Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Maine Democrats go to war on obesity

  1. #1
    Chief of Naval Operations sbp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    11,037

    Maine Democrats go to war on obesity

    http://www.washtimes.com/national/20030214-73474123.htm

    Democratic state legislators in Maine this week are introducing the nation's "first comprehensive legislative package to combat obesity."

    The bill would require nutrition labeling on menus in large chain restaurants, ban soft drinks and junk food in schools, promote transportation policies that encourage walking and create a commission to study the causes of obesity.

    "This is the pervasive nanny culture, and it's sending the wrong message," said Rick Berman, executive director of the Center for Consumer Freedom.

    The proper message, Mr. Berman said, is "moderation" in eating. Instead, he said, those promoting Maine's anti-obesity legislative proposal "are setting up the forbidden-fruit syndrome."

    But state Rep. Sean Faircloth, Bangor Democrat, a sponsor of the bill, said, "This isn't about having another bag of Fritos." He said it's about not getting life-threatening disorders such as heart disease, stroke and diabetes by knowing about what you eat.

    "Nobody's telling you can't have a quarter-pounder. But you'll get caloric information with your quarter-pounder. This is a free-market approach to obesity and public health," Mr. Faircloth said in a telephone interview.

    He also said the Maine Medical Association supports his anti-obesity package.

    Maine state Sen. Lynn Bromley, South PortlandDemocrat , also a sponsor of the measure, said, "If you give people information, they make the right choices."

    Ms. Bromley said she thinks the bill "has a good chance to get through" the Democrat-controlled Legislature.

    "The issue goes directly to the cost of health care," she said yesterday in a telephone interview. "Maine has a biennial budget of $5 billion, and we have a huge looming deficit of $1 billion. ... We estimate the obesity issue in Maine accounts for [costs] of $1 billion."

    Ms. Bromley, who chairs Maine's state Senate Committee on Business Research and Economic Development, and Mr. Faircloth will be announcing introduction of the new measure at a news briefing today at the Statehouse in Augusta.

    Also expected to be on hand to back the bill will be Margo Wootan, director of nutrition policy for the Center for Science in the Public Interest. The center has worked to expose the fat and calorie content of fast food, movie popcorn and ethnic dishes, such as Chinese and Mexican food.

    Ms. Wootan said Mr. Faircloth sought out advice from officials of CSPI and "a number of experts" as to what the anti-obesity package should contain.

    "Over the last couple of years, CSPI has done research on contributors to obesity and policy options to address" the problem that public health leaders call an "epidemic" in America, she said yesterday.

    Ms. Wootan said the five-bill package will require chain restaurants having 20 or more establishments nationally to post the calorie content of all foods.

    "This would not apply to 'mom and pop' restaurants," she said.

    As for the restrictions on soft drinks and snack food in schools, she said Maine's bill is modeled after a West Virginia law. Ms. Wootan said it would prohibit candy and soft drinks with sugar from vending machines.

    Ms. Wootan said snack food would be limited to items that do not contain more than 35 percent sugar or 8 grams of fat per serving. Fruit juice would be allowed, provided it contained nothing but juice.

    The restrictions are confusing to Mr. Berman.

    "They would ban soft drinks, but there is as much sugar in fruit juice as in soft drinks. Orange juice is loaded with sugar," he said.

    And the creation of a commission to study the causes of obesity is unnecessary, Mr. Berman said, because the bill's sponsors already have determined causes and cures.

    another link: http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/...30214_597.html

  2. #2
    Captain
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    L.A..... Costa Mesa... Whatever, Man!
    Posts
    1,824
    Sounds like it's along the same lines as the proposed (and so-called) soda-tax here in CA.

    $0.02 per can on sugared soda to "combat obeisity".





    Dave.

  3. #3
    Captain
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    L.A..... Costa Mesa... Whatever, Man!
    Posts
    1,824
    Here's that one.

    Soda Tax Link from the People's Republic of California


    It still has a chance of passing.






    Dave.

  4. #4
    Rear Admiral Lower Half Cubsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,743
    Does anyone really believe that an extra quarter per 12-pack is going to make anyone thin?

  5. #5
    Chief of Naval Operations sbp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    11,037
    Don't even get me started on the misnamed Center for Science in the Public Interest. Every few months they come up with something new just to get the name in the news. They've come up with so much alarmist junk science over the years.

    So there's going to be nutritional labeling. So what? Shut up and past the damn whopper!


  6. #6
    Captain
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    L.A..... Costa Mesa... Whatever, Man!
    Posts
    1,824
    Originally posted by Cubsfan
    Does anyone really believe that an extra quarter per 12-pack is going to make anyone thin?
    Ha! Well... I think the ruse was that the $$$ generated from the tax (an estimated $350 million/year) would fund education programs to teach children about proper nutrition.

    Really... it was probably going into the general fund to assuage the massive deficit created by Gray Davis' MASSIVE spending and hiring.

    Just roll back spending to '98 levels. Try that. No huge deficits then. Hordes of people were not dying because of lack of state money.

    Sorry to hijack the thread...




    Dave.

  7. #7
    Captain
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    L.A..... Costa Mesa... Whatever, Man!
    Posts
    1,824
    Originally posted by sbp
    Shut up and past the damn whopper!

    Agreed... on that note, I'm going to get some lunch.





    Dave.

  8. #8
    shibuya girl
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,855
    all this talk of food is making me hungry

  9. #9
    Vice Admiral Nanotech9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Gone Wheeling!
    Posts
    4,409
    The bill would require nutrition labeling on menus in large chain restaurants, ban soft drinks and junk food in schools, promote transportation policies that encourage walking and create a commission to study the causes of obesity.
    I'de bet $20 that the major cause of obesity is people eating too damn much....

    What do you think?

    I see it one of two ways:

    You either love eating all the time, or you love being skinny. Up and choose already, and whatever you choose to do, dont complain about it.

  10. #10
    Rear Admiral Lower Half
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    2,917
    So what exactly is the problem with giving people the information they need to make an informed decision about their health?
    I used to be into sadism, necrophilia and beastiality, but then I realized I was just beating a dead horse

  11. #11
    Vice Admiral Nanotech9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Gone Wheeling!
    Posts
    4,409
    cause everyone freakin knows fast food is fatening. It doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure that out...

    Whether or not this Mcdonalds burger has 12 more calories than that BurgerKing burger really isnt going to help someone get skinny.

    You've gotta smoothe up stop eating all the time, and you might get a bit thinner.

    I dont think its up to the restruant or the gov. to help you get thin... Not like it would really help you to have nutrition labeling on your restruant menu anyway.

    "Gee, lemme see... I was going to order Cheese fries and a Chicken fried steak, and then some onion rings, and then some apple pie and ice cream... but O.M.'GOSH, those onion rings have 18 calories in them... I'm better not order the onion rings. But i think i'll still be hungry, so i'll order an extra dip of vanilla with my pie."

    Seriously, i think the Gov needs to stop trying to babysit people - it ones one personal responsibility to watch their own weight. Its not like 100 extra lbs just sneaks up to you in the middle of the night and Ka-PLOW, you're overweight. No, you get there gradually. You see your 10lbs overweight. Freakin do somethign about it. Eat less, excercise, SOMETHING. Its your body, you need to freakin take care of it.

    If you a school age kid, then its the PARENTS responsibility to direct them in how they should eat properly.

    I know, i probably just offended any over-weight people reading this, but hey, its the truth. You make a decision... either love being skinny / healthy, or love eating a lot. Its one or the other, and you've got to live with the decisions you make.

    The only people i have pity on are those who have a SERIOUS medical problem that no matter what they do they are still overweight. I have a cousin that is a little overweight because of a gland problem or something - but, she's done really well and has lost a lot of weight. Guess what though, she didnt loose any weight until she stopped eating so much... and believe me, she LOVED to eat a LOT.

  12. #12
    Admiral Merlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Square On My Arse
    Posts
    7,410

    Re: Maine Democrats go to war on obesity

    Originally posted by sbp

    "They would ban soft drinks, but there is as much sugar in fruit juice as in soft drinks. Orange juice is loaded with sugar," he said.
    I don't know about you but I'd much rather see orange juice served in schools over soda. What an idiot. Statements like this simply cheapen everything else you are trying to say.
    :monkey:

  13. #13
    Admiral Merlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Square On My Arse
    Posts
    7,410
    Originally posted by Nanotech9
    Whether or not this Mcdonalds burger has 12 more calories than that BurgerKing burger really isnt going to help someone get skinny.
    I pretty much agree with your rant but think it was a bit off point. Food labeling won't be of much benefit if it used to choose between a BigMac and Whopper. But it will work if it shocks someone into having something completely different. Yeah, everyone knows fast food is fattening/bad for you but I doubt most people realize just how bad it actually is. If you put the nutritional information there it will surprise a lot of people. That is you'll hear "Holy sh1t, I knew this was bad but I had no idea that this shake had my full week's supply of sodium in it!" And that just might, probably won't, but just might change some behavior.

    On another note, don't most fast food places post the nutritional information somewhere in the store as it is?
    :monkey:

  14. #14
    Rear Admiral Lower Half
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    2,917
    There is a huge problem with "Super-Sizing" in America . . . people see they can get a bunch more food for pennies more than what they were originally planning on spending. They tend to think economically and see it as a great deal. However, I really don't think many people fully understand all the costs involved (non-pecuniary costs) since they don't know HOW BIG of a difference there is in calories/fat/sodium/carbohydrates, etc between a regular sized meal and a SUPER SIZED meal . . . if they saw the difference and were made more aware of it, they may be more likely to eat normal portions - in spite of the "deal" they'd be getting.
    I used to be into sadism, necrophilia and beastiality, but then I realized I was just beating a dead horse

  15. #15
    Admiral zenbooty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Prime Material Plane
    Posts
    7,486
    Government gets involved with health issues (anti-obesity, anti-smoking, etc.) because the govt. has to pay for a lot of the bills through Medicare and Medicaid. The \less money needed to pay for the sick, the more money kept in the govt. slush fund.
    Common sense is what tells you the Earth is flat.

  16. #16
    Admiral molecularfire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Walking through a lemon grove looking for one good orange
    Posts
    6,134
    What Nanotech said...
    I completely agree with you. The government has no place in telling us what to eat. If we want to be fat, that's our choice. However, I don't think we should expect the govt. to pay for our decisions. I think the way they should go about this is to simple deny obesity-related medical problems Ex: diabetes, hypertention, etc... in people who are too fat. We make a decision of what percent body fat is appropriate, and people who are above it have to pay for their own medical bills. Sounds good to me.
    Disclaimer - The above opinion should not be taken as medical advise. My only advise is to talk to your doctor. If you are stupid enough to take anything I say seriously, you have nobody to blame for your cranio-anal inversion but your stupid self.

    I may not be smart enough to do everything but I am dumb enough to try anything. - Beastboy.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •