Sheryl Canter

Why Mayor Bloomberg Is Right About Sugary Drinks

The arguments to Mayor Bloomberg’s proposed ban on super-sized sugary drinks show the ignorance that proves why the ban is necessary. There is no comparison between the health hazards of a large pastrami sandwich and a giant sugary drink (as Jon Stewart complained). Saturated fat isn’t dangerous, as the blog post linked below explains. Nor does the argument that “donuts are dangerous, too” make sense. A large sugary drink is more dangerous than a solid sugary dessert because of the speed with which the sugar hits the liver. Plus the danger isn’t only obesity – it’s heart disease, obesity, cancer, and more.

Most people are unaware of the dangers of sugary beverages – or the debate from the early 1970s over which dietary factor caused heart disease: sugar or fat (it is sugar, not fat – Ancel Keys is now widely thought to have been wrong).

Read this blog post: Sugar Is Toxic: Heart Disease, Cancer & More. It clearly explains the biochemistry of sugar metabolism, and why large-sized sugary beverages are the greatest threat to health of any food.

8 Comments

  1. Joe says:

    Is it the role of government to tell a business what and how to sell a legal product?

    Sugar while harmful to the body in large quanities is not illegal. Shouldn’t it be my choice as to how I spend my money?

    Whats wrong with educating people about the harmful effects of a product and then letting them decide?

  2. Alex206 says:

    This whole time we have been told to avoid fat. We see food labeled “Zero Fat!!!” but then it’s full of sugar!!!

  3. Alex206 says:

    Not all fats are created equal though.

  4. Right you are! I talk a lot more about food issues in my other blog:

    http://normaleating.com/blog/

    – Sheryl

  5. Greg Lee says:

    I certainly agree that excessive sugar is harmful. I stopped drinking cokes over 7 years ago, and then gradually eliminated dessert pies, cakes, ice cream, and all that stuff. I miss it, but living is better. However, that doesn’t mean Bloomberg has the right to tell me not to drink large sugary drinks. It’s none of his business.

  6. > However, that doesn’t mean Bloomberg has the right to tell me not to drink large sugary drinks. It’s none of his business.

    I agree that Mayor Bloomberg does not have the right to tell you not to drink large quantities of sugary drinks, and he does not. He just makes it somewhat less convenient to do so – you have to buy two cups rather than one.

    I disagree that it’s none of his business since the consequences of you drinking large quantities of sugary drinks costs the city in lost wages and health care.

  7. Greg Lee says:

    Hmmph. I’ve heard that one. If I undertake to donate $1000 somewhere every time you post something disagreeing with me, does that make it my business to prevent you from making such posts? I don’t think so. Just because I pay a penalty when you exercise a freedom, that doesn’t make it legitimate for me to deprive you of your freedom so that I can avoid the penalty.

  8. J.L. Kennedy says:

    Making it “somewhat less convenient” to drink large quantities of sugary drinks is no different than ordering us not to, just a matter of degree. People who drink large quantities of sugary drinks should bear the consequences of their own actions. Unfortunately, in our entitlement minded society, it is unthinkable to leave people to suffer the consequences of their own actions, so we pursue the futile course of forcing them to change their self-destructive behavior. It is quite laughable that Bloomberg, or any other government agent, thinks that they can do so. That’s why we have all the laughing going on over this policy.

Leave a Reply

*