Skip to main content

New York City Soda Ban is a Hard Swallow


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.

Comments

  1. You have to eat 4 Big Macs to equal the fat content of a large bucket of buttered popcorn. Will butter be the next thing to go? What ever happened to people being responsible for their own actions and the consequences???

    ReplyDelete
  2. Personal responsibility? For my own knowledge, what planet do you inhabit?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think increasing calorie content awareness and more education about nutrition may do more than this soft drink ban. What a waste of time and money!!!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Earth. Pass the popcorn.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I seem to be the lone dissenter so far, so here goes.

    By your own admission in your post about probiotics, nutrition is not one of your areas of expertise, calling it a 'soft subject' that was not included as part of your medical training. You then go on to not-so-thinly imply that wellness and preventive medicine are little more than New Age silliness, on par with incense and crystals. And now, on your rant about Big Gub'mint Soda Usurpation you highlight the myriad evils of government intervention into such matters as diet.

    Perhaps if people like you, who are the subject matter experts in the structure and function of human digestion, took nutrition more seriously there would be no need for admittedly ham-handed government policies aimed at trying to do SOMETHING about the epidemic of adult AND childhood obesity.

    Perhaps if people like you were more interested in the prevention of diet-related disease, instead of profiting handsomely from it, the information vacuum would not need to be filled by expensive, intrusive, and, usually, ineffective public policy mandates.

    I don't at all disagree that much of the nutrition and wellness products industry is nothing more than junk science and slick marketing. But I suspect that your obvious disdain for non-FDA sanctioned remedies has less to do with a preference for the scientific method, and more to do with a generalized fear that your professions five-figure cash cows (e.g. colonoscopies) might one day be rendered obsolete by smaller portions, more nutrition education, and, quite possibly, a more effective digestive system courtesy of a little, round capsule.

    ReplyDelete
  6. To the lone dissenter above: Why remain anonymous? I agree with much of your comment but you are dead wrong that my views can be explained by a fear that my income might be threatened by any medical advance. If you take some time to read through other posts on this blog, particularly in the Ethics Quality section, you might realize that this gratuitious sentiment is misplaced. Nevertheless, I appreciate your view and thank you for commenting.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Looks like one guy didn't drink the soda ban Kool Aid! http://goo.gl/O8lT3

    ReplyDelete
  8. Soda has nothing to do with people getting obese in NYC or Worldwide. There many countries where soda is being sold and consumed every freken day and they do not consider soda to be the culprit of their obese population. What about Deserts served after dinner?...that's contain more sugar than soda...what about all the candy sold/used in Halloween? What about the crappy sugary treats your companies have at corporate for all the employees that work for you at Bloomberg? What about ice tea, ice cream, etc...etc...etc. ?.....dear Mr. Bloomberg, what really make people obese is the Saturated Fat amount on products that we consumed every day....I understand that Soda is not healthy, but don't just use it as the culprit that make people in NYC fat.

    - James

    ReplyDelete
  9. @NYC Body - well said. Big Gulp is not the enemy. Poor Bloomberg just took another hit on 'stop and frisk' yesterday.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why Most Doctors Choose Employment

Increasingly, physicians today are employed and most of them willingly so.  The advantages of this employment model, which I will highlight below, appeal to the current and emerging generations of physicians and medical professionals.  In addition, the alternatives to direct employment are scarce, although they do exist.  Private practice gastroenterology practices in Cleveland, for example, are increasingly rare sightings.  Another practice model is gaining ground rapidly on the medical landscape.   Private equity (PE) firms have   been purchasing medical practices who are in need of capital and management oversight.   PE can provide services efficiently as they may be serving multiple practices and have economies of scale.   While these physicians technically have authority over all medical decisions, the PE partners can exert behavioral influences on physicians which can be ethically problematic. For example, if the PE folks reduce non-medical overhead, this may very directly affe

Should Doctors Wear White Coats?

Many professions can be easily identified by their uniforms or state of dress. Consider how easy it is for us to identify a policeman, a judge, a baseball player, a housekeeper, a chef, or a soldier.  There must be a reason why so many professions require a uniform.  Presumably, it is to create team spirit among colleagues and to communicate a message to the clientele.  It certainly doesn’t enhance professional performance.  For instance, do we think if a judge ditches the robe and is wearing jeans and a T-shirt, that he or she cannot issue sage rulings?  If members of a baseball team showed up dressed in comfortable street clothes, would they commit more errors or achieve fewer hits?  The medical profession for most of its existence has had its own uniform.   Male doctors donned a shirt and tie and all doctors wore the iconic white coat.   The stated reason was that this created an aura of professionalism that inspired confidence in patients and their families.   Indeed, even today

Electronic Medical Records vs Physicians: Not a Fair Fight!

Each work day, I enter the chamber of horrors also known as the electronic medical record (EMR).  I’ve endured several versions of this torture over the years, monstrosities that were designed more to appeal to the needs of billers and coders than physicians. Make sense? I will admit that my current EMR, called Epic, is more physician-friendly than prior competitors, but it remains a formidable adversary.  And it’s not a fair fight.  You might be a great chess player, but odds are that you will not vanquish a computer adversary armed with artificial intelligence. I have a competitive advantage over many other physician contestants in the battle of Man vs Machine.   I can type well and can do so while maintaining eye contact with the patient.   You must think I am a magician or a savant.   While this may be true, the birth of my advanced digital skills started decades ago.   (As an aside, digital competence is essential for gastroenterologists.) During college, I worked as a secretary