7 ms·

This law is way way way overdue. American Corporations are killing Mexico's youth with junk food. I know kids who exclusively drink soda. Healthy, beautiful kid

This law is way way way overdue. American Corporations are killing Mexico's youth with junk food. I know kids who exclusively drink soda. Healthy, beautiful kids who deserve to go out and play and live their best lives.

i_love_liberals 6y ago
Do you know that Mexico has a law against murder? Curious if you know how many people, specifically in Mexico, specifically in Mexico city follow that and other laws?
- lhorie 6y ago
  Some quick googling says 35k murders in 2019 for a population of about 9M. So, in mexico city, over 99.5% of the population follows the law that says you can't murder people. Not sure what your point is.
  - meddlepal 6y ago
    35k murders is a lot of fucking murders.
    - lhorie 6y ago
      Yes, but to put it in context, heart disease and diabetes cause a lot more deaths [1] and obesity has been shown to increase the risk of those conditions. [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/960030/mexico-causes-death/#:~:text=Mexico%3A%20most%20common%20cause%20of%20death%202017&text=Ranked%20first%20are%20heart%20conditions,of%20homicides%20in%20the%20country https://www.statista.com/statistics/960030/mexico-causes-dea....
  - inasio 6y ago
    That's for the whole of Mexico, so more than an order of magnitude off (120 million). Still an insane number of murders, what a tragedy.
    - lhorie 6y ago
      Ah good catch. Thanks. So we're looking at >99.9% of the population not committing murders.
      - dylan604 6y ago
        Doesn't that stat just mean that >99.9% of population has not been murdered. It says nothing to the number of people doing the murdering. It could be a single individual on a massive serial spree, or an individual murder per killing which I find just as unlikely. The point is, your stat isn't stating what you think it is
        munk-a 6y ago
        The calculation above is putting an upper limit on the number of murderers (probably, that's discounting groups of participants in murders, but I'm fine with that as serial murderers are far more common than murder groups)
    - wahern 6y ago
      That's 30 per 100,000, which is less than several U.S. cities: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_murder_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_murder_rate Though, there are alot of Mexican cities on that list. And the only countries of comparable size that have a higher murder rate are Venezuela (30m) and South Africa (60m): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intention... (Interestingly, arguably it's Central America and the Caribbean that stand out for their high murder rates, not any specific country in the region, which suggests a more complex phenomenon than straight US-funded cartel violence.)
- iovrthoughtthis 6y ago
  I believe you are committing the logical fallacy of "Whataboutery" [1] here. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
mytailorisrich 6y ago
Where are the parents?
- bantunes 6y ago
  Caving to marketing designed to make children nag their parents.
  - mytailorisrich 6y ago
    It's a parenting issue then, because saying 'no' to a nagging child is basic parenting, always has been.
    - buran77 6y ago
      Parenting issue or not we protect children with laws all the time. Think no further than alcohol and tobacco products whose sale to minors is banned. Sure we could say "where are the parents" but that's not how reality works and good solutions are the one that work in reality not on paper. Without legal push to make everyone work in unison there will always be an entity (a corporation) willing to invest enough to push the right buttons and coax people into the most unhealthy habits. After all the profits will belong to that company while the expense is paid by society. The overwhelming majority of individuals are completely unqualified to see through the onslaught of marketing (especially the covert kind), the social pressure, or even to understand the risks they're taking.
      - mytailorisrich 6y ago
        You're ignoring the point. The issue is one of culture (and parenting when it comes to children), in Mexico and in all other countries. Corporations are an easy scapegoat that also fits a political ideology on the left. It's also a complete fallacy to claim that people cannot see through things. People are not stupid they know that it is their diet that makes them fat. People deserve at least this credit and respect. Alcohol and cigarettes sales to children are obviously completely different and a very poor analogy. So... Following the logic, either we accept that people are free to make their own decisions, that parents are responsible for their children, or we take children away from parents because the state knows best. Personally I think we should do the maximum we can to teach good diets at schools, and perhaps provide classes for adults, and to label products then people can do whatever they want but live with the consequences. But I think the likely outcome (as we start to see in some countries), which must be politically acceptable and cheap, will be similar to the path taken for cigarettes: PR campaigns and tax. This is a way to let people do what they want while nudging them, and to let them pay for the consequences (healthcare where it is financed through tax). When it comes to children parents won't be blamed (although they should be) because this is not good to win votes. It will be easier to continue blaming ads and corporations, and to ban things.
liability 6y ago
I know it's in vogue to blame everything on America, but Mexico has a thriving domestic junk food industry too. And frankly, many of their snacks are much better than anything America makes (Takis in particular, I think I'm addicted to them...) Anyway I support this law. Banning junk food/drinks for kids is long overdue. It's little different from banning the sale of cigarettes to kids.
- plafl 6y ago
  I don't think most people blame USA, it's just "progress". Yesterday at the supermarket I noticed the disproportionate ratio between healthy food (and I count there red meat) and junk food (snacks, sweets,...)
  - spanhandler 6y ago
    Low- or zero-prep junk food is also incredibly cheap. When I see comparisons done it's usually ingredient costs of healthy food to full-price junk food costs, but that's not how poor people shop for junk food. They go to Taco Bell when the tacos are like 60¢ each or less, through promotions or coupons. They buy Totino's frozen pizzas eight at a time, on sale at half-off. They buy giant bags of store brand sugary cereal and pairs of 3L bottles of store-brand soda, again, on sale. Costco pizzas (they are so cheap on a calories-per-dollar basis, for zero-prep hot food) and bakery items for the enterprising slightly-less-poor who can scrape together the annual fee. Whichever chips or snack crackers are on sale. Off-brand pop tarts—holy crap those are calorie bombs and very cheap and you wouldn't believe how many kids have a couple of those for breakfast most every day. And so on. Even relatively-healthy-but-not-really-healthy frozen meals can't compete with the outright crap. It's so very cheap.
  - munk-a 6y ago
    I think it's pretty easy to tie that "progress" back to American interference in local economies - I can't really speak to how much that is attributed, but blaming America certainly isn't a stretch.
- fedreserved 6y ago
  Fuego con limon , spicy chips with a hint of lemon are by far my favorite chip I discovered in Mexico. It took me a few months to find them when I came back state side. I wasn't able to find the standard chip, only oven baked when I got back to the USA. Although I'm sure the oven baked are healthier, it definitely came at the expense of flavor and enjoyment
Press2forEN 6y ago
I know scapegoating Americans has become a community pastime, but perhaps you could rephrase your comment with more substance or evidence so as to avoid coming off so elitist and prejudiced.
- lolbrels 6y ago
  Then they would not have a comment. Just typical bashing of Americans - report and move on.
stickfigure 6y ago
You can't blame this on Americans. Walk into any tiendita in rural Mexico and you will find isles of candy and sugary beverages, much of which Americans wouldn't recognize. Mexico loves sweets. I'm glad they're recognizing that dietary health is a serious issue and trying to make changes. But I wonder what effect this will have on paleterias? They're one of the many things I miss from Mexico.
- benatkin 6y ago
  We certainly can. There's a huge amount of influence america has on global eating habits. Coca-Cola, Frito-Lay, and McDonald's are some of the major corporate villains, in case you forgot, and they deserve their reputations.
  - rrrrrrrrrrrryan 6y ago
    I'm not totally sure - if you go out to rural, poorer Mexico, away from the corporate chains and packaged snackfoods, the traditional Mexican diet isn't especially healthy. Lots of lard, simple carbs, etc.
    - rcMgD2BwE72F 6y ago
      Since when? And what happened?
  - stickfigure 6y ago
    Mexico has Jarritos, Sabritos, Barcel, and lots of other local brands that are much more prevalent than their American counterparts. If Coca-Cola, Frito-Lay, and McDonalds all vanished suddenly, it would not significantly change the diet of most Mexicanos. You might be able to formulate a coherent hippie rant about "corporate food" but it isn't a specifically American phenomenon.
    - munk-a 6y ago
      It's unclear whether all of those soft-drinks would be as successful as they are if Coca-Cola didn't open up that market though.
ggregoire 6y ago
> I know kids who exclusively drink soda. Their parents probably do too. Also worth noting, there are places in Mexico where it's easier and cheaper to get a bottle of Coca-Cola than one of potable water. [1] [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/14/world/americas/mexico-coca-cola-diabetes.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/14/world/americas/mexico-coc...
- jeffbee 6y ago
  Not just a Mexico problem. There are many towns in California where I wouldn't even consider asking for a cup of water at a restaurant.
pkaye 6y ago
Its not just American Corporations. The US, Canada and EU and Switzerland were all opposed to this law because it impacted they big food industry. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mexico-health/mexicos-new-warning-labels-on-junk-food-meet-supersized-opposition-from-u-s-eu-idUSKCN25802B https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mexico-health/mexicos-new...
amelius 6y ago
Most kinds of soda are available in sugar-free form, so drinking soda shouldn't be the problem.
- munk-a 6y ago
  Aspartame is pretty terrible for you, so sugar-free alternatives that use artificial sweeteners (instead of just naturally savory flavorful options) aren't great either.
  - amelius 6y ago
    That's a highly controversial statement.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

i_love_liberals 6y ago

Do you know that Mexico has a law against murder? Curious if you know how many people, specifically in Mexico, specifically in Mexico city follow that and other laws?

lhorie 6y ago
Some quick googling says 35k murders in 2019 for a population of about 9M. So, in mexico city, over 99.5% of the population follows the law that says you can't murder people. Not sure what your point is.
- meddlepal 6y ago
  35k murders is a lot of fucking murders.
  - lhorie 6y ago
    Yes, but to put it in context, heart disease and diabetes cause a lot more deaths [1] and obesity has been shown to increase the risk of those conditions. [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/960030/mexico-causes-death/#:~:text=Mexico%3A%20most%20common%20cause%20of%20death%202017&text=Ranked%20first%20are%20heart%20conditions,of%20homicides%20in%20the%20country https://www.statista.com/statistics/960030/mexico-causes-dea....
- inasio 6y ago
  That's for the whole of Mexico, so more than an order of magnitude off (120 million). Still an insane number of murders, what a tragedy.
  - lhorie 6y ago
    Ah good catch. Thanks. So we're looking at >99.9% of the population not committing murders.
    - dylan604 6y ago
      Doesn't that stat just mean that >99.9% of population has not been murdered. It says nothing to the number of people doing the murdering. It could be a single individual on a massive serial spree, or an individual murder per killing which I find just as unlikely. The point is, your stat isn't stating what you think it is
      - munk-a 6y ago
        The calculation above is putting an upper limit on the number of murderers (probably, that's discounting groups of participants in murders, but I'm fine with that as serial murderers are far more common than murder groups)
  - wahern 6y ago
    That's 30 per 100,000, which is less than several U.S. cities: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_murder_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_murder_rate Though, there are alot of Mexican cities on that list. And the only countries of comparable size that have a higher murder rate are Venezuela (30m) and South Africa (60m): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intention... (Interestingly, arguably it's Central America and the Caribbean that stand out for their high murder rates, not any specific country in the region, which suggests a more complex phenomenon than straight US-funded cartel violence.)
iovrthoughtthis 6y ago
I believe you are committing the logical fallacy of "Whataboutery" [1] here. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

mytailorisrich 6y ago

Where are the parents?

bantunes 6y ago
Caving to marketing designed to make children nag their parents.
- mytailorisrich 6y ago
  It's a parenting issue then, because saying 'no' to a nagging child is basic parenting, always has been.
  - buran77 6y ago
    Parenting issue or not we protect children with laws all the time. Think no further than alcohol and tobacco products whose sale to minors is banned. Sure we could say "where are the parents" but that's not how reality works and good solutions are the one that work in reality not on paper. Without legal push to make everyone work in unison there will always be an entity (a corporation) willing to invest enough to push the right buttons and coax people into the most unhealthy habits. After all the profits will belong to that company while the expense is paid by society. The overwhelming majority of individuals are completely unqualified to see through the onslaught of marketing (especially the covert kind), the social pressure, or even to understand the risks they're taking.
    - mytailorisrich 6y ago
      You're ignoring the point. The issue is one of culture (and parenting when it comes to children), in Mexico and in all other countries. Corporations are an easy scapegoat that also fits a political ideology on the left. It's also a complete fallacy to claim that people cannot see through things. People are not stupid they know that it is their diet that makes them fat. People deserve at least this credit and respect. Alcohol and cigarettes sales to children are obviously completely different and a very poor analogy. So... Following the logic, either we accept that people are free to make their own decisions, that parents are responsible for their children, or we take children away from parents because the state knows best. Personally I think we should do the maximum we can to teach good diets at schools, and perhaps provide classes for adults, and to label products then people can do whatever they want but live with the consequences. But I think the likely outcome (as we start to see in some countries), which must be politically acceptable and cheap, will be similar to the path taken for cigarettes: PR campaigns and tax. This is a way to let people do what they want while nudging them, and to let them pay for the consequences (healthcare where it is financed through tax). When it comes to children parents won't be blamed (although they should be) because this is not good to win votes. It will be easier to continue blaming ads and corporations, and to ban things.

liability 6y ago

I know it's in vogue to blame everything on America, but Mexico has a thriving domestic junk food industry too. And frankly, many of their snacks are much better than anything America makes (Takis in particular, I think I'm addicted to them...) Anyway I support this law. Banning junk food/drinks for kids is long overdue. It's little different from banning the sale of cigarettes to kids.

plafl 6y ago
I don't think most people blame USA, it's just "progress". Yesterday at the supermarket I noticed the disproportionate ratio between healthy food (and I count there red meat) and junk food (snacks, sweets,...)
- spanhandler 6y ago
  Low- or zero-prep junk food is also incredibly cheap. When I see comparisons done it's usually ingredient costs of healthy food to full-price junk food costs, but that's not how poor people shop for junk food. They go to Taco Bell when the tacos are like 60¢ each or less, through promotions or coupons. They buy Totino's frozen pizzas eight at a time, on sale at half-off. They buy giant bags of store brand sugary cereal and pairs of 3L bottles of store-brand soda, again, on sale. Costco pizzas (they are so cheap on a calories-per-dollar basis, for zero-prep hot food) and bakery items for the enterprising slightly-less-poor who can scrape together the annual fee. Whichever chips or snack crackers are on sale. Off-brand pop tarts—holy crap those are calorie bombs and very cheap and you wouldn't believe how many kids have a couple of those for breakfast most every day. And so on. Even relatively-healthy-but-not-really-healthy frozen meals can't compete with the outright crap. It's so very cheap.
- munk-a 6y ago
  I think it's pretty easy to tie that "progress" back to American interference in local economies - I can't really speak to how much that is attributed, but blaming America certainly isn't a stretch.
fedreserved 6y ago
Fuego con limon , spicy chips with a hint of lemon are by far my favorite chip I discovered in Mexico. It took me a few months to find them when I came back state side. I wasn't able to find the standard chip, only oven baked when I got back to the USA. Although I'm sure the oven baked are healthier, it definitely came at the expense of flavor and enjoyment

Press2forEN 6y ago

I know scapegoating Americans has become a community pastime, but perhaps you could rephrase your comment with more substance or evidence so as to avoid coming off so elitist and prejudiced.

lolbrels 6y ago
Then they would not have a comment. Just typical bashing of Americans - report and move on.

stickfigure 6y ago

You can't blame this on Americans. Walk into any tiendita in rural Mexico and you will find isles of candy and sugary beverages, much of which Americans wouldn't recognize. Mexico loves sweets. I'm glad they're recognizing that dietary health is a serious issue and trying to make changes. But I wonder what effect this will have on paleterias? They're one of the many things I miss from Mexico.

benatkin 6y ago
We certainly can. There's a huge amount of influence america has on global eating habits. Coca-Cola, Frito-Lay, and McDonald's are some of the major corporate villains, in case you forgot, and they deserve their reputations.
- rrrrrrrrrrrryan 6y ago
  I'm not totally sure - if you go out to rural, poorer Mexico, away from the corporate chains and packaged snackfoods, the traditional Mexican diet isn't especially healthy. Lots of lard, simple carbs, etc.
  - rcMgD2BwE72F 6y ago
    Since when? And what happened?
- stickfigure 6y ago
  Mexico has Jarritos, Sabritos, Barcel, and lots of other local brands that are much more prevalent than their American counterparts. If Coca-Cola, Frito-Lay, and McDonalds all vanished suddenly, it would not significantly change the diet of most Mexicanos. You might be able to formulate a coherent hippie rant about "corporate food" but it isn't a specifically American phenomenon.
  - munk-a 6y ago
    It's unclear whether all of those soft-drinks would be as successful as they are if Coca-Cola didn't open up that market though.

ggregoire 6y ago

> I know kids who exclusively drink soda. Their parents probably do too. Also worth noting, there are places in Mexico where it's easier and cheaper to get a bottle of Coca-Cola than one of potable water. [1] [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/14/world/americas/mexico-coca-cola-diabetes.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/14/world/americas/mexico-coc...

jeffbee 6y ago
Not just a Mexico problem. There are many towns in California where I wouldn't even consider asking for a cup of water at a restaurant.

pkaye 6y ago

Its not just American Corporations. The US, Canada and EU and Switzerland were all opposed to this law because it impacted they big food industry. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mexico-health/mexicos-new-warning-labels-on-junk-food-meet-supersized-opposition-from-u-s-eu-idUSKCN25802B https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mexico-health/mexicos-new...

amelius 6y ago

Most kinds of soda are available in sugar-free form, so drinking soda shouldn't be the problem.

munk-a 6y ago
Aspartame is pretty terrible for you, so sugar-free alternatives that use artificial sweeteners (instead of just naturally savory flavorful options) aren't great either.
- amelius 6y ago
  That's a highly controversial statement.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]