In “Sticky Issue: Does the Soda Industry Skew Research on Health Effects?”, written by the Los Angeles Times, the author reveals to the public that almost all studies paid for by the beverage industry alter the results in favor of the industry. Only a very small percentage of the studies relate pop to obesity. The industry’s only concern is to make money, without any regard to how it affects the population. The author claims that scientific results can be influenced by money. If the researcher has any connection to the company it is likely the researcher made changes to his or her results that supports the company. There has been a drastic increase in obesity in the world, as well as an increase in soda consumption. More than one-third of …show more content…
The beverage industry sued San Francisco for trying to put health warnings on ads for unhealthy drinks. The industry claimed that San Francisco was restricting their First Amendment rights. The court ruled, rightly so, that San Francisco had a right to enforce the law. This is a major improvement and will hopefully contribute to decreasing obesity in America. This case proves that the beverage industry is trying to hide the connection between sugar-sweetened drinks and health issues. Although the warning label will hurt the beverage industry, it could save many lives and people should work to make the label widespread. Obesity, as well as other health issues, is a widespread problem throughout America. Beverage Industries are paying researchers to change scientific conclusions about any potential health problems that could occur from drinking beverages with sugar regularly. The majority of the population is aware that sweetened beverages have negative health effects. Nevertheless, there could be people that follow the beverage industries inaccurate findings and believe there is no connection. Therefore, the industry needs to stop covering up the truth and allow the population to choose if they want to drink sweetened
. . . In this issue of the JCI [Journal of Clinical Investigation], Stanhope and colleagues demonstrate that consumption of fructose-sweetened but not glucose-sweetened beverages for 10 weeks increases de novo lipid synthesis, promotes dyslipidemia, impairs insulin sensitivity, and increases visceral adiposity in overweight or obese adults” (Abstract). Fructose sweetener is another way to say high fructose corn syrup. This study proved that fructose sweetened drinks caused harm to the body and signaled a starting point for diseases such as metabolic syndrome, obesity, insulin difficulties, high blood pressure, high triglycerides, low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and ultimately coronary heart disease. Not only does high fructose cause stress on the body, but fructose can also cause serious
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
Mark Bittman a columnist for the New York Times and author of “Bad Food? Tax It, and Subsidize Vegetables” “July 23, 2011”, argues that people should open their eyes and fight to decrease obesity by going against the processed foods industries that make the bad foods. Bittman supports this thesis by saying how the food industry is incapable of marketing healthier foods, that instead of subsidizing production of unhealthy foods they should be taxed and make healthy food more affordable and available, then he goes on by saying how much money can be saved by taxing per ounce of sugar in sweetened beverages by one penny lastly Bittman claims how our society is profiting off of foods that make us sick and obese and how America could make a program
Melanie Garcia, Joey Esquivel, Jessica Lemus, Ana Lomeli, Lisa Odom BUS 18A, SECTION NUMBER 1072 CASE BRIEF: Due 11/24/15 (481 words) 1. Case Name, Citation & Court: Miller Brewing Company, Plaintiff-Appellee, V. Falstaff Brewing Corporation 655 F.2d 5 211 U.S.P.Q. 665 (1981), U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit 2. Key Facts A. Miller sold and advertised reduced calorie beer under the name “Miller Lite” since 1972.
population would cut the number of children and adults struggling with obesity and other health-related conditions. The last few years, the numbers of children and adults facing obesity have drastically increased. “Obesity causes diabetes, heart disease, and cancer,” emphasizes Dr. Steven Safyer President and CEO of Montefiore Medical Center. Such high populations suffer due to absent understanding what the proper serving size is. Congro acknowledged in Sugary Drinks over 16-Ounces Banned, “Unless they get the educational portion along with it, they won’t understand why it’s being a banned and how it relates to them personally.”
It is believed that many of the soft drink companies are the main reason for the rise of obesity in America. As stated in the article Coca-Cola and the fight against the global obesity epidemic, “The soft drink industry as a whole, and Coke in particular, has received harsh criticism for contributing to the global obesity epidemic. ”(Gertner 15).This suggests that as soft drinks and other processed foods are becoming more popular it is heavily contributing to the recent rise in people becoming overweight. Before fast food and soft drinks were popular, less people were obese which leads to the speculation that it is a cause for the problem. On the other hand there are studies that reveal that dietary factors don’t always affect a person’s weight.
Despite any positive outcomes that the soda ban may bring, I believe banning soda from New Yorkers is not an effective way to reduce these numbers. Healthy living needs to be taught for it to be probably practiced across all the states.
In David Zinczenko’s essay “Don’t Blame the Eater”, the author shares his sympathy for a group of young people suing McDonalds for making them fat. Zinczenko makes a point that the surplus of fast food chains and the amount of advertising they are allowed has a serious effect on today’s youth. He goes on to argue his stance that the “eaters” are not to blame. His tone in the article struck me as if he was accusing those who hold unhealthy eaters responsible for their own actions as “victim blamers” who lack empathy and the understanding of how the food industries work. I felt as though he was coming off as too defensive and a bit arrogant.
¨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.
Trinity Lewis Ms. Glenn ENG 101 XJ65 26 April 2023 The Fizz on Soda Critique The documentary, The Fizz on Soda discusses the brief history of soda and how modern-day soda contributes to obesity and related health risks. Throughout the documentary, the editors use a multimodal approach at convincing the audience that soda no longer has the healing properties that it once did.
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”
Did you know that 60% of adults and one in four children in Australia are overweight or obese, making us one of the most overweight developed nations? Almost half of our population comsumes a sugary drink each day. I believe that it is about time we do something about this. With sugary drinks and weight related health problems closely linked, leading experts from the cancer Council, diabities Australia and the Heart foundation say the sugar tax would be a great solution.
Cannibalising standard variants: Rising awareness of soft drinks-related health issues, in particular sugar levels, has sparked a trend for “better for you” beverages globally. As for Coca-colas’ carbonates, some countries saw standard cola are being cannibalised by low calorie colas and this represents a challenge. Coca-cola must continue to sustain growth in standard cola and expand low calorie
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