¨Several critics questioned why the city was making proposal on sugary drinks a priority when some city schoolchildren have no physical education classes.¨ (Washington TImes) In New York, Mayor Bloomberg placed a law on the sizes of soda citizens are allowed to get. However, this caused a lot of controversy on whether the ban was good or bad. Despite the amount of people supporting the ban´s choice, the ban does have some downsides on it. It is not a good idea to limit the amount of a soda a person can purchase (or propose the ban) because it's not applying to all, it's taking rights away from people, and itś not a big deal. The soda ban should not be placed down since it is not applying to all, but a certain amount of people. It is not going to …show more content…
That is true, however this argument is weak because there are in fact bigger problems than soda being a health issue. Itś your choice on whether you drink soda or not. It won't do much damage unless it becomes a very consistent thing. Though soda is bad, we have much bigger problems killing people. For example, cigarettes or smoking in general. It affects people who are not even committing the action, but people who are near it. The soda ban should not official because of those bigger problems. Stated in ¨Soda´s a Problem But…¨ on page 288, ¨There are times when the government has to step in on obviously dangerous situations- especially those, such as smoking, that affect the people other than the person whose behavior would be curbed-...¨ (Klein, 289) Furthermore, Cigarettes affect more than one person. The Soda Ban is something we shouldn't be worried about if we have another problem possibly killing someone faster and quickly. Despite the mentions of it reducing health issues, the ban still does not deserve to be put in place since there are other severe problems that should be discussed
Did you know that Americans spent $76 billion dollars on soda or energy drinks in 2013? Teens today consume too much sugar from sugary drinks. The youth today are more unhealthy than previous generations and need to reduce their sugar. The article,”Soda Showdown”, written by Rebecca Zissou, presents two perspectives about taxing sugary drinks. One perspective is that there should be a tax on sugary drinks.
Taxing Sugar Sweetened Beverages and the Resulting Effects on Obesity Margot Sanger-Katz’s article “Yes, Soda Taxes Seem to Cut Soda Drinking” in The New York Times is an interesting, albeit brief, cross-examination of different research on the effects that the implementation of taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) has on obesity and weight gain in the population. It provides brief examples assimilated together in an attempt to discuss a highly important current public health event that unfortunately comes across as a sloppy journalistic interpretation of significant scientific progress in the public health field. Though poorly executed, this article does start an important conversation: should public health policies exist that limit access to certain foods, especially if one of public health’s biggest issues is the lack of access to certain nutritious foods for low-income areas? Furthermore, does this “soda tax” actually decrease the amount of soda consumption? Although it appears that the author has missed the point, Sanger-Katz provides a link to an article in the New England Journal of Medicine that actually answers both of these questions magnificently and insists that though thirty-three
Should Soda Pop Vending Machines Be Permit on Middle School and High School Campuses? In many schools, soda pop vending machines would be the essay way to provide a popular drink such as coke in middle schools even in high schools but can you imagine if this will be continued? For many reasons this product can be the majority of problems in obesity in more diseases why? coke contain a substance harmful for our health, the way how we manipulate this type of drink, well there are some information that infers.
M.E. Cohen’s cartoon focuses on persuading parents and teachers to guide children to make the right decisions about health. Cohen illustrates the problem adults have caused on the matter of children’s health due to the adults inability to listen to their own advice. Cohen believes that failing to make good decisions about nutrition may negatively impact students; however, adults are also responsible in helping children to make the right choices. Using a cause and effect format, Cohen introduces the negative effects adults with an unhealthy lifestyle have on children. Cohen shows the soda machine that includes the words, “Soda ban!”
Although numerous amounts of people believe they should be able to make their own decisions, the government should be able to control what Americans are consuming because of children, health, and the future.
The soda ban is a defective idea in itself because of the loopholes in the plan. As Karin Klien talks about the problem in her article “Sodas a Problem but…”, “Convenience stores such as 7-Eleven are overseen by State and would be exempt , but a Burger King across the street would be restricted” (Klien, 288). In addition, there isn’t a need for this soda ban because it makes no sense for a customer at a fast food restaurant (like Subway) to walk across the street and go to a 7-eleven, which is a state-ran store that has drinks that are over 16oz., and even over 64oz. People could even go to a grocery store and buy a 2-liter bottle of the sugary drink because it isn’t run by the city. Another way the soda ban contradicts itself is because of how you’d get the same amount of sugar if you were to drink a drink from a smoothie
When sitting down drinking a diet soda people really don’t think about what makes diet soda diet. If food and drink companies put diet on front of something does that automatically make it beater or even good for the consumer? When making something diet companies usually go straight for the artificial sweeteners to drop the calories in a food or drink, and when people pick up the diet product off the shelf at the store and they automatically think its good or better for them because of just one little word added to the label. But is it really better for you or could these sweeteners be doing harm? Yeah it might help someone loose that one extra pound or help with fitting into that year-old pair of pants that someone has been just dyeing to
As the New York Mayor Michal Bloomberg is taking action against a soft drink industry. Mayor says that a ban is imposed on it because it has a big sugary drink. The mayor behavior could be considered biased towards specific company or product. There are lots of other, he should not ignore others. Everyone knows that lots of sugar are becoming the cause of problems in people like we drink almost daily like Coca-Cola, Pepsi, and other major soft drinks.
The New York State Court of Appeals ultimately made the right decision to block Bloomberg’s “soda ban”. There are some things that you can’t do, and there are some things that you aren’t allowed to do. The New York City Board of Health exceeded its regulatory authority by adopting the “Sugary Drinks Portion cap Rule”. “...The New York City Board of Health, in adopting
What about banning chocolate milk in our country? Believe it or not, schools are actually banning chocolate milk in their lunches. Many think that chocolate milk is unhealthy, but they are all wrong! Chocolate milk is helpful because it has a very healthy nutrient composition, a taste everyone loves, and can serve as a recovery drink after exercise. Many believe that chocolate milk is just all fat and is unhealthy, but that 's not true.
Government intervention in private affairs refers to regulatory actions taken by a government in order to affect or interfere with decisions made by individuals. First of all, I agree with the statement that government intervention in private affairs is always undesirable. Firstly, many consider it as an intrusion into personal choice as the government tries to intervene into private affairs. Besides that, people consider it to be a human rights violation. However, there are still positive sides to government intervention and this essay aims to examine whether government intervention in private affairs is always undesirable.
That is why many propose regulating the purchases of carbonated drinks pact with sugar, or more commonly known as soda. One can of soda contains about 2.5 tablespoons of sugar, and on average, 9% of the daily calories consumed per person is from soda. Due to the high numbers of obesity in America, soda’s and other drinks high in sugar, should be regulated. Obesity can lead to many health problems. Some issues that can potentially occur because of what the person is eating include diabetes, high blood pressure, coronary heart disease, body pains, and potential death (in fact, one article in The New York Times claimed sugar, more particularly soda, to “might just be the biggest killers via preventable disease in the country”
Each year, billions of gallons of soda are sold in the United States alone.” Soda must be allowed to middle schoolers during school hours. Soda should be allowed because kids need more of a choice at school and soda is not the cause of all the bad stuff. Soda must be allowed at middle school because kids need more of a choice at school. At many schools the only things to drink are milk, water, and a few other juices you have to pay extra for.
Introduction The topic which is critical issues on the implications of teens and children’s consumptions of sodas and other sugary beverages. Beverages are different types of drinks made for human consumption to quench thirst. Sugary drinks or soft drink
In fact, those who smoke have their life span shortened by about approximately. However, the government must ban tobacco smoking in order to prevent smokers from lethal diseases, protect nonsmokers as well as saving the environment. The most obvious reason as to why tobacco should be