5 ms·
Why isn't there an outcry to regulate the fast food industry to prevent this kind of thing from happening? This is one of the biggest issues in North America.
by hasenj 10y ago
Why isn't there an outcry to regulate the fast food industry to prevent this kind of thing from happening? This is one of the biggest issues in North America.
- DanBC 10y agoThe easy and obvious first target would be a sugar tax on large serving sodas. That doesn't seem to be so popular in the US for some reason.
- mars4rp 10y agonot only on large serving sodas, there is sugar in %80 of stuff you can buy in supermarkets !!!!
- DanBC 10y agoBut if we can't even tax large serving sodas there's no hope of taxing anything else. They're the best example of empty pointless calories, and safe alternatives (water, sugar free sodas) already exist.
- mason240 10y agoIt would be more effective and efficient to just put a tax right on sugar commodities. Add something like a 30% tax with the intention of driving the price up.
- tormeh 10y agoYep. Just tax the sugar and most of the problems go away. It sounds too simple to be true, but I think it could be true.
- logfromblammo 10y agoImposing any tax (or subsidy) with a primary purpose of changing public behavior is not acceptable to me. It's arrogant and patronizing, and turns what would otherwise be objective facts into topics for lobbying and political debate. If you want to sway people, do it with information, not by charging them extra for doing what is wrong in your opinion. While I would never support a "sugary foods" consumer tax, I might support a uniform tax on the purchase price of all restaurant foods, that would specifically support objective dietary and nutrition science, public education campaigns on how to obtain nutritious meals at any income level, publicly queryable tracking of food items from farms to tables, random testing of restaurant foods as served to the end-consumer, and more effective nutrition labels for prepackaged foods and restaurant menu items. If you fund objective research on what people should eat (and why) by taxing what they do eat, the information alone should be sufficient to help people choose healthier meals on their own, rather than by twisting their arms with existing biases and assumptions. I personally believe (without objective data to back it up) that excessive dietary sugars, particularly those containing fructose, are the most blameworthy single factor for American obesity, and that this is due in part to steep import tariffs on foreign-produced crystalline sucrose, farming subsidies and favors to domestic corn, beet, and cane producers, the price differential between high-fructose corn syrup and crystalline sucrose, the weakly-supported demonization of dietary fats, and the slow decline of real median-household purchasing power since the 1970s. In other words, we got to where we are now by pushing people around with overly-specific taxation and politically-influenced dietary recommendations.
- hueving 10y agoThe same reason there isn't a cry for stapler companies to stop making staplers that staple fingers. This stuff is fine if you don't jam it in your mouth every other day.
- lucb1e 10y agoNobody looks at the underside of everything they ever eat. One might look at the biggest stuff, if that, and a hamburger at 400 kcal looks pretty reasonable. I had no idea other products added so many calories. This article was quite an eye opener for me. While your comparison might be technically true, people don't quite notice calories the same way as they notice a staple in their fingers.
- hueving 10y ago>Nobody looks at the underside of everything they ever eat. Speak for yourself. I learned way back in high school that fries were almost as damaging as the burger. Now that all the calorie counts are right in your face on the container and the menu at fast food places, I don't know how you could not know what you were eating.
- kj01a 10y agoFor one thing, I want to have these options when I want pig out at a fast food restaurant. I'd rather regulate myself.
- wyldfire 10y agoI don't know that we need more regulation (NYC already has the portion cap for soft drinks). But what about subsidies for carrots, lettuce, celery and tomatoes? That might help nudge things a bit.
- kj01a 10y agoTomatoes are deceptively sugar heavy, because biologically they are fruits not vegetables, but I agree subsidizing lower-calories would be a good idea.
- jtuente 10y agoHow would subsidizing vegetables get more people to eat them? They're already super cheap.
- tormeh 10y agoMy problem is the bulk sizes. I always end up throwing more than half away because they're sold in so big packs. They're really cheap, but I just don't like throwing food away, so I don't buy it. It's perfectly irrational, but hard to change.
- smacktoward 10y agoThere has been such an outcry, which is why restaurants that operate at scale in the U.S. are now required to post calorie counts on their menus. And the article notes there is some evidence that this has impacted the choices people make.
- 1123581321 10y agoIf you get a chance, spend some time at a McDonalds watching people order. A lot of people eat off the dollar/value menu, which offers 300-400 calorie sandwiches for $1-2. Even if someone orders two McDoubles, they're only having 800 calories and the macronutrient balance isn't bad. Another innovation that's probably helping is the Coke "freestyle" machine that has hundreds of combinations. "Low/no calorie soda" is a prominent top-level menu item and it has many, many more diet soda and sports drink options than classic soda fountains, which often only have Diet Coke or Diet Pepsi. Sadly, I don't have statistics in front of me, but based on my observations, this encourages people to choose diet soda more often. The popularity of the Chipotle burrito bowl/salad is another encouraging trend. I don't have any statistics for this either, but I've observed that once people learn about fajita burrito bowls (no wrap, peppers instead of rice) they order it fairly often. This is a very reasonable meal and healthier than a lot of home-cooked food. A low percentage of Chipotle customers buy side orders of chips. That said, there are still plenty of people ordering ridiculous meals. Reducing portions doesn't stop hungry people from ordering extra food, dessert with their lunch, and so on. Americans will have to change their tastes, reducing demand for junk food, in order to become healthier.
- blackoil 10y agoI eat burger and other fast food about once a month and would be pissed of that's taken from me. What we need is better education and marketing not a ration on sugar.
- ramblerman 10y agoRegulation isn't the answer, for the same reasons I wouldn't support prohibition. What is necessary is information and education. Start by forcing these companies to accurately label all of their meals with calorie counts and macros.
- jlebrech 10y agoa government grant for healthier outlets is the way to go.
- nsxwolf 10y agoWhat makes you think anyone wants to eat that stuff? All these places listed already have things you can order that come in at far less than 2,000 calories. If people aren't already doing that, they're certainly not going to go eat some crappy little salad with no dressing at Panera. Maybe people actually want to eat the giant burrito.
- Kalium 10y agoPlenty of fast food places accurately label calorie counts right now. If I walk into a McDonald's or a Subway, I'm going to have a pretty good idea of how many calories are in a thing from looking at the menu. It doesn't have quite the impact on most you might think.
- jazzyk 10y agoThe best thing would be to ask overweight people to pay higher health insurance premiums. We would have healthy, good-looking population in no time :-)
- nradov 10y agoMany US health insurance plans already give premium discounts to members who maintain their BMI or waist ratio below a certain limit.