Mayor Bloomberg of New York City is a man of strong convictions and rather than sit on his billion dollar rear end, has correctly taken on the gun lobby who want little or no regulation of firearms.
But gun regulation is one thing.
Regulating the portion size of a soft drink a person can drink is another and the good mayor has over reached when he has decided that government knows best how much a person can choose to drink or eat.
Mistakenly, I thought the case was closed and the good citizens of NYC correctly stood up to the mayor and said enough is enough.
Rather, I was surprised to learn that the NYC large soft drink ban was still going into effect and other cities are considering the ban.
Telling people the quantity of a sugary drink that they may drink is a bit mind-boggling almost un-American.
With such regulation, this NYC government over reach could easily drive this progressive thinker into the arms of wing nut conservatives who want absolutely no government interference in how much we can eat but only wish to regulate our reproductive or voting rights.
A person consuming a liter of sugar water is not good for anyone’s health. (Before Americans became truly aware of the dangers of sugar, the astronaut's drink Tang---almost pure sugar flavored with orange was served on some breakfast tables as an alternative to orange juice.)
The science is against the health benefits of processed sugar and high fructose corn syrups in our diets. Sugar derived from beets, sugar cane, and corn is most certainly addictive and probably could be classified as an addictive drug.
But until further notice, sugar has not been outlawed as a drug and adults should not be regulated on the portions that they wish to consume.
A government watchdog determining food portion or drink sizes is going way over the role of government.
Soon, health conscious government officials may decide that restaurant buffets are illegal because the over eating at a food trough results in more calories consumed than what a person may drink in a month.
If not already being drafted, there may be laws regulating the number of Big Macs or slices of pizza one person may eat at a sitting.
The sky is the limit when food portions could be regulated by skinny health crazed wing nuts.
Keep the large sugary drinks out of schools if you wish---the kids are minors---but to limit adults consumption is a dangerous direction to head down.
Every adult from personal experience knows the addictive nature of sugar and simple carbohydrates. However, the last thing this nation needs is a food patrol limiting our food or drink portions.
An overweight borderline diabetic drinking a 16-oz serving of sugar water demonstrates a poor food choice selection.
Perhaps a better response would have been that with education, the merchants selling these large drinks would have voluntarily down sized the servings that they offer.
But down sizing drink sizes should have been done voluntarily and if the merchants still wish to offer the gallon size drinks---then so be it. And more importantly, if the adult person still knowing the health risks of consuming the sugary concoction wishes to do so--so be it. Soft drinks are not illegal!
But no way should the government—be it local, state or federal legislate portion sizes.
There will always be a time that for the safety of the nation, there will have to be laws and ordinances to protect citizens from physical harm from others.
Everyone breathes air and rules reducing air pollution is a good thing because it is a commodity that we all rely upon to survive.
But my personal safety is not endangered when another person drinks a sugar-laden beverage or chooses to have three pieces of a high calorie cheesecake or gobbles up a can of Pringles because he can't eat just one.
If the trend set by Bloomberg continues, in the future you may read: