November 4, 2010 9:42 AM

Happy Meal Ban in San Francisco: Food Police or Fat Fighter?

By
David W Freeman
Topics
News ,
Kids and family

burger boy, fat, kid, hamburgers, diabetes

(istockphoto)

(CBS) If Ronald McDonald is looking a bit glum these days, there's a reason:

They've banned the Happy Meal in San Francisco.

Actually, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors voted to ban restaurants from handing out toys with meals that fail to meet basic nutritional standards for fat, calories, and sodium. That would include the Happy Meal, which has been a fat-packed fave of hungry children for decades.

Backers of the bill said it would help promote healthy eating habits and help in the fight against childhood obesity, which has tripled in the past 30 years, according to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

"Our children are sick," Supervisor Eric Mar, who sponsored the measure, told Reuters. "Rates of obesity in San Francisco are disturbingly high, especially among children of color. This is a challenge to the restaurant industry to think about children's health first and join the wide range of local restaurants that have already made this commitment."

Mar may not be exaggerating. Up to 30 percent of the city's fifth-graders are overweight, the New York Times reported.

Under the ban - scheduled to take effect December 2011 - restaurants in the Golden Gate City would be allowed to distribute toys with meals only if they contained fewer than 600 calories and less than 640 mg of sodium, according to Canadian broadcaster CTV. In addition, less than 35 percent of calories in the meals could come from fat (less than 10 percent from saturated fat).

Sound reasonable? Marisa Sherry, a registered dietitian in New York City, certainly thinks so. "Whatever it takes to get restaurants to help fight childhood obesity is a great thing," she told CBS News.

But McDonald's isn't so happy about the happy meal ban.

"We are extremely disappointed with today's decision," company spokesman Danya Proud said in a statement, according to Reuters. "It's not what our customers want, nor is it something they asked for."

Of course, there are other things McDonald's customers haven't requested.

Like getting fat.

13 Photos

Kids' Meal Shockers: Look Out!

View the Full Gallery »


Add a Comment See all 61 Comments
by nvoong November 10, 2010 5:49 PM EST
Really? San Francisco is probably one cities in this country that sells the least amount of Happy Meals. When do you parents finally say, "No, you are not getting a Happy Meal." How about you work on fixing our deficit instead of spending our tax dollars on something as ridiculous as this? I'm not saying the fast food restaurants are the good guys, but when are parents going to take some responsibility? There's a shooting at a school and videogames and the media are blamed. Why don't you not buy that videogame for your kid? Why don't you spend some time with your children and find out what they're watching on tv.
Reply to this comment
by whitemtntn November 10, 2010 12:36 PM EST
As revolting as McDonalds is, it's none of the government's damn business what fat Americans choose to eat. Fix the roads and shut up!
Reply to this comment
by Cead_DoesHisHomework November 7, 2010 4:52 AM EST
Wow! The 'Frisco hippies have officially warped themselves into the Nationalsozialistische Amerikanischer Arbeiterpartei!!!

SanFran's StormTroopers say "Jawohl!" to burger-banning! Will these places of business be targeted for pogroms by the food-Gestapo next? Business owners may close-up shop & relocate, fearing of a "GoldenArchesNacht" attack! Bay Area Bailout: Mass Exodus of Big & Small business-people costing Billions in tax revenue as well as Loss of Commerce-Savvy Entrepreneurs! Will they use their talent to bite back at us? Time Will Tell...

(Yet another lesson in History repeating itself...)
Reply to this comment
by aivilon November 6, 2010 4:17 PM EDT
I am not usually a big fan but I think I will go to McDonald?s for dinner tonight for three reasons.

#1 The McRib is back with all of its disgusting deliciousness.

#2 It is the only fast food restaurant that is less than a 30 minute drive from my house. You really learn to appreciate businesses that provide any kind of service when you live in the middle of nowhere.

#3 I recently watched the movie Food Inc. and have also done some recent reads about the Irish Potato Famine. So in my opinion an obesity epidemic is almost a win compared to some of the major problems throughout history that have been created by bad government policy. Like say mass starvations.

Bonus: As usual I won?t even buy my son a happy meal. We don?t need the food Nazis creating a law against happy meals, it?s called personal responsibility.

Did I mention that my son will climb over a table to eat a salad and one of his favorite foods is beets. The other night he licked his plate clean of the chicken panang curry stir fry I made. Our occasional trip to a fast food restaurant has not caused him bad eating habits. If I saw that it was, we would stop going.
Reply to this comment
by Cead_DoesHisHomework November 7, 2010 4:58 AM EST
MMMmmm....McRib! (ala Homer Simpson)

Thanks for the 411, friend! To the 'Arches I shall make a pilgrimage as well; appreciate the McRib "Heads-Up"!
:-)
by Joncj5 November 5, 2010 12:46 PM EDT
The city is not banning Happy Meals folks. It is only saying that if you are going to bribe children with a toy, then you have to give them something healthier than you currently offer. Why would anyone be upset that they are removing fat grams and calories? I find it hard to believe any parent would not appreciate this. I wish they'd do that with adult meals and stop salting French fries, but I do not go there and do not take my kids there anyway. Yes, I am one of those responsible parents, but not all are. I have no problem with government protecting children.

Some of you seem to be saying you want the extra fat and calories for your kids. Like some kind of right is being taken from you. A Happy Meal is not a civil right folks so you are not being violated here. They are just taking poison away from kids and I think it is great.

Would those of you who feel this is wrong prefer to drink your water directly from a lake? Or would you like it to go through a filtration plant first to remove the impurities? The government regulates that, you know. Are you upset about that? This is the same thing. The government is telling McDonalds to remove impurities from your kids food, that is all they are doing. But, if you really want to give them all that fat and calories, buy them a Big Mac, ask for a toy (they'll give you one if you are with a kid) and move on.
Reply to this comment
by 4DCox November 5, 2010 2:26 PM EDT
I understand what you are saying...no I do not want my kids to have it, but why spend tax dollars on something that people with the free gift of common sense should be able to control....but yes, I read something today that they were to offer it with less calories and that is understandable and something I missed yesterday in the rush....so I guess if you choose apple dippers instead of french fries you get the toy! lol...
by brinniewales November 6, 2010 10:50 AM EDT
Is there an age limit at which we draw the line and say it's OK to eat calorie/fat/sodium laden food without government intervention? Should we have laws that regulate the free dessert with meal (brownie with ice cream, ice cream with choice of syrup, pie, cheesecake) because it would take the customer over their RDA for calorie/fat/sodium?
Joncj5, most of the comments in this forum are against government interference in choices that have historically been made by adults -- the parents of children. The Happy Meal consumer is not walking into McDonald's and making the purchase. The child is too young to handle money, let alone go to McDonald's unattended. They go with an adult who allows the choice and makes the purchase. Educate these people.
It is a slippery slope when we allow the government to regulate this type of reward-for-purchase or gift-with-purchase, even if the food isn't the healthiest. The overall population does not want the government dictating any further policy in their lives than it is currently doing. The key really lies with educating the public, including children in grammar school, parents, and yes, of course, retailers, about the need for proper nutrition.
by 4DCox November 5, 2010 10:58 AM EDT
Spodee5, I agree with you, I work in the research industry and am well aware of all the risks that come along with fast food. And maybe they should take children off medical care but I still believe it should be to the PARENTS who do not take care of their children. I take care of my children and they eat better than I do. They eat raw veggies, oatmeal, chicken, fish and I do not have to force them because I started when I was pregnant on welfare. I have had to make sacrifices in lifestyle (ie. working certain jobs, certain hours, cuts in pay) to cater to these two little kids who dont even know how to get ready in the morning let alone make decisions as what is good to eat. Now my kids do watch disney movies, probably too much, but we take them to the park and read to them, help them do workbooks, when you would rather be cleaning or laying down because you just worked 8 hours. They get candy once a week, maybe...I take them to MCD maybe once or twice a month,...but that is expensive! I started on welfare, and from time to time we've had two incomes, but now are on one income. We come home and cook for them,you can get a baked chicken from the store and cook some veggies, cheaper than going to fast food,...my daughter asks me for a salad now and she is 2yrs old! Maybe Im just blessed....But I feel it is my responsibility to decide when they can have those unhealthy french fries and when they cant. Even now I am trying to figure out how I can get them in some kind of sport or activity I can afford....But my point is punish the parents...they are responsible for their kids. Its like when they cracked down on spanking children, people cant find a way to dicipline their kids, maybe they should start by grounding them from fast food!
Reply to this comment
by spodee5 November 5, 2010 7:26 AM EDT
To all those saying the government shouldn't police these calories or these kids feedoms; I say feel free to take your children off medical insurance because their increased healthcare needs drive up my premiums/costs. Obesity is worse for a person from a health perspective than smoking. Research all it's comorbidities! Hypertension, congestive heart failure, sleep apnea, hypercapnea, kidney disease, stroke, diabetes, bone & joint problems, skin disorders are just a few.
Reply to this comment
by Chris91234 November 4, 2010 10:09 PM EDT
Too all the people saying that those opposed "don;t understand" or otherwise supporting this legislation, I hope you are okay with them coming after YOUR freedom someday.

Honestly, it is not the governments job to police the calories of any meal nor to dictate what legal items can or cannot be packaged with said meal.

If a person wants to feed their child happy meals every danged day of that child's life then let them. Is the parent a stupid idiot for doing this? Yes, but again IT IS NOT AND NEVER SHOULD BE THE GOVERNMENTS PLACE TO SAY OTHERWISE!!!

When will people wake up and start taking personal responsibility for their OWN lives. STAY OUT OF OTHER PEOPLES LIVES! To those that are going to argue that happy meals "harm the child" well maybe they do over a long period of time but it is still non of your freaking business.
Reply to this comment
by brinniewales November 4, 2010 9:34 PM EDT
With the exception of restaurant employees, scarcely anyone on the planet is eating at McDonald's everyday, especially people in the Happy Meal age bracket. The decision to purchase the meal falls to the parent, not the child. It certainly does not fall to the Board of Supervisors to dictate anything about the sale or purchase of a meal being sold in a clean, licensed, inspected business. If the venue is appropriate, this toy ban/calorie guideline by the Board needs to be taken before the judiciary for a ruling. Otherwise, the Board needs to be looking at the nutritional content of all restaurant meals geared for children. Many exceed the calorie, fat and sodium content of the various Happy Meals? How about that junior size plate of fettuccine Alfredo, or even a slice or two of topping-laden pizza? Think that deep fried chicken or turkey leg at the county fair would pass muster with the B of Sups? Will the waiters at restaurants need to keep a separate nutritional count for every child they serve so the establishment does not sell a full meal laced with fat and salt to a child? What happens if the child eats off the parent's plate? Would that count against the kid's total fat/sodium/calorie intake for the restaurant meal?
What is the educational level of the B of Sups? They are seriously lacking in logic. Get real, Supervisors. Admit you overstepped your bounds.
Reply to this comment
by nvoong November 10, 2010 5:48 PM EST
Agreed!
by abby_del_abbey November 4, 2010 7:02 PM EDT
The fast food industry (like the cereal industry) realized very quickly that marketing to children (especially through toys) was a very, very effective means to sell their products. Parents who refuse to actually parent give in to their whining children. I see no problem with a city doing this because apparently the parents are unwilling and unable to stand up to their children and/or marketing ploys and say no to unhealthy food.
Reply to this comment
See all 61 Comments
.

Follow HealthPop

Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
Better Information. Better Health.
CBS News on Facebook
  • Building You a Better Morning

  • CBS This Morning

    "CBS This Morning," anchored by Charlie Rose, Gayle King and Erica Hill, airs weekdays from 7 to 9 a.m. ET and at the same time in other time zones.
    Learn more...