Cpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com
This is an electronic packet of information to use to write your Research Paper. Think of this packet like a cafeteria – you will select those items from it that you want to use in your Research Paper and leave all of the other items.
From this packet you are to select the BEST pieces of particulars to provide perfect proof that your Claim (thesis) is correct. Your quotes, your block quotes and your paraphrases will all come from the material in this packet. Nothing will be documented in your paper that is not in this packet. You are NOT to use information from any other sources; your “research” has been done for you – it is this packet, and only this packer. The packet contains a variety of information. Some of which you will not be able to use because it will not support your claim. Remember to select the best proof. The Research Paper IS TO BE YOUR WRITING AND YOUR IDEAS, SUPPORTED BY TEXTUAL SPECIFICS FROM THESE SOURCES.
You may not be able to write a complete Works Cited page entry for every text in this electronic packet, but remember: MLA rules state that if an item is missing that would usually go into an entry for the Works Cited page, the writer ignores the missing piece and created an entry without the missing information. Are you asking yourself why won’t you know all the information to write a complete entry? Only the information given at the top of each of the first pages of each piece of information (some information may take more than one page) can be used. Remember, using MLA rules – if a piece of information is not provided, ignore it and move to list the next piece of information that you do have.
If you have a question, ask in class….e-mail me… stop in before school or after school. Remember that famous saying by Jim Rohn: “Discipline is the bridge between goals and accomplishments." Don’t put off working on this paper.
We will go to the Media Center to work on this. I strongly suggest that you have a flash-drive, and/or save everything to your space on the school website.
Don’t waste time. This is a big project and worth many points.
You can do this!
Mrs. C
New York Health Board Approves Ban on Large Sodas
George Lerner, CNN News Service On-Line
September 14, 2012
New York (CNN) -- New York City's Board of Health voted Thursday to ban the sale of sugary drinks in containers larger than 16 ounces in restaurants and other venues, in a move meant to combat obesity and encourage residents to live healthier lifestyles. The board voted eight in favor, with one abstention.
"It's time to face the facts: obesity is one of America's most deadly problems, and sugary beverages are a leading cause of it," said New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg in a statement earlier this month. "As the size of sugary drinks has grown, so have our waistlines -- and so have diabetes and heart disease."
But the move is expected to draw further protest from the soda industry and those concerned about government involvement in their personal choices. >
>>
"What we need in New York are sensible solutions to the obesity issue that focus on a comprehensive approach to tackle an extremely complex problem," said Eliot Hoff, a spokesman for a beverage industry-sponsored group called New Yorkers for Beverage Choices. "New Yorkers are smart enough to decide for themselves what to eat and drink."
Critics, including McDonald's and Coca-Cola, have assailed the ban as "misguided" and "arbitrary," though Bloomberg has billed it as both a health and fiscal initiative. New York City spends an estimated $4 billion each year on medical care for overweight people, the mayor said in an earlier statement.
One in eight New Yorkers also suffer from diabetes, a disease often linked to obesity, his office noted, calling sugary drinks "the single largest driver of these alarming increases in obesity." About 58% of New York City adults are considered overweight or obese, the mayor added. In 2007, the Bloomberg-appointed health board adopted a regulation that forced restaurants to all but eliminate the use of partially hydrogenated vegetable oils and spreads, the main sources of trans fats in the U.S. diet.
Thursday's decision is expected to take effect in six months and be enforced by the city's regular restaurant inspection team, allowing restaurant owners nine months to adapt to the changes before facing fines. "6 months from today, our city will be an even healthier place," Bloomberg tweeted on Thursday. The ban would not apply to grocery stores
page 1 of 1
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
Limit Food Stamps for Sodas, 18 Mayors Ask Government
CBS News OnLine/ June 19, 2013
Joe Raedle
Sugary drinks, which have been linked to health risks, should not be bought with government-assistance food stamps, mayors of major U.S. cities said in a letter Tuesday urging the government to evaluate approaches to limiting the purchases. The mayors of New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and 15 other cities are reviving a push that's against allowing food stamps be used to buy soda and other sugary drinks. In a letter sent to congressional leaders on Tuesday, the mayors say it's time to look at the use of the subsidies of the program, called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), for sugar-laden beverages in the interest of fighting obesity and related diseases. "More than one third of American adults are now obese, costing approximately $147 billion per year in associated medical expenses," read the letter. " As a result of obesity, this generation of American children is the first to face the possibility of a shorter life expectancy than their parents. It is time to test and evaluate approaches limiting SNAP's subsidization of products, such as sugar-sweetened beverages, that are contributing to obesity." The other cities whose mayors signed the letter are Baltimore; Boston; Louisville, Ky.; Madison, Wis.; Minneapolis; Newark, N.J.; Oakland, Calif.; Philadelphia; Phoenix; Portland, Ore.; Providence, R.I.; Salt Lake City; San Francisco; St. Louis; and Seattle.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture, which runs the food stamp program, declined to comment on Tuesday's letter. "We need to find ways to strengthen the program and promote good nutrition while limiting the use of these resources for items with no nutritional value, like sugary drinks, that are actually harming the health of participants," Mayor Michael Bloomberg, whose office released the letter, said in a statement. "Why should we continue supporting unhealthy purchases in the false name of nutrition assistance?"
Representatives for Republican House Speaker John Boehner and House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, to whom the letter was addressed, didn't immediately respond to requests for comment. The American Beverage Association, which has previously clashed with Bloomberg, said sugary drinks shouldn't be singled out as a cause of obesity. It called obesity "a complex health condition that affects Americans of all income levels." "Targeting struggling families who rely on (food stamps') vital safety net will not make America healthier or reduce government spending," the association, which represents the non-alcoholic, refreshment beverage industry, said in an emailed statement.
Last year, more than 47 million Americans used food stamps under SNAP. The benefits can't go to buy alcohol, cigarettes, hot food and some other items. Proposals to stop people from using the benefit to buy soda, candy and other items seen as unhealthy have been floated for decades; opponents have said such restrictions would be paternalistic and might discourage needy people from getting the subsidies. Bloomberg has gotten national attention for trying to bar eateries from selling sugary drinks in sizes larger than 16 ounces, and he has tried before to stop food stamps from going to buy soda. In 2010, he and then-Gov. David Paterson sought the USDA's permission to add sugary drinks to the list of prohibited food-stamp purchases for New York City residents. The agency declined, saying it would be too big and complicated to implement.
Earlier this month, Bloomberg wrote to Senate Agriculture Committee members to applaud a proposal to have the USDA conduct a two-state test of limiting the use of food stamps to buy unhealthy food and drinks. The proposal wasn't included in the version of the massive farm bill the Senate passed last week; the House is preparing to consider it this week. The mayors' letter also expressed concerns about the legislation's proposed cuts in funding for food stamps and suggested providing incentives to use them for fruits and vegetables. Research has linked sugary drinks to 180,000 annual deaths worldwide.
page 1 of 1
Big Gulp: New York Judge Strikes Down Bloomberg’s Beverage Ban
JONATHAN TURLEY
New York Times Magazine/ March 12, 2013
Manhattan state Supreme Court Justice Milton Tingling has struck a victory for sanity (as well as individual choice) in striking down New York Mayor Bloomberg’s widely ridiculed ban on large sugary drinks. As we previously discussed, the law was a poorly drafted and poorly conceived ban that allowed a host of higher caloric drinks to be sold in bars and other establishments. Tingling found the law to be “arbitrary and capricious.” Bloomberg has appeared to have developed an insatiable appetite to dictating what others can eat, including a proposed crackdown on popcorn and milk. After the soda ban, a long list of items have been put forward to Bloomberg to ban before Judge Tingling put a halt to the feeding frenzy.
Tingling focused on the obvious “loopholes” in the law that barred sales for some establishments while allowed the drinks to be sold by other establishments “even within a particular City block, much less the City as a whole.” The judge also found that the law created a an administrative Leviathan and violate the separation of powers doctrine” by sweeping into areas of legislative authority with the city council. As we discussed earlier, I have no problem with banning sodas in school as many district have done. However, Bloomberg has decided that educational programs and warnings are not enough because adults are not meeting the expectations of the government. Bloomberg is quoted as saying “I look across this country, and people are obese, and everybody wrings their hands, and nobody’s willing to do something about it.” The solution therefore is to take away choice and to dictate Dr. Bloomberg’s diet for all citizens.
Bloomberg insisted that when you are told that you cannot have that soda, “Nobody is taking away any of your rights. This way, we’re just telling you ‘That’s a lot of soda.’” Really? Sounds a lot like “you can’t have that soda.”
Honestly, if prohibition did not work for alcohol, it is likely to be even less successful for sodas. Then there are those other items like french fries, onion rings, and other unhealthy foods eaten in excessive quantities. How about requiring proof that a large stuffed pizza has no fewer than four persons willing to sign for it? I think people have a right to an unhealthy lifestyle. This is not like second-hand smoke that harms others. You can be around someone with a large soda and remain perfectly healthy. Then there are those high calorie alcoholic drinks being served with the loaded stuffed potatoes in bars around New York.
After the ruling, Bloomberg insisted “I’ve got to defend my children, and yours, and do what’s right to save lives.” Sixty percent of New Yorkers opposed the limit and clearly believe that they do not need Bloomberg making choices for them or their families. However, most parents feel that they can defend their own children and make choices for them. Moreover, Bloomberg did not ban sodas for school children, he dictated what adults can drink. The ban was facially absurd from the start since it would only force customers to buy multiple drinks if they wanted the same amount. Then there was the confusion of the lines of exemptions. The ban did not apply to pure fruit juice or fruit smoothies or drinks that are more than half milk. Starbucks yesterday vowed to continue to serve sweetened coffee drinks before the ruling, causing an outburst by Bloomberg.
Undeterred, Bloomberg has decided to spend more money in fighting the ruling and affirm his right to control the diets of people in the city. He rejects the widespread objections over individual choice and insists that New Yorkers must be required to comply with the dietary demands of his government. However, that Tingling feeling yesterday was the voice of reason.
- 324k
Page 1 of 1
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
AMERICAN LIBERAL TIMES
American Liberal Times Magazine
← What good would a government shutdown do?
More About George Zimmerman! →
July 31, 2013/ by john hammon
New York’s Ban on Large Sugary Soda Drinks Flunked!
i
[pic]The argument used by a New York appeals court to strike down the city’s ban on large sugar-laden soda drinks served in restaurants within the city was that the New York City Board of Health had acted in an “Unconstitutional” manner in trying to get the ban enforced in the first place. When I read that I went on a search.
I got out my copy of The Constitution and I started looking for the place where the Founding Fathers had discussed the banning of sugary drinks in restaurants and for the life of me I couldn’t find a mention of it in The Constitution anywhere. As I understand it, the ban tried to stop restaurants from selling these drinks in containers bigger than 16-ounces. But I didn’t see anywhere it said anything against someone buying a couple of dozen of the 16-ounce drinks. I began to wonder how it came to be that some judicial authority could get the power to dictate what free citizens of a free country can and cannot eat and drink in the first place.
I am surprised that some genius hasn’t figured out that sugar is an addictive substance yet. Will the day come when we will be able to purchase common cane sugar only by prescription or when we might be subject to arrest and imprisonment for possession of a candy bar above a certain minimum number of ounces? Sugar as a controlled substance? Is it possible? I am one person who supports the good old fashioned American personal freedom to die from obesity if that is what somebody really wants to do.
I also support every American’s right to make all the poor decisions for themselves they care to make.
I really think that if the People want to see limits placed on anything they ought to be able to vote on the issue and have it decided by an elective process. If something as simple as a common ordinary soda drink is so bad for you why hasn’t The Surgeon General come out against it and why aren’t there activist groups trying to get laws passed to have it banned altogether – - – like tobacco for instance? Where is the activism? The American People’s rights should be protected at all costs – - and that includes the right to be stupid if they want to be stupid.
Page 1 of 1
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
NYC Poised to Limit Size of Sugary Drinks
Gretchen Goetz/ May 31, 2012
Food Safety News (On Line)
A small soda at McDonalds is about to become the largest option available in New York City if a proposal to limit sugary drink portion sizes is passed by the city’s health board. Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s administration, which has made public health a central part of its agenda, announced Thursday that it is seeking a 16 oz. cap on sugar-sweetened drinks served at delis, fast food and sit-down restaurants, movie theaters and sports venues. This latest rule would follow past city regulations that have mandated calorie labeling on all chain restaurant menus and banned artificial trans fats from food establishments.
According to the New York City Health Department, sugary drinks are a main contributor to the city’s obesity problem. Nearly 6 in 10 NYC residents are either overweight or obese. High sugary drink consumption is associated with weight gain, obesity and higher rates of diabetes in New York City, says a 2011 report by four district health offices. The sugary drink limit requires approval from the New York City Board of Health, which is set to vote on it June 12.
Bloomberg touted the plan as a positive step desired by New York City residents. “New York City is not about wringing your hands; it’s about doing something,” Bloomberg said in a Wednesday interview with the New York Times. “I think that’s what the public wants the mayor to do.” This new limit will require a significant paring down of soda offerings at many restaurants. A 16 oz. portion is the equivalent of a “small” at McDonald’s or a “regular” cup at Burger King. Soda in this amount usually contains around 150 calories, all from sugar. Movie theater drink cups are currently 22 oz., usually holding over 300 calories. Diet sodas would still be permitted in larger quantities since they contain little to no sugar.
The NYC proposal also applies to other sugared beverages, such as fruit drinks and flavored milk, shakes, or alcoholic beverages, which must also be limited to 16 oz. if the measure passes. The move is being criticized by the beverage industry as overstepping control over consumer choice and as putting unfair blame on soda as such a large contributor to obesity. “The people of New York City are much smarter than the New York City Health Department believes,” said Coca-Cola in a statement Thursday. “We are transparent with our consumers. They can see exactly how many calories are in every beverage we serve. We have prominently placed calorie counts on the front of our bottles and cans and in New York City, restaurants already post the calorie content of all their offerings and portion sizes — including soft drinks. “New Yorkers expect and deserve better than this. They can make their own choices about the beverages they purchase. We hope New Yorkers loudly voice their disapproval about this arbitrary mandate.”
The New York City Beverage Association also weighed in against the proposal: “There they go again. The New York City Health Department’s unhealthy obsession with attacking soft drinks is again pushing them over the top,” said Stefan Friedman, spokesman for NYBA in a statement Thursday. “The city is not going to address the obesity issue by attacking soda because soda is not driving the obesity rates.”
The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), a consumer watchdog group, praised the move. “Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s pioneering proposal to limit serving sizes of sugary drinks is the boldest effort yet to prevent obesity, which is not only painful for millions of Americans but is costing our nation upwards of $150 billion in higher health costs annually,” said CSPI’s executive director Micheal Jacobson in a Thursday press release. “New York City’s health department deserves tremendous credit for recognizing the harm that sugary soft drinks cause in the form of obesity, diabetes, and heart disease – and for doing something about it. We hope other city and state public health officials adopt similar curbs on serving sizes and reducing Americans’ exposure to these nutritionally worthless products.” This is not the first time soda has been targeted as a primary contributor to the American obesity epidemic. Some school districts have banned soft drinks, and certain cities have banned the drinks on government premises.
Page 1 of 1
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
Daniel Fisher, Forbes Magazine
5/31/2012
Bloomberg's Attack On Big Soda Lacks One Thing: Scientific Evidence
| |
|[pic] |
| |
| |
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg‘s plan to ban sodas larger than 16 ounces might be appealing to people who associate jumbo soft drinks with obesity, but it lacks one critical element: A plausible scientific explana-tion for why it will work. Researchers have tried for decades to determine why some people are obese and others are not. The only firm connection that has emerged is that obesity is closely associated with socio-economic status. If your parents are obese, you are much more likely to be obese yourself. That explanation doesn’t satisfy attorneys pushing lawsuits against McDonald’s, or social-engineer types like Bloomberg, who is known for his efforts to snuff out smoking and other dangerous habits. They have repeatedly searched for some other factor that can explain obesity, and many have seized on sugary drinks.
Move up tMove down
Here’s the idea: Liquids laced with calorie-rich sugar somehow fool the body into thinking they aren’t as filling as, say, a dense cheeseburger, and therefore people consume more of them without triggering the satiety instinct that tells humans to stop eating. It’s an appealing theory that makes intuitive sense. Some scientists have layered on an economic argument, saying that high-fructose corn syrup has aggravated the problem by making it cheaper to produce sickly-sweet sodas than with cane sugar (which is artificially expensive because of federal price controls). According to one study, the calories in a glass of orange juice cost roughly nine times as much as a sweet fruit punch or Safeway Select Cola.
Some groups even use this to support soft-drink taxes that supposedly reduce obesity. But this 2010 study by a Yale School of Public Health researcher found only a slim relationship between obesity and state soft-drink taxes. Other researchers have found that people simply substitute other high-calorie drinks like milk and fruit juice when soda gets more expensive. (More such studies are discussed here.) The problem is that the entire upside-down pyramid of theory rests upon the unproven premise that soda can fool the human dietary-intake system in ways that other foods don’t.
The record shows that soda is just the latest villain in an evolving series of studies that try to explain why low-income people tend to be obese, ranging from fast foods to candy to larger portion sizes. As University of Washington researcher Adam Drenowski notes in this 2007 article, most of those studies relied on time trends and epidemiological data to reach their conclusions. In each case, the researchers suggested that obesity was very likely caused by the particular dietary factor under study, which was duly identified as a cause for concern. Epidemiological methods can sometimes turn up a true culprit (cigarettes cause lung cancer, although researchers don’t know exactly why) but they can’t be used, by themselves, to show a scientific cause-and-effect relationship.
Large-scale studies at the international level as well as studies of food consumption by various socioeconomic and ethnic groups within the U.S. have repeatedly undermined the theory that any particular type of food is to blame for obesity. It’s well known, for example, that the heaviest consumers of sugary drinks are adolescent males — who also tend to be the thinnest and most active members of the population. (“Unfortunately, increasing sugar consumption [is] unlikely to make anyone thinner, younger—or male,” Drenowski notes.)
Many researchers, including Drenowski, have nevertheless concluded that low-cost, high-calorie diets must have some relationship to obesity. But then what to make of the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture study released earlier this month that found healthy foods are, in fact, less expensive than unhealthy ones?
The study found that high-fat or sugary foods are only cheap when measured on a price-per-calorie basis.
Page 1 of 2
Researchers have used the per-calorie measure for years to calculate changes in food prices among countries and over time. But that method suffers from a number of flaws, including the mathematical fact it makes high-density, high-calorie foods look “cheaper” because they divide the price by a higher number of calories than low-density, low-calorie foods. Also the measure doesn’t reflect how people actually buy and consume food; otherwise people would avoid low-fat milk because it costs roughly twice as much per calorie as high-fat milk. And the whole idea of marketing low-carb foods would make no economic sense since consumers would perceive them as being a ripoff on the price/calorie scale.
Measured according to price per 100 grams of food, grains and vegetables flipped from being most expensive to being least expensive, the USDA researchers found. Per-portion, protein — the stuff of the evil McDonald’s cheeseburger — was most expensive.
Blaming soda makes intuitive sense, as I said, especially to people who don’t consume a lot of soda. That tends to be better-educated, higher-income people, the same sort of people who secretly might find a tax on soda and candy to be attractive since they wouldn’t find themselves paying it much of the time. Similarly, a ban on sodas the size of a 55-gallon drum might be just the ticket for people who never find one in their hands. But the science supporting the idea it will reduce obesity is still lacking.
page 2 of 2
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
Mayor Bloomberg’s Ban on Sodas
David Furm/ CNN Opinion (on-line)
June 4, 2012
Washington (CNN) -- Nobody seems to have a positive word for Mayor Michael Bloomberg's proposal to ban oversized servings of sugary drinks in New York's food-service establishments. The mayor has been decried as a nanny. He has been accused of selective enforcement. (A Starbucks 20 ounce drink can have more than 500 calories, but will be exempt from the ban because it contains more than 50% milk.) The beverage industry complains that solutions to the obesity problem ought to be more "comprehensive." One important conservative magazine called the mayor's actions a form of "fascism." So let's defy the trend here and say: Good for Bloomberg. Obesity is America's most important public health problem, and the mayor has led the way against it. This latest idea may or may not yield results. But it is already raising awareness. Even if it fails to become law, it ought to prod the beverage industry into acting as more responsible corporate citizens.
Sugary drinks now provide 7% of the calories in the American diet, the largest single national source of calories. Teen boys average more than a quart of sugary soda per day. Even adults who say they are trying to lose weight still drink more two 12-ounces cans per day, on average. There is little doubt about the serious health effects of sugary soda. Just one soda a day doubles a woman's risk of diabetes, according to the Harvard Journals of Public Health. Two sodas raises her risk of heart disease by 40%. Americans drink more soda for the very simple reason: it's getting cheaper. The inflation-adjusted price of soda has declined by an estimated 48% over the past 20 years. Improvements in packaging account for much of this price decline. It costs barely anything more to manufacture a 64-ounce "double gulp" container than to produce the former standard sizes.
Opinion: Big Gulp? Meet Big Brother
Some object that the mayor's proposal to restrict serving sizes will restrict liberty. But the liberty restricted is not the liberty of the soda-drinker. If they wish, soda drinkers can buy a 2-liter bottle of soda at the grocery for about $1.70 and pour as much of it down their throats as they wish. The liberty that is being restricted is the liberty of the soda seller to manipulate known human weaknesses to the seller's advantage and the buyer's detriment.
Human beings are not reasoning machines. We are animals who have inherited certain propensities not always well-adapted to modern urban life. We evolved in conditions of food scarcity. Our bodies have adapted to store food energy against famine; our sub-rational minds crave sweetness. The sugary beverage industry has invested massively to understand better how to use our very human natures against us. The ever-increasing size of the standard soda serving has changed our understanding of what is and what is not an appropriate amount of sugar to consume at a sitting. The beverage industry works on Americans before they have learned to read; even before they have learned to speak. In 2010, children and teens were exposed to twice as many full-calorie soda TV ads as they were in 2008, according to a study by the Yale Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity.
The beverage industry is correct that a soda crackdown alone will not on its own address the obesity problem. Americans spend twice as much time in cars as in the 1970s and average more than 26 hours per week of sedentary entertainment. Some 80% of Americans do no physical exercise at all. As I've written before in this space: "The campaign against obesity will have to look a lot less like the campaign against smoking (which involves just one decision, to smoke or not to smoke) and much more like the generation-long campaign against highway fatalities, which required the redesign of cars, the redesign of highways, and changes in personal behavior like seat-belt use and drunk driving."
But if a restraint on soda serving size will not do everything, it may still do something. Or, possibly not. The idea may fail. The idea is an experiment, and most experiments fail. We learn from failure how to design a better effort next time. And when we do at least succeed in this difficult struggle for public health, we will all owe New York's visionary mayor our thanks for leading the way.
Page 1 of 1
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
Big Gulp? Meet Big Brother
By Edward Morrissey, CNN Staff
June 2, 2012
(Editor's note: Edward Morrissey is a senior editor and correspondent for the conservative commentary website )
(CNN) -- America's image of New Yorkers combines swagger, style and an unwillingness to get pushed around. Humphrey Bogart once warned a Nazi commander in "Casablanca" that "there are certain sections of New York, Major, that I wouldn't advise you to try to invade." Seventy years ago, movie audiences would have laughed in appreciation of the city's toughness. Today, however, Rick Blaine would hardly recognize the place. Mayor Michael Bloomberg hit the panic button over soft drinks this week, proposing a citywide ban on any serving of sugary-sweet soda more than 16 ounces in restaurants, movie theaters and street carts. Bloomberg claims that he needs to have the cops throw themselves between consumers and liquid refreshment to save citizens from themselves and prevent obesity. Big Gulp, meet Big Brother.
This is just the latest intervention staged by ”Hizzoner”. His past decrees banned smoking, not just indoors in places of business, but also outside of businesses and in parks. Bloomberg also banned restaurants from cooking with artificial trans fats. In those cases, he took a lot of criticism as being a health hysteric and a food nanny, but at least an argument existed that consumer choice might have been irrelevant. Restaurants don't usually advertise all of their ingredients on the menu, for instance, and few people get asked permission before someone lights a cigarette in the doorway of an establishment.
Soft drinks: Public enemy No. 1 in obesity fight?
In this case, though, no such argument exists. People purchase the volume of beverage they desire, and in almost every case, plenty of choice exists for smaller quantities. The outcome of barring the sale of anything larger than 16 ounces of Coca-Cola or Pepsi at the ballpark will be that more containers will get thrown out as people just buy more units, and that waste will have to be disposed of later. Consumers will pay more and have more inconvenience in purchasing what they want to drink, and will still end up drinking the same amount anyway.
Is drinking soda really that bad for you?
The new restrictions make little sense for most other venues. Fast-food restaurants have customer-accessible fountains in most cases for in-store dining. Few people buy the large size, and many of these restaurants no longer bother with size at all for those sales, sticking with one standard size. Will Bloomberg start regulating how many refills each customer gets, too? For that matter, many traditional restaurants offer free refills on soft drinks, too. If Bloomberg caps those, what happens when customers just buy another soft-drink order? Will the restaurant be forced to stop serving root beer far more quickly than they stop serving beer?
Nor do the drink categories make sense, either. Bloomberg's order won't apply to alcoholic beverages, even though many of those are loaded with calories, especially beers and ales, or to dairy-based drinks. As Reason's Jacob Sullum points out, that means that while New Yorkers will no longer be able to ingest 240 calories
Page 1 of 2
drinking a 20-ounce Coke, they will still have no trouble buying a 24-ounce, 520-calorie double-chocolatey frappucino at Starbucks, or a 20-ounce, 800-calorie milkshake.
Now, some of those choices may be better than others, although it's hard to argue that the dietary value of milk justifies ingesting an 800-calorie drink as opposed to the 240-calorie cola. But more to the point, that's a decision that free people should be able to make on their own. New Yorkers shouldn't have to ask Bloomberg, "Mayor, may I?" when selecting an otherwise-legal and nonlethal beverage.
Bloomberg justifies his nanny-state interventions by pointing to the social costs of obesity, but there is no direct causal link between obesity and 20-ounce sodas with sugar in them, and neither would it be anyone's business at all except for the increasing government control and subsidies for health care. Bloomberg's insistence on dictating consumer choices has a more direct connection to an assumption that government should control our access to health care than obesity has to a couple of Big Gulps.
Perhaps it's time for New Yorkers to put their mayor on a power diet, and to wise up about the real trade-offs between expanding safety-net programs and personal choice. Soft drinks won't be the last of the usual suspects that Mayor May I will round up in his crusade to dictate his choices and eliminate everyone else's.
Page 2 of 2
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
A Soda Per Day May Raise Heart-Attack Risk
Health Magazine June 2011
| |By, Amanda Gardner |
It's no secret that the empty calories in soda and other sugary drinks can contribute to weight gain and obesity. But a new study suggests these beverages also may harm your heart, even if they don't cause you to gain weight. The study, which followed nearly 43,000 men for an average of 22 years, found that those who habitually drank one 12-ounce sweetened beverage per day were 20% more likely to have a heart attack, fatal or otherwise, than men who drank none. The association could not be explained by obesity or weight gain alone. The researchers took into account the men's body mass index, along with their dietary habits, exercise levels, family history of heart disease, and other extenuating factors.
Sugary-beverage consumption "appears to be an independent risk factor for heart disease," says lead author Frank Hu, M.D., a professor of nutrition and epidemiology at the Harvard School of Public Health, in Boston. Artificially sweetened diet drinks were not linked to heart attacks, as they have been in some other recent studies. And only daily or near-daily consumption of sugary drinks measurably increased heart-attack risk. The study was published this week in the American Heart Association journal, Circulation.
Several factors besides body weight—or, more likely, a combination of factors—could explain the findings, Hu says. For instance, he says, sugary beverages have been linked to high triglycerides and low "good" cholesterol (HDL), which could increase heart-attack risk without being accompanied by obesity. Sugary beverages also are believed to promote inflammation, an immune-system response involved in both heart disease and insulin resistance, a major risk factor for type 2 diabetes.
Finally, Hu says, sugary drinks have been associated with the accumulation of belly fat, which can increase a man's risk of heart attacks even if he isn't obese. Blood samples taken from roughly 40% of the men during the study supported some of these hypotheses. Men who consumed sugary beverages at least once a day had higher triglyceride levels, lower HDL levels, and higher levels of a marker of inflammation known as C-reactive protein (CRP). They also had higher levels of leptin, a hormone that helps regulate metabolism. The study had some important limitations. Most notably, the researchers measured beverage consumption every four years using food questionnaires. Although this is a commonly used research method, it relies on the study participants' memory and is therefore less than exact.
In addition, the new research was part of an ongoing study, funded by the National Institutes of Health, that includes only male health professionals, almost all of whom are white. That may limit the relevance of the findings to other groups. However, the findings do closely resemble those of a similar study in women, known as the Nurses’ Health Study. "We already know that sugary beverages are associated with increased obesity, type 2 diabetes, and other metabolic issues," Hu says. "This adds further evidence that sugary beverages are detrimental to our health."
Page 1 of 1
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
Soft Drinks: Public Enemy No.1 in Obesity Fight?
by Caleb Hellerman, CNN
April 27, 2012
(CNN) -- Pushing her meal cart into the hospital room, a research assistant hands out tall glasses of reddish-pink liquid, along with a gentle warning: "Remember, you guys have to finish all your Kool-Aid." One by one, young volunteers chug down their drinks, each carefully calibrated to contain a mix of water, flavoring and a precisely calibrated solution of high fructose corn syrup: 55% fructose, 45% glucose. The participants are part of an ongoing study run by Kimber Stanhope, a nutritional biologist at the University of California, Davis. Volunteers agree to spend several weeks as lab rats: their food carefully measured, their bodies subjected to a steady dose of scans and blood tests. At first, each volunteer receives meals with no added sugars. But then, the sweetened drinks start showing up.
For the final two weeks of the study, volunteers drank three of the sweet concoctions daily -- about 500 calories of added sugar, or 25% of all calories for the adult women in the study. Within just two weeks, their blood chemistry was out of whack. In one striking change, the volunteers had elevated levels of LDL cholesterol, a risk factor for heart disease.
While force-feeding junk food may sound extreme, this controlled diet is not so far from the real world. A 20-ounce regular soda contains 227 calories, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). That single drink is more than 10% of the total calories an adult woman needs to maintain a healthy weight, according to USDA diet guidelines. Meanwhile, about 1 in 4 Americans gets at least 200 calories a day from sugary drinks. These numbers, along with work like Stanhope's, gives ammunition to doctors and public health officials who say soda should be treated as public health enemy No. 1.
About 1 in 4 Americans gets at least 200 calories a day from sugary drinks. "Soft drinks and sugar-containing beverages are the low hanging fruit in public health today," says Dr. David Ludwig, director of the New Balance Foundation Obesity Prevention Center, at Children's Hospital in Boston. "Many children are consuming 300 calories per day or more, just in sugar-containing beverages. Compare the challenge of giving up three glasses of sugary beverages, versus getting them to do two hours of moderate physical activity."
"If you switch from Coke to water, that's easy," says Elizabeth Mayer-Davis, a professor at the University of North Carolina and a recent president of the American Diabetes Association. "You don't have to make big complicated changes in how you cook, and shop, and all that. And the number of calories you can save, can be substantial."
Some in the soft drink business say their product has been unfairly singled out. "Consumption of added sugars is going down," says Karen Hanretty, Vice-President of Public Affairs for the American Beverage Association. "Soda consumption has declined, even as obesity has increased. To say that sugar is solely responsible for obesity, doesn't make sense." Coca-Cola has adapted to meet consumer demand, says Rhona Applebaum, the company's Vice President and Chief Scientific Regulatory Officer. More than ever, she says, those consumers choose low-sugar products. Today, Diet Coke and Coke Zero make up 41% of Coke's North American soda sales, up from 32% a decade ago. "Our products are part of a balanced, sensible diet, and they can be enjoyed as a valuable part of any meal, including snacks," says Applebaum.
Buried in the flood of horror stories about America's obesity crisis, are a few hopeful signs. Not only is sugar consumption going down, but obesity rates among girls and women have actually stayed flat since 1999,
Page 1 of 2
according to Cynthia Ogden, a scientist with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). For boys and men, those levels have increased only modestly since around 2006, Ogden says.
Coincidentally or not, the leveling off of obesity coincides with a drop in the amount of soda that Americans consume. Consumption of soda -- both regular and diet -- has fallen by 17.3% since 1998, according to Beverage Digest.
Soft drinks and sugar-containing beverages are the low hanging fruit. Dr. David Ludwig, New Balance Foundation Obesity Prevention Center: “Of course soda isn't the only concern. An 8-ounce glass of fruit punch or apple juice has nearly 130 calories. The same glass of chocolate milk has more than 200 -- a solid 20 percent of all recommended daily calories.” Overall, added sugars -- which includes both natural sugar, and high fructose corn syrup -- make up about a sixth of all calories taken in, according to USDA figures. Somewhat more than a third of those sugars come from soda and other drinks. That's why most people who take a hard look at American diets say that cutting out sweetened drinks, is the first step for anyone struggling with weight or diabetes.
"If we create the assumption that doing one thing will reduce the epidemic [of obesity], we're making a mistake," says Dr. William Dietz, director of the CDC's Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Obesity. "But within the dietary side, we have to focus on where the biggest action is." The action, says Dietz and others, lies with sugar and its close cousin, high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS). Most sweet drinks, including nearly all soda in the United States, use HFCS.
Not everyone agrees they're equivalent. While most studies show that table sugar and HFCS play an equal role in weight gain, some research suggests that HFCS -- which usually contains 10% more fructose than sucrose -- is more likely to change the body's metabolism, in ways that can increase risk for cardiovascular disease and diabetes. But most scientists say the differences are subtle. That includes even Stanhope, whose work has focused on comparing the effects of fructose and other sugars. In terms of advising patients or making public health policy, she says, there isn't much difference. "I think we really, at this point, need to treat them all alike."
"Are sweetened drinks the only reason we have epidemics of obesity and diabetes? No, they're not," says Mayer-Davis, the past ADA president. "But sometimes the easy answer, is the answer."
Page 2 of 2
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
The New York City Soda Ban, and a Brief History of Bloomberg’s Nudges
by Alice Park
Time Magazine OnLine/ May 31, 2012
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is hoping city residents will drink a lot less this summer — less soda, that is. On Wednesday the famously public health-focused mayor proposed a ban on the sale of large-sized sugar-sweetened beverages — that includes sodas, sweetened teas and coffees, energy drinks and fruit drinks. If approved, the proposal, which is slated to take effect as early as next March, would prohibit restaurants, delis, sports arena vendors, movie theaters and food carts regulated by the city health department from selling sugary beverages in sizes larger than 16 oz. Fines for failing to downsize could be as high as $200.
The ban would apply to food service establishments selling bottled as well as fountain drinks; retailers would have to remove 20-oz. soft drink bottles from their shelves, and delis and restaurants offering self-service fountains wouldn’t be able to give customers cups larger than 16 oz. The ban wouldn’t affect convenience stores or grocery stores and wouldn’t apply to diet drinks, fruit juices, dairy-based drinks like milkshakes or alcoholic beverages. “Obesity is a nationwide problem, and all over the United States, public health officials are wringing their hands saying, ‘Oh, this is terrible,’” Mr. Bloomberg told the New York Times. “New York City is not about wringing your hands; it’s about doing something.”
During his tenure, Bloomberg has done a lot, initiating several controversial public-health measures, many aimed at reducing obesity by encouraging people to adopt healthier lifestyles. Critics have disparaged him as Nanny Bloomberg for it, but many of the mayor’s sweeping policies have inspired policy makers across the country to do the same. Among his recent actions:
2002: Bloomberg banned public smoking in the city’s bars and restaurants, following the lead of cities like Aspen, Colo., Beverly Hills and San Luis Obispo, Calif., which were the first to bar patrons from lighting up in restaurants and other enclosed public places
2005: At the mayor’s urging, New York became the first city to force restaurants and other food vendors to phase out the use of artificial trans fats, which have been linked to obesity and heart disease. The initiative inspired other cities, including Philadelphia and San Francisco, to pass trans-fat bans of their own. Now entire counties and states are considering regulations that would take the fats out of their food.
2008: New York became the first city to pass a law requiring food service providers to post calorie counts on menus. Seattle and other cities subsequently passed similar laws, and a federal law requiring any restaurant chain with more than 20 locations to publish calorie counts on their menus went into effect this year.
2010: In his first swipe at the soda industry, Bloomberg proposed barring people from using food stamps to purchase sugary sodas. The U.S. Department of Agriculture rejected the proposal saying it would be too difficult to enforce.
2010: Bloomberg urged state legislators to pass a soda tax that would allow the state to collect an additional penny per ounce of sugared soda sold; it failed to pass.
2011: The mayor banned smoking in most outdoor areas in the city, including public parks, plazas and beaches. San Jose, Calif., adopted a similar ban this year, and Boulder, Colo., policy makers are also considering limiting smoking outdoors.
Salt is also on the mayor’s hit list. He wants packaged food makers and restaurants to reduce sodium by 25% in an effort to lower rates of high blood pressure and heart disease.
Page 1 of 2
Improving New Yorkers’ health and eating habits has been one of Bloomberg’s signature missions as mayor. The city subways are plastered with public health messages, such as the graphic anti-obesity advertisements that show a sugary soda turning into fat as it’s poured into a glass. (In March, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention launched its own series of graphic advertisements: a national anti-smoking campaign.) Studies are mixed on whether drastic public-health measures like Bloomberg’s can actually change behavior. Some show that people consume less in restaurants where calorie counts are available, for example, than where they aren’t, while others show that people actually tend to consume more when provided with such infor- mation. And low-income populations, which tend to have higher rates of obesity and health problems to start with, appear to be the least affected by such changes. Still, Bloomberg and the city’s health department cite New York’s rising life expectancy as proof that the measures are working.
Beverage makers, not surprisingly, are critical of the new proposal, calling it “zealous” in a statement. “There they go again,” Stefan Friedman, spokesman for the New York City Beverage Association, told the Associated Press. “The New York City Health Department’s unhealthy obsession with attacking soft drinks is again pushing them over the top. The city is not going to address the obesity issue by attacking soda because soda is not driving the obesity rates.”
The Coca-Cola Company also defended its products, noting that their beverages contain calorie information. “The people of New York City are much smarter than the New York City Health Department believes,” it said in a statement. “We are transparent with our consumers. They can see exactly how many calories are in every beverage we serve…New Yorkers expect and deserve better than this. They can make their own choices about the beverages they purchase.” Whether or not it’s responsible for the obesity epidemic, studies show that sugared beverages are a major source of extra calories that can contribute to weight gain. The ban wouldn’t prevent a customer from ordering several small-sized sugary drinks, of course, or from helping themselves to refills at a fountain, but Bloomberg is hoping that at least at movie theaters and baseball stadiums, the inconvenience of carrying the additional cups will be enough to curb New Yorkers’ sugared drink habit.
The New York City Board of Health needs to approve the measure before it can take effect, which seems likely given the board’s support of the mayor’s previous public health efforts — and because all the members were appointed by Bloomberg. If the mayor has his way, residents and visitors to New York may soon be feeling thirsty for more.
Page 2 of 2
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
Sugary Drinks Over 16-ounces Banned in New York City, Board of Health Votes
CBS News/ May 31, 2012.
by, Emmanuel Dunand
Large sugary drinks are on their way out of New York City restaurants. New York City's Board of Health today passed a rule banning super-sized, sugary drinks at restaurants, concession stands and other eateries. The ban passed Thursday will place a limit of 16-ounces on bottles and cups of sugar-containing sodas and other non-diet sweetened beverages beginning in March 2013.
CBS New York reported the vote was approved Thursday with eight in favor and one in abstention. Mayor Bloomberg's office announced the news on his Twitter account: Board of Health has voted to approve new sugary drink policy. 6 months from today, New York City will be an even healthier place.
The ban will apply in restaurants, fast-food chains, theaters, delis, office cafeterias and most other places that fall under the Board of Health's regulation. People who buy sugary drinks at such establishments will still have an option to purchase an additional 16-ounce beverage. Exempt from the ban are sugary drinks sold at supermarkets or most convenience stores and alcoholic and dairy-based beverages sold at New York City eateries. City health officials called for the ban to combat the obesity epidemic. According to the NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, more than half of adults are overweight or obese and nearly one in five kindergarten students are obese. The restaurant and beverage industries have slammed the plan in ad campaigns and through public debates. The American Beverage Association has previously criticized that soda is being targeted as a culprit in the obesity epidemic over other factors.
"It's sad that the board wants to limit our choices," Liz Berman, business owner and chairwoman of New Yorkers for Beverage Choices, said in an emailed statement to . "We are smart enough to make our own decisions about what to eat and drink."
Some medical professionals applauded the ban. "For the past several years, I've seen the number of children and adults struggling with obesity skyrocket, putting them at early risk of diabetes, heart disease, and cancer," Dr. Steven Safyer, President and CEO of Montefiore Medical Center, said in an emailed statement to . "This policy is a great step in the battle to turn this health crisis around."
Nutritionist Karen Congro, director of the Wellness for Life Program at the Brooklyn Hospital Center, told , "There are pockets of the population who have no idea what a proper serving size is, so this will help reign them in." However she added without educating New Yorkers about obesity risks, the ban may not be as effective as officials hope, given people will still be able to buy sugary drinks such as Big Gulps at 7-11 convenience stores. "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," Congro said. Some New Yorkers have ridiculed the rule as a gross government intrusion. "This is not the end," Eliot Hoff, spokesman for New Yorkers for Beverage Choices, said in a statement to . "We are exploring legal options, and all other avenues available to us. We will continue to voice our opposition to this ban and fight for the right of New Yorkers to make their own choices."
Page 1 of 1
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
Michael Bloomberg
Forbes Magazine (Online)
September 2013
Net Worth: $31 B As of September 2013
At a Glance
Mayor, New York City, United States
Age: 71
Source of Wealth: Bloomberg LP, self-made
Residence: New York, NY
Country of Citizenship: United States
Education: Master of Business Administration, Harvard Business School;
Bachelor of Arts / Science, Johns Hopkins University
Marital Status: In Relationship
Children: 2
The world's richest mayor Michael Bloomberg relinquishes control of New York City in December 2013, after 12 years shaping everything in the Big Apple. On one hand, Bloomberg guided the city through the financial crisis and his efforts to restrict smoking and encourage bicycle use and pedestrian access have won him plaudits from locals. But he was also ridiculed for his controversial "nanny state" campaigns, including banning sugary drinks larger than 16 ounces. Plus, a U.S. District Court judge ruled in August 2013 that Bloomberg's signature "stop and frisk" policing practice is unconstitutional. What the billionaire will do post elected office is anyone's guess, but it seems unlikely he will fade from the spotlight.
In his last year as mayor, Bloomberg took steps to extend his political influence into the national debate around gun control. That influence is richer than ever, with his fortune up $6 billion since last year, thanks to the performance of Bloomberg LP, the financial data firm he founded in 1982 after being fired from Salomon Brothers. He owns 88% of the company, which generated $7.9 billion in 2012 revenues. Bloomberg also owns at least 10 homes in Manhattan, Westchester County, Bermuda, Vail and the Hamptons. His lifetime philanthropic giving has reached $2.8 billion, including his recent $100 million pledge to the Gates Foundation to help fellow billionaire Bill Gates eradicate polio.
Page 1 of 1
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
Michael Bloomberg
September 2013
Michael Bloomberg was born on February 14, 1942, in Boston, Massachusetts. Bloomberg put himself through Johns Hopkins and Harvard and became a partner at Salomon Brothers. He started his own company which revolutionized the distribution of financial information and made him a billionaire. In 2002, Bloomberg became mayor of New York City. He was re-elected for a second, then a controversial third term.
Early Life
Michael Rubens Bloomberg was born on February 14, 1942, in Boston, Massachusetts. The son of a bookkeeper, Bloomberg put himself through Johns Hopkins University and Harvard University, where he earned a Master of Business Administration degree in 1966. His first Wall Street job was with Salomon Brothers, where he quickly climbed the ladder, becoming partner in 1972.
Bloomberg L.P.
When Salomon Brothers was bought in 1981, Bloomberg started his own company, Bloomberg L.P., built around a financial information computer that revolutionized the way securities data was stored and consumed. The company was enormously successful and soon branched into the media business with more than 100 offices worldwide. As one of the wealthiest men in the world, Bloomberg chose to turn his attentions to philanthropy, with an emphasis on education, medical research and the arts.
New York Mayor
Bloomberg entered the political arena in 2002, when he won election as the 108th mayor of New York. Considered a liberal Republican, Bloomberg is pro-choice and in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage. His most popular program as mayor was establishing a 311 telephone line that put callers in contact with the city, allowing them to report crimes, trash problems, or anything else. Bloomberg was re-elected mayor in November 2005.
Controversially, in 2008 Bloomberg was able to push through legislation allowing him to run for a third term as mayor, citing that the particularly difficult economic climate and his financial skills warranted his remaining in office. After spending an unprecedented amount of his own money (upwards of $90 million) on the campaign Bloomberg secured a third four-year term in November of 2009.
Bloomberg published an autobiography, Bloomberg by Bloomberg, in 1997. He and his former wife, Susan Brown, have two daughters, Georgina and Emma.
Page 1 of 1
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
Is This the Real Thing? Coca-Cola’s Secret Formula ‘Discovered’
by William Lee Adams
Feb. 15, 2011 /Time Magazine News On-Line
For 125 years, Coke’s secret recipe has remained one of the most heavily guarded trade secrets in the world. Now a group of accidental soda sleuths say they’ve stumbled across a list of its ingredients. Producers of the radio program This American Life came across an article on the history of Coca-Cola in an old copy of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Coca-Cola’s hometown newspaper. Published on page 2B on February 18, 1979, the article received little attention at the time. But, producers say, that’s because no one realized the photo used to illustrate the story is a hand-written copy of John Pemberton’s original recipe, jotted down by a friend in a leather-bound recipe book of ointments and medicines, and passed down by friends and family for generations.
The long story of Coke’s secret formula begins with Pemberton, a veteran from Georgia who emerged from the Civil War with a morphine addiction. Hoping to cure his ailment, he dreamed up Pemberton’s French Wine Coca, a brew that included kola nut and coca wine. But in 1886, as Atlanta passed prohibition legislation, he reformulated the drink without alcohol, renamed it Coca-Cola, and began selling it in Georgia pharmacies.
Asa Candler, an early president of the Coca-Cola company who bought the formula in 1887, worried rivals would obtain the recipe so insisted no one ever write it down again. Staff removed all labels from ingredient containers and identified them by sight and smell only. Candler even went through the company mail so he could shred invoices that employees might attempt to sell to other drink makers. If the radio program’s producers are right, Candler and other executives were too late: the book of remedies with the copy of the Coke recipe had already started its travels. This American Life tracked down the book to a widow in Griffin, Georgia, who says her husband was fishing buddies with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution writer. It’s now in a bank vault, too.
And while companies like Pepsi have deduced the general ingredients on their own, none have unlocked the “Merchandise 7X flavoring” that gives Coke its unique taste and bubbly burn. “The company has always said, and as far as I know it’s true, that at any given time only two people know how to mix the 7X flavoring ingredient,” Mark Pendergrast, historian and author of For God, Country and Coke told This American Life. “Those two people never travel on the same plane in case it crashes; it’s this carefully passed-on secret ritual and the formula is kept in a bank vault.”
|The recipe: |The secret 7X flavor (use 2 oz of flavor to 5 gals syrup): |
|Fluid extract of Coca: 3 drams USP |Alcohol: 8 oz |
|Citric acid: 3 oz |Orange oil: 20 drops |
|Caffeine: 1 oz |Lemon oil: 30 drops |
|Sugar: 30 (unclear quantity) |Nutmeg oil: 10 drops |
|Water: 2.5 gal |Coriander: 5 drops |
|Lime juice: 2 pints, 1 quart |Neroli: 10 drops |
|Vanilla: 1 oz |Cinnamon: 10 drops |
|Caramel: 1.5 oz or more for color | |
The This American Life team enlisted experts and ordinary citizens alike to taste-test the original formula. It was pretty close — some people couldn’t differentiate it from the real thing — but the radio show couldn’t hit the nail on the head. And no matter what, they’ll never quite achieve the level of marketing that has made Coca-Cola so beloved.
Page 1 of 1
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
New York City Bans Supersize Sodas
BBC News On-Line/ 13 September 2012
New York City has approved the first US ban on large-size sodas and other sugary drinks being sold in restaurants and other eateries. The ban will not apply to alcohol, diet sodas or drinks that are more than 70% juice. The measure was passed by eight members of the city's mayoral-appointed health board, with one member abstaining. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has called for the ban as a way to reduce obesity and its related health problems.
Opponents have vowed to fight the law in court. "We are smart enough to make our own decisions about what to eat and drink," Liz Berman, a business owner and chair of New Yorkers for Beverage Choices, a soft-drink industry sponsored group. A New York Times poll in August suggested that 60% of New Yorkers were against the measure. The ban, passed on Thursday, will apply to sodas and other sugary beverages larger than 16 ounce (0.5 litre) nearly everywhere they are sold, except groceries and convenience stores.
New York resident: "It should be up to the individual and not the mayor" . Diet sodas, alcoholic beverages and drinks that are more than 70% juice will not be affected. Restaurants and others that violate the law face a $200 (per incident) fine. Health Commissioner Thomas Farley called the measure "a historic step to address a major health problem of our time". New York has become a national pacesetter on passing laws aimed at curbing obesity. The city was among the first to require chain restaurants to post calorie counts prominently on their menus. About one-third of Americans are obese, and about 10% of US healthcare costs are tied to obesity-related disease, according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.
On-line source @
Page 1 of 1
Home / Who we are / The facts / News / Join Us / The latest /
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
New Yorkers on Benefits Face Fizzy Drinks Ban
IN ASSOCIATION WITH
2 June 2011
by Dave Howard
Newsbeat US reporter
BBC News Beat (online site)
With a month to go before the height of summer, temperatures in New York are already hitting 30C (86F). For Dennis, Johnson and Javii, playing basketball in the Bronx, it's the kind of weather for a refreshing fizzy drink. "Soda's good for us," says Johnson. Dennis is even sure fizzy drinks can help with medical problems: "If you have a stomach ache," he says, "What does your mom buy?" He answers his own question: "Ginger ale, right? That's a soda." Twenty-three-year-old Dominique Pleasant is sitting nearby with her two daughters. They're all drinking cans of cola.
Like more than a quarter of people in the Bronx, Dominique qualifies for food stamps. "Food stamps is free money from the government to purchase food," she explains. "It's for people on low incomes, single parent families like us or people that don't have a job." 'It's stupid.' It's estimated 1.7 million New Yorkers claim food stamps.
Now the city is waiting to hear if the federal government in Washington will allow a ban on spending food stamps on fizzy drinks. Health officials say it's to cut obesity and tackle illnesses like diabetes. "I think it's stupid," says Dominique Stephens. "It makes no sense. The air we are breathing is bad but they aren't trying to stop that."
New York has seen a long line of moves lately to try to improve public health. It's just banned smoking in public parks. Chain restaurants have to put calorie counts on menus. There's been a series of hard-hitting advertisements on local TV warning of the dangers of fizzy drinks. Officials say it's about helping people make the right choices.
page 1 of 1
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
Is the End in Sight for Bucket-Sized Sodas?
31 May 2012 By Daniel Nasaw/ BBC News Magazine
New York City officials displayed big cups of soda along with the amount of sugar in them. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has proposed banning sales of large soft drinks. Does this herald the end of the popular, money-making bucket-sized cups of soda? The cold, sugary caffeinated goodness of a big cup of Coca-Cola so delights Chris Alexander he quips it helps soothe his post-traumatic stress disorder. "If I get agitated, I'll have an incredible urge to get a Coke," says Alexander, a 37-year-old US Army veteran who served several tours in Iraq. "I'll go get a 48-ounce Big Gulp every once in a while. It's just convenient. If I'm working a lot of hours, I'll just grab a giant one and take it to the office and let it sit there for a while." Forty-eight ounces (1.42 liters) of soda has more calories than an eight-ounce (227g) T-bone steak, and 5.5 ounces (156g) of sugar, and Alexander admits he gains weight if he slurps the sodas but lets his exercise routine slacken.
But in convenience stores across America, one can buy even larger drinks - one of America's largest convenience store chains, 7-Eleven, sells a 50-ounce (1.5-litre) "Double Gulp" soda, and has at times sold a 64-ounce (1.9-litre) soda. "They're quite popular," says Margaret Chabris, a spokeswoman for 7-Eleven, which has 7,800 convenience stores in the US. "People are quite thirsty and want a large-sized soda." Big, bigger, biggest: 7-Eleven sodas come in 32, 44 and 64-ounce sizes.
Rowboat-sized soft-drinks have been marketed to Americans for decades. Huge non-alcoholic beverages are not widely consumed in the UK, where food portions tend to be much smaller anyway, British food service analysts say. The big drinks were initially popular among laborers - construction workers who needed the sugar, caffeine and water to fortify them over long days on a hot job site, people in the US convenience store industry say.
“The Mayor's 'Nanny State' approach will do little to curb the problem,” says Jeff Stier, Conservative group National Center for Public Policy Research in England. "That's for the whole day," says Jeff Lenard, vice-president of industry advocacy at the US National Association of Convenience Stores. "It's not to chug in the next couple of minutes." But the category proved broadly popular with Americans.
"Somebody comes in and they see it's so much cheaper per ounce, or they think 'I'm really thirsty right now' - so they get these larger portions," says David Just, Associate Professor in the Dyson School of Applied Economics and Management at Cornell University. They're popular among children and teens who are not ready for coffee but like the zip of the caffeine. "Kids learn quickly that they can get more bang for their buck by buying a super-size soft drink instead of an eight-ounce carton of low-fat milk," Mary Mullen and Jo Ellen Shield, dieticians. The drinks are also a money-maker for the convenience stores - the small cost to them of the additional paper, plastic, water and syrup is significantly lower than the few cents more it can charge to the customer.
Americans - especially New Yorkers - resent being told what to do. "Cold-dispensed beverages", as the category is called, amount to only about 2% of a store's sales, but on average, they return a 48% gross profit, according to the National Association of Convenience Stores. Cigarettes, by contrast, constitute about 36% of retail sales but have only a 15% profit margin. "These are profitable categories," says Steven Montgomery, President of b2b Solutions, LLC, an Illinois convenience store consulting firm. In part because of its size and prominence in American society and its progressive, health conscious populace, New York City sets public health trends - it was one of the first major cities in the United States to ban smoking in bars and restaurants, for example. New York City officials said on Thursday they hoped the ban - on sugary drinks larger than 16 ounces (473ml) sold in restaurants, movie theatres and sports venues - will spread to other cities.
Page 1 of 2
A 64-ounce (1.9-litre) Coke has 765 calories. So does:
10 hard-boiled eggs 47 teaspoons of sugar A 14-ounce sirloin steak 24.5 cups of air-popped popcorn
But the ban will not - for now - affect convenience stores or grocery stores. In addition, soft drink analysts doubt it will be particularly effective: thirsty consumers can simply buy two 16-ounce cups instead of a single 32-ounce drink. And fast-food restaurants can advertise "free refills" - already a common practice in American restaurants - and charge more up front. "The people who are buying the 64-ounces, whether it's really good for them or not - they're doing it because they like to do it," says Dr. Just of Cornell University. "They are the most likely to resist it and the least likely to conform." The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics says there is conflicting research on whether programs like New York's proposed ban encourage consumers to eat more healthily. In addition, many Americans resent being told what they cannot buy, and on Thursday a conservative advocacy group sought to tap into that sentiment in a statement opposing the ban.
"The mayor's 'Nanny State' approach will do little to curb the problem and will do plenty to alienate the very people we need to work with - not against - the people who consume too many calories from a variety of sources," says Jeff Stier of the National Center for Public Policy Research.
Page 2 of 2
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
New York Mayor Proposes Ban on Big Sugary Drinks
BBC News/ 31 May 2012
The proposals would see large-size sugary drinks taken off shelves and menus. The Mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg, is calling for a municipal ban on sales of super-sized sugary drinks in an attempt to tackle obesity.
He wants to stop the city's restaurants, delis, sports stadiums and cinemas from selling large sizes of sweetened soft drinks.
Research suggests that 58% of adults in New York are obese or overweight. The New York City Beverage Association said the measures, which could come into effect next year, were "zealous". "The city is not going to address the obesity issue by attacking soda [sweetened soft drinks] because soda is not driving the obesity rates," spokesman Stefan Friedman said in a statement.
But officials at Mayor Bloomberg's office at City Hall disagree. Citing a 2006 study, they argue that sugary drinks are the biggest factor in rising calorie consumption and obesity levels.
On its website, the New York City Department of Health describes how drinking one 20-ounce (590ml) sweetened soft drink a day translates into eating 50 pounds (22.6kg) of sugar a year.
Public health crusader
"Obesity is a nationwide problem, and all over the United States, public health officials are wringing their hands saying, 'oh, this is terrible,'" Mayor Bloomberg told The New York Times. "New York City is not about wringing your hands; it's about doing something." Under the proposals, any bottles of sugary drinks larger than 16 ounces would be taken out of the refrigerators in cafes while extra-large options will disappear from restaurant menus.
The ban applies only to drinks that contain more than 25 calories per 8 ounces. The proposed law on sweetened drinks is the latest in a long line of public health interventions by Mayor Bloomberg's office.
During his three terms in office, he has banned smoking in the city, outlawed trans-fats in restaurants and forced chain restaurants to put calorie-counts on menus. His zeal for taking steps to make New York a healthier place has earned the mayor the title "Nanny Bloomberg" among his detractors. The New York Daily News tabloid led its story on the proposed ban with: "Mayor Bloomberg is a big soda scrooge." On the microblogging site, Twitter, New Jersey native @JTenBring responded to the proposed soda ban by saying: "Law discriminates against those like me. Drink a TON of soda and not only not obese, am underweight. Let me CHOOSE."
The health board and mayor's office have already angered the drinks industry with recent adverts highlighting the dangers of drinking high-calorie drinks. Affected companies are running their own adverts on the New York subway emphasizing the importance of "choice". The proposals on sugary soft drinks will go to New York's Board of Health in June for a final decision
Page 1 of 1
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
Judge Blocks New York City Large-Soda Ban, Mayor Bloomberg Vows Fight
March 11, 2013/ Reuters News Association
by Joseph Ax
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg speaks to the media at New York's City Hall after a ruling invalidating the city's plan to ban large sugary drinks from restaurants and other eateries. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg vowed on Monday to appeal a judge's ruling that struck down his pioneering ban on large sugary drinks sold by the city's restaurants, movie theaters and other food service businesses just a day before it was to take effect. The judge called the ban "arbitrary and capricious" in an 11th-hour decision that dealt a serious blow to Bloomberg, who has made public health a cornerstone of his administration, with laws prohibiting smoking in restaurants, bars and parks; banning trans fats; and requiring chain restaurants to post calorie counts.
At a press conference, Bloomberg said the judge's ruling was "totally in error" and promised to keep pressing his effort to combat a growing obesity epidemic linked to heart disease and diabetes. He has successfully fought off past court challenges to the smoking ban and the calorie count rule. "Anytime you adopt a groundbreaking policy, special interests will sue," Bloomberg said. "That's America." It is unclear whether the case will be resolved by the time Bloomberg's term expires at the end of this year.
Beverage manufacturers, restaurants and other business groups had called the so-called "soda ban" an illegal overreach that would infringe upon consumers' personal liberty. The regulation would have prohibited the city's food-service establishments from selling sugary drinks larger than 16 ounces (473 ml) starting on Tuesday, though city officials had said they would not begin imposing $200 fines on offending businesses until June. "People are dying every day," Bloomberg said. "This is not a joke. This is about real lives." But the ban only applied to businesses under the auspices of the health department, since it was the mayor-appointed health board, and not the city council, that approved the policy last fall. That meant that grocery and convenience stores - including 7 Eleven and its 64-ounce Big Gulp - were exempt from the regulation's reach.
In his ruling, state Supreme Court Justice Milton Tingling, in Manhattan, zeroed in on the loopholes, noting it would only have applied to businesses that are under the purview of the health department, like restaurants, and would allow sweetened milk-based drinks like milkshakes. "It is arbitrary and capricious because it applies to some but not all food establishments in the city, it excludes other beverages that have significantly higher concentrations of sugar sweeteners and/or calories on suspect grounds, and the loopholes inherent in the rule ... serve to gut the purpose of the rule," he wrote. He also expressed concern that to allow the health board such sweeping authority would "eviscerate" the separation of powers between the executive and the legislature branches of city government.
Chris Gindlesperger, a spokesman for the American Beverage Association, which brought the lawsuit on behalf of companies such as Coca-Cola, PepsiCo and Dr Pepper Snapple, said the ruling was a "sigh of relief" for New Yorkers and small businesses throughout the city. Dawn Sweeney, CEO of the National Restaurant Association, which joined the lawsuit as a plaintiff, said the decision would save thousands of restaurants and suppliers from unnecessary costs. But beverage industry consultant Tom Pirko of Bevmark Consulting in Santa Barbara, California, said the ruling could backfire if it convinces municipalities that the only way to reduce soda consumption is through higher taxes. "What the industry is very worried about is not measures like Bloomberg's, which is local and easy to walk around. What they're worried about is taxes," he said.
In anticipation of the soda ban, Bloomberg on Monday released new data tying sugary drinks to the city's fattest neighborhoods, though the ABA was quick to criticize its methodology. Meanwhile, fast food restaurants and cafes had been scrambling on Monday to comply with the looming deadline. Many were confused over whether the rules applied to popular sweetened coffee drinks, underlining the ban's uneven applications. McDonald's Corp said customers ordering a large coffee would be handed as many packets of sugar as they like on the side, to be poured into the drink at the customer's leisure.
By contrast, Dunkin' Donuts, which had been handing out leaflets to explain the law's impact on its menu, decided its servers would hand over large drinks unsweetened and simply direct customers to a self-serve stand where sugar and flavored syrups are kept.
Public sentiment on the ban had appeared divided, with a Marist University poll last summer showing 53 percent of New York City adults against the ban and 42 percent in favor. "The mayor took a bullet and now we'll wait for the next big Bloomberg health initiative," said Professor Douglas Muzzio of Baruch College. "He's not going to stop." Last month, Bloomberg proposed a ban on polystyrene foam, the packaging material that is widely popular for take-out food but is almost impossible to recycle.
Page 1 of 1
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
[pic]
What Else Should the Mayor Ban?[pic]
The New York Times
By MICHAEL M. GRYNBAUM
Published: May 30, 2012
New York City plans to enact a far-reaching ban on the sale of large sodas and other sugary drinks at restaurants, movie theaters and street carts, in the most ambitious effort yet by the Bloomberg administration to combat rising obesity. Reactions to Big Sugary Drinks Ban
With supersize soft drinks facing prohibition, what else should the Mayor ban?
The proposed ban would affect virtually the entire menu of popular sugary drinks found in delis, fast-food franchises and even sports arenas, from energy drinks to pre-sweetened iced teas. The sale of any cup or bottle of sweetened drink larger than 16 fluid ounces — about the size of a medium coffee, and smaller than a common soda bottle — would be prohibited under the first-in-the-nation plan, which could take effect as soon as next March. The measure would not apply to diet sodas, fruit juices, dairy-based drinks like milkshakes, or alcoholic beverages; it would not extend to beverages sold in grocery stores or convenience stores. “Obesity is a nationwide problem, and all over the United States, public health officials are wringing their hands saying, ‘Oh, this is terrible,’ ” Mr. Bloomberg said in an interview on Wednesday in City Hall’s sprawling Governor’s Room. “New York City is not about wringing your hands; it’s about doing something,” he said. “I think that’s what the public wants the mayor to do.”
A spokesman for the New York City Beverage Association, an arm of the soda industry’s national trade group, criticized the city’s proposal on Wednesday. The industry has clashed repeatedly with the city’s health department, saying it has unfairly singled out soda; industry groups have bought subway advertisements promoting their cause. “The New York City health department’s unhealthy obsession with attacking soft drinks is again pushing them over the top,” the industry spokesman, Stefan Friedman, said. “It’s time for serious health professionals to move on and seek solutions that are going to actually curb obesity. These zealous proposals just distract from the hard work that needs to be done on this front.” Mr. Bloomberg’s proposal requires the approval of the Board of Health, a step that is considered likely because the members are all appointed by him, and the board’s chairman is the city’s health commissioner, who joined the mayor in supporting the measure on Wednesday.
Mr. Bloomberg has made public health one of the top priorities of his lengthy tenure, and has championed a series of aggressive regulations, including bans on smoking in restaurants and parks, a prohibition against artificial trans fat in restaurant food and a requirement for health inspection grades to be posted in restaurant windows. The measures have led to occasional derision of the mayor as “Nanny Bloomberg,” by those who view the restrictions as infringements on personal freedom. But many of the measures adopted in New York have become models for other cities, including restrictions on smoking and trans fats, as well as the use of graphic advertising to combat smoking and soda consumption, and the demand that chain restaurants post calorie contents next to prices.
In recent years, soda has emerged as a battleground in efforts to counter obesity. Across the nation, some school districts have banned the sale of soda in schools, and some cities have banned the sale of soda in public buildings. In New York City, where more than half of adults are obese or overweight, Dr. Thomas Farley, the health commissioner, blames sweetened drinks for up to half of the increase in city obesity rates over the last 30 years. About a third of New Yorkers drink one or more sugary drinks a day, according to the city. Dr. Farley said the city had seen higher obesity rates in neighborhoods where soda consumption was more common. The ban would not apply to drinks with fewer than 25 calories per 8-ounce serving, like zero-calorie Vitamin Waters and unsweetened iced teas, as well as diet sodas. Restaurants, delis, movie -theater and ballpark concessions would be affected, because they are regulated by the health department. Carts on sidewalks and in Central Park would also be included, but not vending machines or newsstands that serve only a smattering of fresh food items.
Page 1 of 2
At fast-food chains, where sodas are often dispersed at self-serve fountains, restaurants would be required to hand out cup sizes of 16 ounces or less, regardless of whether a customer opts for a diet drink. But free refills — and additional drink purchases — would be allowed. Corner stores and bodegas would be affected if they are defined by the city as “food service establishments.” Those stores can most easily be identified by the health department letter grades they are required to display in their windows. The mayor, who said he occasionally drank a diet soda “on a hot day,” contested the idea that the plan would limit consumers’ choices, saying the option to buy more soda would always be available. “Your argument, I guess, could be that it’s a little less convenient to have to carry two 16-ounce drinks to your seat in the movie theater rather than one 32 ounce,” Mr. Bloomberg said in a sarcastic tone. “I don’t think you can make the case that we’re taking things away.”
He also said he foresaw no adverse effect on local businesses, and he suggested that restaurants could simply charge more for smaller drinks if their sales were to drop. The Bloomberg administration had made previous, unsuccessful efforts to make soda consumption less appealing. The mayor supported a state tax on sodas, but the measure died in Albany, and he tried to restrict the use of food stamps to buy sodas, but the idea was rejected by federal regulators.
With the new proposal, City Hall is now trying to see how much it can accomplish without requiring outside approval. Mayoral aides say they are confident that they have the legal authority to restrict soda sales, based on the city’s jurisdiction over local eating establishments, the same oversight that allows for the health department’s letter-grade cleanliness rating system for restaurants. In interviews at the AMC Loews Village, in the East Village in Manhattan, some filmgoers said restricting large soda sales made sense to them. “I think it’s a good idea,” said Sara Gochenauer, 21, a personal assistant from the Upper West Side. Soda, she said, “rots your teeth.”
But others said consumers should be free to choose. “If people want to drink 24 ounces, it’s their decision,” said Zara Atal, 20, a college student from the Upper East Side. Lawrence Goins, 50, a postal worker who lives in Newark, took a more pragmatic approach. “Some of those movies are three, three and a half hours long,” Mr. Goins said. “You got to quench your thirst.”
Page 2 of 2
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
Blow to Bloomberg: Appeals Court Rules NYC’s Big Sugary Drink Ban Unconstitutional
The Blaze
July 30, 2013
By Becket Adams
NEW YORK (AP) — New York City’s crackdown on big, sugary sodas is staying on ice. An appeals court ruled Tuesday that the city’s Board of Health exceeded its legal authority and acted unconstitutionally when it tried to put a size limit on soft drinks served in city restaurants. In a unanimous opinion, the four-judge panel of the state Supreme Court Appellate Division said that the health board was acting too much like a legislature when it created the limit, which would have stopped sales of non-diet soda and other sugar-laden beverages in containers bigger than 16 ounces. The judges wrote that while the board had the power to ban “inherently harmful” foodstuffs from being served to the public, sweetened beverages didn’t fall into that category. They also said the board appeared to have crafted much of the new rules based on political or economic considerations, rather than health concerns.
The city’s law department promised a quick appeal.
“Today’s decision is a temporary setback, and we plan to appeal this decision as we continue the fight against the obesity epidemic,” Mayor Michael Bloomberg said in a statement. New York’s effort to cap soda portions has drawn national attention, whether from diet companies lauding it as a groundbreaking step in America’s war on extra weight or from late-night TV hosts ribbing Bloomberg as a nutrition nanny. The drinks limit follows other Bloomberg efforts to nudge New Yorkers into better diets. His administration has forced chain restaurants to post calorie counts on menus, barred artificial trans fats from restaurant fare and challenged food manufacturers to use less salt.
Bloomberg and city Health Commissioner Thomas Farley saw soft drinks as a sensible next front in a necessary fight: reining in an obesity rate that rose from 18 to 24 percent of adults in the city within a decade. Studies have tied heavy consumption of sugary drinks to weight gain, and the city had to start somewhere, the officials said.
“We have a responsibility, as human beings, to do something, to save each other. … So while other people will wring their hands over the problem of sugary drinks, in New York City, we’re doing something about it,” Bloomberg said at a news conference after the measure was struck down in March. Critics said the city went too far in imposing a serving size limit. “For the first time, this agency is telling the public how much of a safe and lawful beverage it can drink,” Richard Bress, a lawyer for the American Beverage Association and a coalition of other groups that challenged the regulation, told the appeals court at a hearing in June. “This is the government coercing lifestyle decisions.”
Opponents also said the measure’s limitations made it meaningless as a health tool but potentially devastating to businesses that would have to deny customers big sodas while neighboring establishments could still supersize them. The regulation would apply in settings ranging from sandwich shops to table-service restaurants to movie theaters, but not in supermarkets or most convenience stores, as those establishments aren’t subject to city regulation. The measure also exempted alcoholic drinks and milk-based concoctions, including lattes.
The lower court judge, state Supreme Court Justice Milton Tingling, wrote in March that “the loopholes in this rule effectively defeat the stated purpose.” He also found that the Bloomberg-appointed Board of Health intruded on the City Council’s authority when it imposed the rule. While the city appealed, Bloomberg has continued pushing the cause in other ways. In June, he and the mayors of 15 other cities urged congressional leaders to stop allowing food stamps to be used to buy soda and other sugary drinks, reviving an idea that had been broached for years.
page 1 of 1
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
Will New York City’s Large Soda Ban Back-fire ?
The Washington DC WONKBLOG
By Sarah Kliff, Published: April 14, 2013
[pic]
The whole idea of New York City's large sugary drinks ban was to get New Yorkers to consume less soda. But what if they actually ended up drinking more with such a regulation in effect?
That's the question raised in a new peer-reviewed paper from Brent Wilson, Stephanie Stolarz-Fantino and Edmund Fantino, which looks at what drinks people order when cup size gets capped at 16 ounces.
The researchers gave 100 study participants three different menus to order from, and asked to imagine what they would buy at a fast food restaurant or a movie theater. One had drink sizes ranging from 16 to 32 ounces. On a second menu, soda options ranged from one 16-ounce drink, a package of two 12-ounce drinks and a package of two 16-ounce drinks. A third menu only had one option: one, 16-ounce soda.
Soda pricing was equal among settings; that is, one 24-ounce drink and two 12-ounce drinks cost the same ($1.79, a price the researchers took from the McDonald's menu). So the whole idea was to see how customers might react to a bundle of small sodas versus one, larger drink.
What they found: Participants offered the bundled menu tended to order a larger amount of soda. Those in a non-bundling scenario did tend to order less soda—they only had one option, the 16-ounce drink. But, perhaps surprisingly, bundling two small sodas together lead to orders that were larger than the scenario where large cup sizes were included. "These results show that businesses should earn significantly more revenue when bundles are offered than when small drink sizes alone are offered," the study authors write. "This means restaurants have a strong incentive to convert their original-sized drinks into bundles so they do not lose a major source of revenue."
This is obviously one small study and it also wasn't able to look at how much people would actually drink of the sodas they ordered, another important factor in determining calorie intake. It does provide some evidence though, that when it comes to soda, outlawing large sizes might not lead to the desired result.
Page 1 of 1
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
New York becomes the First City in the U.S. to Ban Large-sized Sugary Beverages
Time for Kids
September 14, 2012
By Alice Park for TIME
This 24-ounce fountain soda from Wendy's would be banned in New York City under a new law. On September 13, the New York City Health Department became the first in the nation to ban the sale of sugared beverages larger than 16 oz. at restaurants, mobile food carts, sports arenas and movie theaters. The ban includes sodas and sweetened tea. The law is aimed at cutting obesity rates in the U.S., where at least two-thirds of American adults are considered overweight. While the ban is widely supported by health professionals, it’s not popular with food retailers or many city residents.
A new law in New York City will ban the sale of any sodas larger than 16 ounces at restaurants and cafeterias. The ruling, which takes effect in March 2013, will prevent restaurants and cafeterias from selling sugared beverages in cups or containers larger than 16 ounces—about the size of a typical small soda. Supermarkets and convenience stores—including 7-Eleven, which sells the jumbo-sized Big Gulp—are not included in the law. And the ban doesn’t apply to fruit juices, alcoholic beverages, diet sodas or dairy-based drinks like milkshakes.
Health in the Big Apple
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg led the ban on large drinks. More than half of New York City adults and nearly 40 percent of the city’s public elementary and middle school students are considered overweight. "We are dealing with a crisis ... we need to act on this," said Board of Health member Deepthiman Gowda, a professor of medicine at Columbia University, the Associated Press reported. Bloomberg has noted that the ban doesn’t prevent people from buying several small sodas at a time if they wish, but health officials hope that the inconvenience will eventually get people to cut down on their use of sugared drinks. New York City’s Board of Health members say that banning mega-sized drinks is an important step toward helping consumers not only to drink fewer calories, but may also encourage people to make other healthy changes to their diet. The board reviewed data showing that sugared drinks make up 43 percent of the added sugar in the average American diet.
Critics of the Law:
7-Eleven's Big Gulps are here to stay. Grocery and convenience stores like 7-Eleven are exempt from New York City's ban because they are not regulated by the city. Some health officials, as well as the restaurant and beverage industry, are critical of the ban. They ask, why single out sugared sodas, when there are many reasons why people are overweight? And if sugared beverages are being targeted, why not take stronger measures against other sources of sugar, such as candy and other sweets?
Many restaurant owners, fast-food chains and makers of sodas, including Coca-Cola, PepsiCo and McDonald’s, are also upset because they say the ban could hurt certain businesses while rewarding others. The groups plan to continue to challenge the ruling, including taking their concerns to court. “We are smart enough to make our own decisions about what to eat and drink,” Liz Berman, the chairperson of the New Yorkers for Beverage Choices coalition, said in a statement. What do you think? Should the government ban large sugary drinks to help consumers make healthier choices? Or should people be allowed make their own choices about beverage size?
Total votes: 13054
POLL
Should the government ban large sugary drinks for public health? Page 1 of 1
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
Gallup Poll: Americans Don’t Want Ban on Large Sodas and Sugary Drinks
Red Alert
by Meghan Keenan
June 26, 2013
Americans like their soda, sweetened coffee and sugary drinks — and want the freedom to choose how much of those beverages they consume. A Gallup poll released Wednesday confirmed that 69 percent of Americans would vote against a law that limits the size of these drinks served in restaurants.
“Suppose that on Election Day you could vote on key issues as well as candidates. Would you vote for or against a law that would limit the size of soft drinks and other sugary beverages served in restaurants to no more than 16 ounces?” the poll asked Americans.
Sound familiar?
Though New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s proposed ban on large sodas and sugary beverages was ruled unconstitutional in March, the bill isn’t dead yet. Bloomberg is still pushing for the ban as the bill makes its way through an appellate court. Critics of ‘Nanny’ Bloomberg’s attempted ban say it goes too far in restricting individual choices. If the bill does pass, other cities and states may begin to introduce similar legislation.
Poll results indicate how Americans around the country would feel about the proposed law in New York, with only 30 percent of those polled saying they’d vote for it.
The majority of Americans across all subgroups polled oppose a law that would limit the size of sugar-sweetened beverages served in restaurants, but Gallup found that Democrats are more likely than Republicans to support the size limit, 37 percent to 21 percent. Additionally, Americans who make less than $24,000 per year are slightly more likely to support a ban than those with higher-income levels, and nonwhites are more likely to support the law than whites.
Bloomberg and other supporters of the proposal in New York argue that it will make people healthier and reduce obesity rates. The lower-court judge ruled that the ban would unfairly apply to some retailers but not others. But Bloomberg is running out of time to get his ban passed, as the Mayor’s term ends on Dec. 31 of this year.
Data from the June 15-16 Gallup poll was collected from telephone interviews with 1,015 U.S. adults.
page 1 of 1
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
Documentary: Fast Food, Fat Profits: Obesity in America
August 24, 2013
by Dr. J. Mercola
Fast Food, Fat Profits (a new book) gives a quick overview of what’s wrong with the US food industry, and how its inherent design virtually guarantees a sick, overweight population. From food deserts and cheap fast food to soda that’s marketed directly to children and a revolving door between food agencies and the government, the system is very much stacked against healthy eating... and healthy people. If your meals consist of $1 burgers and super-size drinks, your diet may be cheap, but it is also excessively high in grains, sugars, and factory-farmed meats. This is a recipe for obesity, diabetes and heart disease, just to name a few of the conditions that commonly befall those who consume "the Standard American Diet."
Why Is a Fast-Food Meal Cheaper Than Healthy Food?
Many people realize that they can get a value meal at numerous fast-food restaurants for far less money than it takes to purchase foods to make a healthy meal for their family. Adding to the problem, many on the most limited food budgets, such as those who receive food assistance dollars, live in "food deserts" – areas without grocery stores, and perhaps only a convenience store or a fast-food restaurant where they can purchase their food. While it’s certainly possible to eat healthy on a limited budget, this first requires that you understand what constitutes a healthy meal, and then that you have access to such foods, which is not always the case.
Meanwhile, instead of ensuring that all Americans have access to healthy foods, the US government is actively supporting a diet that consists of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), soybean oil, corn oil and grain-fed cattle, a direct result of their flawed farm subsidy system. The junk foods are made even cheaper through the use of unhealthy filler ingredients and preservatives that prevent spoiling, with the end result being that the very worst foods for your health are often significantly cheaper to buy.
Kids Are Eating Turkey Sandwiches with 100 Other Ingredients...
Perhaps nowhere are the problems with the food system more apparent than in US schools, where kids are served processed food products that only vaguely resemble actual fresh food. In Fast Food, Fat Profits, one chef is shocked to see that turkey sandwiches slated for the next school lunch contain 100 ingredients! What this cocktail of chemicals is ultimately doing to our population is difficult to pin down, but food additives like preservatives, artificial flavors and colors and MSG have already been linked to behavioral problems, ADHD and cancer, among other conditions. But, again, many assume that the burger from a fast-food joint is equivalent to one they’d make in their own kitchen... a far cry from reality.
For instance, the McRib sandwich from McDonald’s, described as pork, barbecue sauce, slivered onions and tart pickles, served on a hoagie style bun, actually contains more than 70 ingredients and even the ‘pork’ allegedly consists of restructured meat product (made from all the less expensive innards and castoffs from the pig). Unfortunately, some parents are unaware that feeding their kids fast-food meals is like feeding them a chemistry experiment, or they are simply lured in by the low prices and tasty (albeit artificial and addictive) flavors.
The Revolving Door Between the Food Industry and the Government Is Ever Turning
Many Americans also believe, mistakenly, that food sold on US soil must be good for them, or else the state and federal regulatory agencies would be taking action. But this ideal is laughable when those same government officials work for the very food companies they are supposed to be regulating. Take, for instance, John Bode, a Washington attorney who served on the Senate Agriculture Committee staff and held three presidential appointments at the Agriculture Department. He became president and CEO of the Corn Refiners Association in May of this year.
Then there’s Catherine Woteki, US Department of Agriculture (USDA) chief scientist and Undersecretary for Research, Education, and Economics, who previously served as Global Director of Scientific Affairs for Mars, Inc. Michael Taylor, a former vice president of public policy and chief lobbyist at Monsanto Company, who became the deputy commissioner for foods at the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is yet another example. There are other close connections that most of the public isn’t aware of either. Dairy Management, which also includes the National Dairy Council, has been aggressively marketing cheese to restaurant chains in efforts to increase sales. But we’re not talking about simply promoting consumption of a piece of cheddar cheese or a block of Gouda... this includes fast-food restaurants selling junk-food products like:
Pizza Hut's Cheesy Bites pizza
Wendy's dual Double Melt sandwich concept
Burger King's Cheesy Angus Bacon cheeseburger and TenderCrisp chicken sandwich (both of which contained three slices of cheese plus a "cheesy sauce")
Page 1 of 3
In other words, the government is not your ally here. They are working alongside fast-food giants like Pizza Hut, Domino’s, Wendy’s and others to get you to eat more of their junk-food products, which happen to contain lots of (highly processed) cheese!
Should Soda Be Banned from Food Stamp Programs?
Most Americans are drinking far too much soda and other sugary drinks, a key culprit in rising rates of obesity, heart disease, diabetes and related conditions. Some brands, like Chubby’s from the Caribbean, are even marketed directly to children (and feature bottles designed to fit in a small child’s hand). But, as the video highlighted, now a group of health associations, physicians and nutrition experts are calling for pilot programs that would restrict the purchase of sugary drinks by people using the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). This is already done for alcohol and tobacco, but the move to regulate what types of food and drinks a person is able to buy is new territory.
Increasing regulations like these may not be the solution, however, especially if the money spent on soda is simply put toward more heavily processed foods. While farmer’s markets do occasionally make it into the ghetto (and some do accept food stamps), the farmer's market is an occasional institution, operating just one day a week. Fast-food franchises, on the other hand, pump out low-nutrient fare seven days a week, 365 days a year.
While it's possible to make the healthy choice, under these conditions, it's not easy.
There’s no denying, of course, that processed foods, whether soda or potato chips, will eat up your grocery budget in the blink of an eye, and will cause disease in the long-term. In reality, any money spent on junk food is a waste, and purging these items from your grocery list is the first step to eating right on a budget. Some of the healthiest foods are incredibly affordable, even under $1 a serving, such as:
Raw organic milk
Raw nuts and seeds
Two cage-free organic eggs
Avocado, berries and broccoli
Home-grown sunflower sprouts
Fermented foods you make at home
What’s the Real Cost of Eating Cheap Food?
Fast Food, Fat Profits highlights what is arguably one of the most disturbing health trends of the 21st century – the fact that today’s generation may be the first to live a shorter lifespan than their parents, and this is a direct result of too much cheap (nutrient-deficient and toxin-laden) food. Avoiding processed food requires a change in mindset, which is not always an easy task. It CAN be done, however. Rather than looking at processed foods as a convenience that tastes good or saves money, try thinking of it as:
• Extra calories that will harm your body
• A toxic concoction of foreign chemicals and artificial flavors that will lead to disease
• A waste of your money
• Likely to lead to increased health care bills for you and your family
• Not something to give to children, whose bodies are still developing and therefore are both much more susceptible to cancer and in greater need of nutrients
Your goal should be to strive for 90 percent non-processed, whole food. Not only will you enjoy the health benefits—especially if you buy mostly organic—but you'll also get the satisfaction of knowing exactly what you're putting into your body, and that in and of itself can be a great feeling. It may cost more to eat this way, but then again it might not. (And in the long run the amount it will save you in the long run is immeasurable.)
Are You Trying to Eat Healthy on a Budget?
While it may not be immediately obvious for people who have grown up relying on ready-made, pre-packaged foods and snacks, you can replace those foods with something equally satisfying that will support, rather than wreck, your health. This requires some strategy, especially if you're working with a tight budget, but it can be done:
(1) Identify a Person to Prepare Meals. Someone has to invest some time in the kitchen. It will be necessary for either you, your spouse, or perhaps someone in your family prepare the meals from locally grown healthful foods. This includes packing lunches for your kids to take to school.
Page 2 of 3
(2) Become resourceful: This is an area where your grandmother can be a wealth of information, as how to use up every morsel of food and stretch out a good meal was common knowledge to generations past. Seek to get back to the basics of cooking – using the bones from a roast chicken to make stock for a pot of soup, extending a Sunday roast to use for weekday dinners, learning how to make hearty stews from inexpensive cuts of meat, using up leftovers and so on.
(3) Plan your meals: If you fail to plan you are planning to fail. This is essential, as you will need to be prepared for mealtimes in advance to be successful. Ideally, this will involve scouting out your local farmer's markets for in-season produce that is priced to sell, and planning your meals accordingly, but you can also use this same premise with supermarket sales.
You can generally plan a week of meals at a time, make sure you have all ingredients necessary on hand, and then do any prep work you can ahead of time so that dinner is easy to prepare if you're short on time in the evenings.
It is no mystery that you will be eating lunch around noon every day so rather than rely on fast food at work, before you go to bed make a plan as to what you are going to take to work the next day. This is a marvelous simple strategy that will let you eat healthier, especially if you take healthy food from home in to work.
(4) Avoid food waste: According to a study published in the journal PloS One,1 Americans waste an estimated 1,400 calories of food per person, each and every day. The two steps above will help you to mitigate food waste in your home. You may also have seen my article titled "14 Ways to Save Money on Groceries." Among those tips are suggestions for keeping your groceries fresher, longer, and I suggest reviewing those tips now.
(5) Buy organic animal foods. The most important foods to buy organic are animal, not vegetable, products (meat, eggs, butter, etc.), because animal foods tend to concentrate pesticides in higher amounts. If you cannot afford to buy all of your food organic, opt for organic animal foods first.
(6) Keep costs down on grass-fed beef. Pasture-finished beef is far healthier than grain-fed beef (which I don't recommend consuming). To keep cost down, look for inexpensive roasts or ground meat. You may also save money by buying an entire side of beef (or splitting one with two or three other families), if you have enough freezer space to store it.
(7) Buy in bulk when non-perishable items go on sale. If you are fortunate to live near a buyer's club or a co-op, you may also be able to take advantage of buying by the pound from bins, saving both you and the supplier the cost of expensive packaging.
(8) Frequent farmer's markets or grow your own produce. You may be surprised to find out that by going directly to the source you can get amazingly healthy, locally grown, organic food for less than you can find at your supermarket. This gives you the best of both worlds: food that is grown near to you, cutting down on its carbon footprint and giving you optimal freshness, as well as grown without chemicals, genetically modified seeds, and other potential toxins. Just as restaurants are able to keep their costs down by getting food directly from a supplier, you, too, can take advantage of a direct farm-to-consumer relationship, either on an individual basis or by joining a food coop in your area. Many farmer's markets are now accepting food stamps, so this is an opportunity most everyone can join in on
page 3 of 3
This page
is purposefully
left blank
between
different articles that
you may use
for
your research paper
F as in Fat: How Obesity Threatens America's Future 2013
August 16, 2013
Publisher: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
Author(s): Levy J. Segal and Thomas K. St. Laurent
The latest annual report from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) and Trust for America’s Health (TFAH) shows that adult obesity rates remained level in every state except for one, Arkansas. Thirteen states now have adult obesity rates above 30 percent, 41 states have rates of at least 25 percent, and every state is above 20 percent, according to the report.
Of the states with the 20 highest adult obesity rates, only Pennsylvania is not in the South or Midwest. For the first time in eight years, Mississippi no longer has the highest rate—Louisiana at 34.7 percent is the highest, followed closely by Mississippi at 34.6 percent. Colorado had the lowest rate at 20.5 percent.
Rates vary by age. Obesity rates for Baby Boomers (45-to 64-year-olds) have reached 40 percent in two states (Alabama and Louisiana) and are 30 percent or higher in 41 states. By comparison, obesity rates for seniors (65+ years old) exceed 30 percent in only one state (Louisiana). Obesity rates for young adults (18-to 25-year-olds) are below 28 percent in every state.
Rates by gender are now consistent. Ten years ago, there was nearly a 6 percentage point difference between rates for men and women (men: 27.5 percent, women: 33.4 percent), and now rates are nearly the same (men: 35.8 percent, women 35.5 percent). Men’s obesity rates have been climbing faster than women’s for this last decade.
Rates vary by education. More than 35 percent of adults ages 26 and older who did not graduate high school are obese, compared with 21.3 percent of those who graduated from college or technical college.
Rates vary by income. More than 31 percent of adults ages 18 and older who earn less than $25,000 per year were obese, compared with 25.4 percent of those who earn at least $50,000 per year.
Page 1 of 1
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.