The F$$d P$lice are C$ming

[Canadiens1131]

More ammo for the f00d p0li$e (alternate title: your kids are fucking fat and will get diabetes from downing sugar water all day)

News from The Associated Press

Half of Americans drink daily soda, sweet beverage

By MIKE STOBBE
AP Medical Writer
Health Video
Buy AP Photo Reprints

ATLANTA (AP) -- Half of Americans drink a soda or sugary beverage each day - and some are downing a lot.

One in 20 people drinks the equivalent of more than four cans of soda each day, even though health officials say sweetened beverages should be limited to less than half a can.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released the figures Wednesday in a report said to be the government's first to offer national statistics for both adults and kids.

Sweetened drinks have been linked to the U.S. explosion in obesity and related medical problems, and health officials have been urging people to cut back for years. Some officials have proposed an extra soda tax and many schools have stopped selling soda or artificial juices.

But advocates say those efforts are not enough, and on Wednesday a coalition of 100 organizations announced a new push. The effort includes the American Heart Association and the some city health departments who plan to prod companies to stop the sale of sugary drinks on their property or providing them at business meetings - as Boston's Carney Hospital did in April. There will also be new media campaigns, like one starting soon in Los Angeles that will ask "If you wouldn't eat 22 packs of sugar, why are you drinking it?'

The new CDC report may be ammunition. It found:

-About half the population drinks a sugared beverage each day.

-Males consume more than females, with teenage boys leading the pack. On average, males ages 12 through 19 drink the equivalent of nearly two cans of soda each day.

-Poor people drink more than the more affluent. Low-income adults got about 9 percent of their daily calories from sugary beverages; for high-income adults it was just over 4 percent.

-Blacks get more of their calories from sweetened beverages than other racial and ethnic groups.

The study is based on in-person interviews of more than 17,000 people in the years 2005 through 2008. They were asked to recount everything they ate and drank in the previous day. However, diet sodas, sweetened teas, flavored milks and 100 percent fruit juice did not count.

Healthy-eating recommendations call for people to limit sugary beverages to about 64 calories per day. That's a little less than half of a 12-ounce can of regular Coca-Cola, which is 140 calories.

In other terms: An average can of sugared soda or juice has 10 to 12 teaspoons of sugar.

There have been efforts to reduce children's access to sodas and sports drinks in schools, with beverage companies agreeing to remove full-calorie soft drinks. But the CDC study found more than half of the drinks are consumed at home. Less than 1 percent are bought at schools or day-care centers.

That's why some members of the coalition argue that parents shouldn't drink sweetened beverages, so they don't serve as a poor example at home. They hope drinking soda will become as unfashionable as smoking.

A spokesman for Carney Hospital - the 149-bed Boston facility that stopped allowing full-calorie soft drink sales - said the approach makes sense. When the policy was implemented in April, sales of beverages dropped, but have gone back up, as more people apparently are adjusting to water and other non-sweetened drinks.

The hospital's Dorchester neighborhood has high rates of diabetes and other weight-related illnesses, said spokesman Joe Burnieika. "We can't afford to feed people's bad habits if we can give them a healthy alternative," he said.

In a statement, the American Beverage Association on Wednesday suggested that the coalition's effort was misguided. Citing sales data and some other research, the industry group said sales of full-calorie soft drinks have been declining, which they credited to soda makers offering more no-calorie and low-calorie options and improved calorie labeling on the front.

These initiatives "will contribute far more to solving complex health issues like obesity than (the coalition's) sound bite solution that offers plenty of hype but no substance," the statement said.

---

Online:

CDC report: CDC - National Center for Health Statistics Homepage

[yolland]

Sometimes I do wish it was easier to condition people to just practice moderation, rather than conditioning them to view certain foods as if they were poisons.

[Canadiens1131]

Originally Posted by yolland

Sometimes I do wish it was easier to condition people to just practice moderation, rather than conditioning them to view certain foods as if they were poisons.

Exactly. Everything in moderation. You ask, "why do the French eat all this fatty food and not get overweight?" They eat longer meals, smaller portions, and eat in moderation. (well, except for the vino)

Unfortunately it seems like so many fail to heed this warning.

[the iron horse]

Originally Posted by Canadiens1131

Exactly. Everything in moderation. You ask, "why do the French eat all this fatty food and not get overweight?" They eat longer meals, smaller portions, and eat in moderation. (well, except for the vino)

Unfortunately it seems like so many fail to heed this warning.

It's the main point in this issue!

Well said in both posts.



"Moderation in all things." ~Saint Paul

[KhanadaRhodes]

Originally Posted by Canadiens1131

More ammo for the f00d p0li$e (alternate title: your kids are fucking fat and will get diabetes from downing sugar water all day)

i like that the story comes from atlanta.

[MrsSpringsteen]

I saw on the news last night that peanut butter is good for you, has a good type of fat that has to do with good cell growth, etc. I just wish it didn't have to be in moderation.

I haven't had soda in years-well maybe one or two ginger ales a year

[KhanadaRhodes]

if you have a couple dark chocolate reeses peanut butter cups then you get double duty.

[the iron horse]

Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen

I saw on the news last night that peanut butter is good for you, has a good type of fat that has to do with good cell growth, etc. I just wish it didn't have to be in moderation.

I haven't had soda in years-well maybe one or two ginger ales a year

Ginger Ale is my favorite soda. I buy an organic ginger soda.

Not every day, but I do enjoy one ocassionally without guilt.

Also love peanut butter




The Food Police

[VintagePunk]

I love PB&J too. That's my lunch more often than not (on whole grain toast), and I'm a grown-ass adult.

Iron Horse, your attitudes toward food and physical activity seem very sensible. If only everyone could think that way. But they don't, obviously. So what would your attitude/solution toward those who don't be? Leave them on their own and let them wallow in their own poor-nutrition worlds and suffer the inherent diseases? Should the government attempt to inform about poor choices? Should they regulate? Where is your personal line?

[Canadiens1131]

Originally Posted by the iron horse

The Food Police

No man is an island.

Overweight and obese people put a tremendous stress on the healthcare system in the United States, whether Iron Horse decides to make his own sensible individual choices or not. These people cost him, and every taxpayer money.

I wonder why many conservatives seem to have this fallacy of a view that every family lives on a large parcel of land with a home they earned through the American dream and the personal freedom and space to not ever affect any other individual in society negatively.

It's the "plantation", 19th century view of society and in this day and age it's ludicrous.

[the iron horse]

Originally Posted by Canadiens1131

No man is an island.

Overweight and obese people put a tremendous stress on the healthcare system in the United States, whether Iron Horse decides to make his own sensible individual choices or not. These people cost him, and every taxpayer money.

I wonder why many conservatives seem to have this fallacy of a view that every family lives on a large parcel of land with a home they earned through the American dream and the personal freedom and space to not ever affect any other individual in society negatively.

It's the "plantation", 19th century view of society and in this day and age it's ludicrous.

No, what is ludicrous and scary is that a society will allow a goverment to control and restrict their freedom in food choices.

[financeguy]

Originally Posted by the iron horse

No, what is ludicrous and scary is that a society will allow a goverment to control and restrict their freedom in food choices.

But if large corporations do it, that's fine and dandy, right?

[the iron horse]

Originally Posted by financeguy

But if large corporations do it, that's fine and dandy, right?

I was talking Big Brother.

How are large corporations retricting or banning choices in food?

[financeguy]

Originally Posted by the iron horse

I was talking Big Brother.

How are large corporations retricting or banning choices in food?

Christ, you're naive.

I'll try and break it down. There are a finite number of choices in food, right?

[the iron horse]

Originally Posted by financeguy

Christ, you're naive.

I'll try and break it down. There are a finite number of choices in food, right?

Naive?

You did not answer this question:


How are large corporations retricting or banning choices in food?

[financeguy]

Originally Posted by the iron horse

Naive?

You did not answer this question:


How are large corporations retricting or banning choices in food?

The answer is difficult to explain in simple terms and necessarily understandable by those of significantly below average intelligence, or a stubborn mulish resistance to recognise that the way the world works is how it is, not how one would wish.

Your record on here is of preaching in soundbites, not engaging, and failing to address points put to you, so I'm not that bothered tbh.

[the iron horse]

Originally Posted by financeguy

The answer is difficult to explain in simple terms and necessarily understandable by those of significantly below average intelligence, or a stubborn mulish resistance to recognise that the way the world works is how it is, not how one would wish.

Your record on here is of preaching in soundbites, not engaging, and failing to address points put to you, so I'm not that bothered tbh.

Thank you so much for answering a simple question.

Take care

[financeguy]

Originally Posted by the iron horse

Thank you so much for answering a simple question.

Take care

It isn't a simple question, and the answers are certainly not, is my point.

Do you have a guided systematic approach to filter out personal prejudice from your analysis of economic and social problems?

[financeguy]

But, to take one example, the McDonald's organisation abuses its corporate power and reduces realistic choice by selling bad food to people who don't have the education and/or resources to know that what they are eating is bad for them. It has a proven record and demonstrable record of questionable ethics at the highest level of its organisation, including aggressive marketing of bad food to children.

There are not infinite choices in food consumption, particularly for the working and middle classes. Our choices are finite and limited, and furthermore adversely affected to the detriment of our health when large corporations enjoy largely unfettered market power, as is currently the case.

Denial of these simple precepts also encompasses the point of view that advertising is pointless and does not work.

But, if it doesn't work, why do they spend so much on it?

[BVS]

Originally Posted by the iron horse

No, what is ludicrous and scary is that a society will allow a goverment to control and restrict their freedom in food choices.

What choices have GOVERNMENT removed from your options?

And I want you to actually answer the question, don't give me another bs link.