersize me" and brining it into the discussion, but have to admit that I suddenly got tired of the whole thing - I have argumented som many times about how society influences your choices that I am kind of bored with it... but the idea of a Health city amused me...
    2675 days ago
    Your idea of a 'health city' put me in mind of The Eden Project. If we combined some ecologically-sound planned communities with the focused-health aspects of something like diet + fitness, well, wouldn't THAT be a worthy experiment--! I'd be willing to give that a shot.
    2675 days ago
    i like your idea about a health city:-)

    have you seen the movie supersize me? the thing about the restriction is that to begin with soda (pop, läsk) is nutritionally worthless - it adds absolutely nothing useful to a diet, just sugar. which is the cause of major health problems in the US. and 16 oz is almost a half liter - think about it, if you have a liter of milk in the fridge - would you want to sit down and drink more than half of it with your meal? at least you would get some calcium with it, and not just sugar. and people who drink the larger than half-liter portions of soda (pop) do so more than once a day.

    portions in general in the US have grown over the past 40 years; the standard (corelle) plates i had when i was first married in 1972 are smaller than the standard plates today - and people fill those plates and go back for more. which is why obesity is such an epidemic in the US.

    i've always envied people who *do* drink soda and want to lose weight - because, if you can only break the addiction, those are easy calories to cut out - and you *will* lose weight.

    as for the critics - they are not representatives of freedom, but representatives of the soda industry. and money talks.
    2675 days ago
  • Add Your Comment to the Blog Post

    Log in to post a comment

    Disclaimer: Weight loss results will vary from person to person. No individual result should be seen as a typical result of following the SparkPeople program.