HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » NAACP, Beverage Lobby Cha...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 01:22 PM

NAACP, Beverage Lobby Challenge City's Soda Ban

Source: WNYC Public Radio

Restaurants, beverage producers and the NAACP are in court on Wednesday challenging the city’s new rule that limits the size of sugary sodas in food service establishments.

Arguments on both sides will come down to how city rules and laws are made, and who has the authority to change them.

A coalition of opponents says limiting soda size amounts to creating a new law, not just a new rule. Laws must be passed by the City Council, where many members oppose the initiative. Rules are passed by the Health Board, which is appointed by Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

A representative for the NAACP says the mayor should have given the public a say on soda sizes by going through the City Council, and not pushed the change through the health board, which he appointed. The organization, along with the Hispanic Federation, argues that minority-owned delis and corner stores will be at a disadvantage compared to grocery chains.

Read more: http://www.wnyc.org/blogs/wnyc-news-blog/2013/jan/23/court-hear-soda-size-challenge/



This law never should have been devised in the first place. Sadly, many low-info voters in this nation read about laws like this on some site like Drudge or The Blaze or other media and get suckered into Republican appeals to "FREEDOM! LIBERTY!!!1!" but end up voting against their own interests i.e. Medicare, Social Security, well-funded public schools, etc. As if the Religious Right's strategy of divisive social issues like abortion and same-sex marriage was bad enough in mugging the working and middle classes.

And the NAACP in this lawsuit? Pretty awkward situation: Right wingers opposed to this law are forced to agree with a LIBERAL! ANTI-TEA PARTY! group, while us on the left get disappointed that NAACP is in bed with corporate interests.

17 replies, 2510 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to alp227 (Original post)

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 01:24 PM

1. economic interests

at the expense of our well being (individually and society)

the whole things is unfortunate... soda companies should never have been allowed to dominate

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Original post)

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 01:46 PM

2. A picture is worth ...

 



What this world needs is more soda-pop

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to panzerfaust (Reply #2)

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 01:52 PM

3. That ain't no soda in his hand.

 

Looks more like a wine cooler.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to panzerfaust (Reply #2)

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 02:49 PM

11. The Thai translation is "Life has flavor".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Original post)

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 02:03 PM

4. Why is the NAACP supporting the attacks on this effort to improve the health of

New Yorkers?

What does this matter have to do with the NAACP?

In my opinion, the NAACP should support the effort to stop the consumption of sugared drinks, especially drinks containing corn syrup.


Chart: Obesity Among Adults, by Black/White Race or Hispanic Ethnicity and Sex, United States, 2006-2008.

In most of the states examined, blacks had the highest prevalence (number of existing cases in a defined group of people during a specific time period) of obesity, followed by Hispanics, and then whites. Greater prevalences of obesity for non-Hispanic blacks and whites were found in the Midwest and South. Among Hispanics lower prevalence was observed in the Northeast compared to other regions.

Among blacks in 45 states and DC with sufficient respondents, the prevalence of obesity ranged from 23.0% to 45.1%, with a total of 40 states having an obesity prevalence of ≥30%, including 5 states (Alabama, Maine, Mississippi, Ohio, and Oregon) with a prevalence of ≥ 40%.

Among Hispanics in 50 states and DC, the prevalence of obesity ranged from 21.0% to 36.7%, with 11 states having an obesity prevalence of ≥ 30%. Among whites in 50 states and DC, the prevalence of obesity ranged from 9.0% to 30.2%, with only one state (West Virginia) having a prevalence of ≥ 30%; 5 states (California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, and New Mexico and DC had an obesity prevalence of < 20%.

At least three reasons may account for the racial and ethnic differences in obesity. First, racial and ethnic groups differ in behaviors that contribute to weight gain; second explanation may be differences in individual attitudes and cultural norms related to body weight. A third explanation may be differences in access to affordable, healthful foods and safe locations to be physically active; this limited access may negatively impact diet and physical activity levels.

http://www.cdc.gov/features/dsobesityadults/index.html

Of course, these charts do not account for individual and racial differences in body build and the amount of weight that a particular frame (small or large bones) can carry and remain healthy. This can be crucial in comparing the weight of different races.

Two young girls I know are the same height but have very different bone structures. One of them will always weigh more than the other.

Asians and certain European ethnic groups are relatively small boned and this accounts for some statistical weight differences.

But -- I live in an area that is to a great extent Hispanic, and when I went into the local 24-hour store, I could not buy a drink that was sugar-free. That's horrible. I don't have a big build, and I can't have all that sugar.

Children should not be filling up on useless sugar calories. Parents should not be spending their money on useless sugar calories. I support the effort in New York to reduce the consumption of soft drinks.

Why is the NAACP opposing this?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #4)

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 02:10 PM

7. I'm sure it comes down to $$$

NAACP donors are likely some of the same people profiting from the sale of such drinks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #4)

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 02:37 PM

8. What happened to "my body my choice"?

Would you support Berkeley banning large servings of meat to promote vegan diets?

There are other ways to promote public health without interfering with adults' dietary choices.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Reply #8)

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 03:12 PM

12. But I don't want my tax dollars, going to treat diabetics and the like

that end up in Emergency over and over and over...

because of their "freedom" to consume what THEY want, no matter how bad.

Every idiot should now know that sugared sodas (and even the diet versions) are garbage and bad for us.

If they want to literally commit suicide by diet, do it on their own dime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SoapBox (Reply #12)

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 07:57 PM

13. So what else should we restrict to reduce our collective ER bill?

Last edited Wed Jan 23, 2013, 08:32 PM - Edit history (1)

Large servings of red meat like Big Mac burgers I? The size of cigarette packs? Since smoking and meat eating have been linked to cancer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Reply #13)

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 09:41 PM

15. Automobiles and Guns

send a lot of people to the hospital, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Reply #8)

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 09:50 PM

16. But NAACP involvement here implies that soda size regulation is somehow a RACIAL issue.

There's no connection between the size of the soft drink you order and your racial, ethnic, or cultural identity.

So your Berkeley analogy doesn't work in this context.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #16)

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 09:55 PM

17. Well, my point is: government should NOT interfere in adults' dietary choices!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #4)

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 02:45 PM

10. My guess is that Coke and Pepsi donate $$$ to the local NAACP. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Original post)

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 02:06 PM

5. "Because we reserve the right to over eat/drink ourselves" ...

...I think this IS a public health issue, and while maybe the NYC ordinance is a little over the top, it draws attention to an enormous problem - and symptom - of (one of the things) what the hell is wrong with our society.

We are ridiculously unhealthy, as a general rule. Even looking past the sugar, what about all the other chemicals in sodas that we're ingesting? The resulting obesity, "addiction" (the more carbs you have, the more your body wants), and other related diseases that drive up health care costs, insurance costs, etc etc etc affects us all, ultimately. Yet we think we gotta have as much of it as we can - and all the other cheap processed fake-food shit - at any given moment.

I am reminded of the dude with the buckets full of barf & spaghetti-o's in the movie Seven.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Original post)

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 02:09 PM

6. "minority-owned delis and corner stores will be at a disadvantage compared to grocery chains"

So the NAACP is saying operators of these stores can't measure?

That's kind of fucked up...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Original post)

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 02:41 PM

9. The law is ridiculous

I've never had a Big Gulp or whatever sodas they're targeting. Diet soda is a guilty pleasure, but I don't want a huge paper cup of anything. But good gawd, this is a whole lot intrusive. Educate people and let them make up their own minds. I think Bloomberg is a little nuts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Original post)

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 08:02 PM

14. Do all McDonalds have the any Size Soda for 1 Dollar right now ?

i don't know if it's just around some areas.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread