What do you think of a ban on large soft drinks? Do you think this should be don

1. 85

   moonlakeposted 11 years ago

   What do you think of a ban on large soft drinks? Do you think this should be done.
   
   The mayor of NY wants to ban large sugared soft drinks.

   replyreport
2. 0

   Starmom41posted 11 years ago

   He's not trying to ban them completely, only in certain places like restaurants and theaters.  If a person wants them they can still buy the things at stores.

   replyreport
   1. 85

      moonlakeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The ban included restaurants, delis, movie theaters, stadiums and street carts. This was on the Today Show this morning.

      replyreport
   2. 91

      Sherry Hewinsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      At the movies is about the only time I would ever buy a large soft drink. The drinks are so expensive there, we usually buy the biggest one and share because it's the best deal.

      replyreport
   3. 0

      Starmom41posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      that's what I said-  certain places. 
      and not having an opinion is not a reason for a vote-down.

      replyreport
   4. 83

      SweetiePieposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      @Starmom,
      
      I think it is silly people voted you down for stating the facts.  I am not sure why people are panicking about this anyway.  In cities like London you cannot find sodas larger than 18 ounces anyway at places like McDonald's.

      replyreport
   5. 97

      Melissa A Smithposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The point is though, are they illegal in London? The businesses should be able to see what they want.

      replyreport
   6. 83

      SweetiePieposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      @Melissa,
      
      I just sort of like how in European countries people do not over indulge on large sodas, and even when they drink soda, it has real sugar.  I do not believe in bans, but I find it a bit odd people are defending corporations that push sodas

      replyreport
   7. 97

      Melissa A Smithposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Supporting freedom is not supporting the choices of these companies (or the people that lead them to do it). My opinion should not be relevant to what someone should be legally allowed to do.

      replyreport
   8. 83

      SweetiePieposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Well I think this corporate angle has a lot of do with it.  As I said I do not support bans, but it it going the way in this country corporate interests/freedoms are being put on a higher pedestal than individual freedom, aka Citizens United.

      replyreport
3. 97

   Melissa A Smithposted 11 years ago

   I find it ridiculous and insulting. As if restricting large sodas will even put a dent in the obesity epidemic, and as if the city's residents need the mayor to babysit them.

   replyreport
   1. 85

      gmwilliamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Totally agree!  It is now the era of Big Brother!

      replyreport
4. 73

   Barbara Kayposted 11 years ago

   It is just one more right taken away from people

   replyreport
5. 61

   duffsmomposted 11 years ago

   This is how it starts:  Oh we want to stop this product it is bad for you. 
   
   That is the beginning--and only the beginning.  I think it is a bad precedent.

   replyreport
   1. 83

      SweetiePieposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Well this is only New York City, and they are only putting a ban on the size of soda sold.  I am more concerned about the corporations pushing the mega sodas, even if I do not agree with the bans, per se.

      replyreport
6. 60

   tlmcgaa70posted 11 years ago

   little by little our freedoms are being taken away from us, all in the name of our greater good, our protection. i know many obese people who struggle daily with their intake, they exercise, they eat far less than skinny people, and yet they are obese. medicines cause weight gain, thyroid malfunction causes weight gain, and so many illnesses do to. to blame it ALL on the choice of food is ridiculous. the more aspects of our daily living and daily personal choices that the government takes away without a word in protest from us, the more they will control EVERY aspect of our lives. besides, the soft drink industry is huge and makes a huge amount of money, i seriously doubt they will take such a ban laying down. and artificial sugars cause far greater problems than does regular sugar, so that wont work either. we need to stand up to our government and let them know we wont be controlled. we have a RIGHT to eat what we choose, drink what we choose and live how we choose.

   replyreport
7. 83

   SweetiePieposted 11 years ago

   Not really sure the ban is the best way to go, but American soda consumption is way out of control.  Back in the 80's there was regular sugar in soda, and now they use corn syrup.  Who really needs a fifty ounce drink of corn syrup and food coloring, but I do not think we should keep dodos from buying it.  You are better off buying a Brita water filter bottle you can carry around, and flavor packets of ice tea and crystal light if you need to jazz it up.  Not feeling too sorry for those who need to indulge in a giant soda, but I guess we should let them make their own bad choices.

   replyreport
8. 71

   Amethystravenposted 11 years ago

   I don't believe a ban would be enough to keep artificial ingredients out of the foods we are given to choose from at grocery stores. If the labels were truthful about the ingredients artificial or not, people could make up their own minds as far as what they want to consume. We literally are what we eat. Our bodies show what we've eaten physically and mentally. Some foods help us become overweight and bipolar, while others help us stay trim and mentally balanced, of course with the help of exercise or lack there of.  If a product is honestly labeled, a person can do research on the ingredients and decide for themselves. The only time I would vote for a ban is when I find out my tax dollars are paying for it to be manufactured.

   replyreport
9. 91

   Pamela99posted 11 years ago

   I don't think the ban will work anyway. Many fast food restaurants give you a glass and you fill it up. You can refill as often as you want. I think the government is being too intrusive in our everyday lives anyway. However, I do agree obesity is a huge problem, which leads to health problems. I still think these people will consume too many calories at home until they get serious about a weight loss program and begin to exercise.

   replyreport
   1. 62

      Ramsa1posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The problem is people behaving irresponsibly, not obesity.

      replyreport
10. 61

    nightwork4posted 11 years ago

    instead of getting people to use common sense, lets just make another law. it's stupid and another law people don't need.

    replyreport
11. 71

    Steven Grayposted 11 years ago

    Given that so many restaurants offer free refills, I doubt that it a ban on "large drinks" would make help consumers make any substantive steps toward better health.  However, on principle, banning or taxing food simply because it is deemed "unhealthy" is a terrible thing.
    It's pretty obvious that excessive fructose is harmful, and Americans drink way too much soda.  The difference between the old sugar and high-fructose corn syrup has less to do with its effect on obesity, which is isn't much different than the old sucrose sweetener, than in its effect on the liver.  Fructose destroys the liver in unholy ways.
    Would I like to see fructose banned?  Yes.  Outside of natural fructose content in fruit, it is an addictive poison.
    But we must also recognize that bans, whether justifiable or not, set bad precedents.
    At one time, coconut oil was vilified in the press.  Should we have banned coconut oil, with its incredibly good qualities for as both a skin product and a high-heat cooking oil full of healthy medium-chain fatty acids?  Banning coconut oil would have been a grave error.
    I have no fear that fructose will ever be revealed as having healthy properties, but the principle remains the same.  If mass outcry is enough to ban one thing, it might be used to quickly to ban something else.

    replyreport
    1. 83

       SweetiePieposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I had an Asian professor who taught an introductory biology course at my university, and he used to contend that palm oil was banned as a way to keep Southeast Asian countries from making this a competitive export.  It is just like other oils.

       replyreport
12. 61

    KangaYankeeDooposted 11 years ago

    This is just another example of big government sticking their nose into other people's lives, and trying to be big brother.

    replyreport
13. 0

    Larry Wallposted 11 years ago

    It is really silly. People will just buy two instead of one. Personally, I do not like to megasized watered-down drinks, but to each his own. I think  you are getting more ice than drink, so from a health standpoint, it is not going to do much good. Stores will have two for one sales to maintain volume.

    replyreport
14. 63

    Desertarmorposted 11 years ago

    Really??? NO! this is big goverment trying to make its way in even more into our lives.  Plus if they actually did pass a law, I would just buy 2 small soft drinks.

    replyreport
15. 76

    moonfairyposted 11 years ago

    I think it's silly,they're just going to buy more drinks!!

    replyreport
16. 89

    dezalyxposted 11 years ago

    No. Like some already answered, you would just buy 2 smaller drinks (or like what some people here do, bring a large jug with them and put the drinks inside).
    
    I think that these lawmakers just like to jump on the bandwagon of what is currently "trending". They think, oh because obesity is a problem, let's ban the large size soft drinks. We have lots of lawmakers like that here in the Philippines. Like this recent bill they are trying to pass. We have too many coins in circulation that cost more than they are worth, so we should make it illegal to own too much coins. I think these lawmakers should just focus on the economy and the good of their areas instead of coming up with these useless laws to make them popular.

    replyreport
17. 85

    moonlakeposted 11 years ago

    No soda but doughnuts are ok according to Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg. What's wrong with this man?

    replyreport
    1. 62

       Ramsa1posted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Doesn't Bloomberg have a city to run?

       replyreport
18. 62

    Ramsa1posted 11 years ago

    No. People should start taking responsibility for their actions. Americans cannot want freedom and at the same time want the govt to control every facet of their lives.

    replyreport
19. 60

    cityaliceposted 11 years ago

    That doesn't make too much sense.  What would stop a person from buying several soft drinks.

    replyreport
20. 0

    mjkearnposted 11 years ago

    I'm not a fan of soft drinks as such and I think most people moderate their own consumption,
    MJ.

    replyreport