Half of New Yorkers say Bloomberg ban on giant sodas is bad idea
CBS
(CBS/AP) About half of New Yorkers say Mayor Michael Bloomberg's proposed ban of sugary drinks over 16 ounces from the city's eateries is an example of government going too far, while 42 percent say it would be good health policy, according to a poll released Monday.
Foes hit "Nanny" Bloomberg over sugary drink plan
Video: NYC Mayor Bloomberg's war on obesity
Bloomberg scoffs at critics on soft drink rules: "We're not taking anything away"
Companies blast proposed NYC drinks ban
Of the 500 adults surveyed Sunday for the NY1-Marist poll, 53 percent said the proposal is a bad idea, while 42 percent praised the concept - which would make New York the first American city to so directly attempt to limit portion sizes in an attempt to fight obesity.
Forty-five percent of those polled said they think the ban would help people lose weight, while 52 percent said it wouldn't make a difference. More than half the people surveyed said they never order a sugary drink large enough to be banned.
The pollsters contacted people at random on cell phones and land lines on Sunday. The survey has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points.
Last week, Bloomberg proposed limiting portion sizes of sugary drinks to 16 ounces at the city's restaurants, delis, food trucks, movie theaters and sporting arenas. Regular soda and sports drinks would be affected, while diet sodas wouldn't. Any drink that's more than half milk or more than 70 percent juice would be exempt. Refills will not be banned under the proposal.
Grocery stores and many convenience stores are regulated by the state and wouldn't be impacted.
"Every study shows that you will eat a very big proportion of whatever's put in front of you," Bloomberg said in an interview with CBS News. "And if you have to make a conscious effort to go to another cup, you're less likely to do it."
According to CBS New York, drinking one soda a day equals 50 pounds of sugar a year. Americans consume 200 to 300 more calories a day than they did 30 years ago, CBS News reported.
"When we're looking at a city where there is an epidemic of overweight and obesity and we look at the diseases that are associated with obesity, even in young kids, 50 pounds of sugar a year, of added sugar to rest of the diet, is way too much," Cathy Nonas, director of the city's physical activity and nutrition program, told CBS New York.Since New York City banned sugared beverages from schools in 2003, the city's health commissioner says there's been about a 5 percent reduction in the obesity rates in NYC public school kids in the last four years, according to CBS News.
Marc La Vorgna, a spokesman for Bloomberg, said the poll showed New Yorkers weren't overwhelmingly set against the proposal.
"We didn't propose it because we thought it would be popular, but it should come as no surprise that the numbers are so close since New Yorkers always have had an openness to bold ideas when taking on intractable problems," he said in a statement.
The ban has been denounced by the soft-drink industry and critics who accuse the mayor of trying to institute a "nanny state" rather than allowing individuals to make their own choices. It's expected to win the approval of the Bloomberg-appointed Board of Health and take effect as early as March of 2013.
Soda company Coca-Cola says New Yorkers are smart enough to make the choice for themselves.
"The people of New York City are much smarter than the New York City Health Department believes," the company said in a statement. "We are transparent with our consumers. They can see exactly how many calories are in every beverage we serve. New Yorkers expect and deserve better than this. They can make their own choices about the beverages they purchase. We hope New Yorkers loudly voice their disapproval about this arbitrary mandate.''
Fast food chain restaurant McDonald's whose drinks would be impacted by the plan also released a statement against the proposal, CBS Moneywatch reported.
"Public health issues cannot be effectively addressed through a narrowly-focused and misguided ban," the company said. "This is a complex topic, and one that requires a more collaborative and comprehensive approach. McDonald's takes the well-being of our customers very seriously, and we continue to work, along with our supplier partners, to be part of the solution."
Several obesity experts backed the proposal.
Dr. Brian Elbel, assistant professor of population health and health policy at New York University told HealthPop last week that he saw the ban as really innovative and has a very large potential to have an impact at obesity and obesity rates."
Dr. Kelley Brownell, director of the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale University, told The New York Times that over time people will quickly become conditioned to the soda restrictions and will feel less cheated.
"You'll set a new norm," Brownell said. "Just like everybody in the country used to smoke, and there's a new norm now."
Popular in Health
- Health risks remain for Okla. tornado responders, victims
- Disney pulls show that makes fun of gluten-free child
- Environmental Working Group's top sunscreens for 2013 12 Photos
- Which sunscreens are recommended for 2013?
- Skin cancer self-exam: What to look for (PHOTOS)
- Bed sharing may increase risk of SIDS by five times
- Handbags may contain more germs than average toilet flush
- Ketamine shown to help fight treatment-resistant depression
This trend he's starting is going to set a very dangerous precedent for our democracy.. Our democracy and personal liberties are a very fragile and can be lost very easily if everybody does not stay on top of these issues and stay vigilant. People forget how quickly people's rights and liberty under a democracy can be legislated away very easily by just electing the wrong people elected into power just 1 time. Just look at what happened to the old Weimar Republic in Germany 1933 which was a very strong democratic federal republic that almost mirrored our own at the time. What did that take 1 year - maybe 2 before people lost their rights and control of gov't when the Nazis took over. Am I saying Bloomberg's a Nazi? Absolutely NOT... The man loves his country very much - as do I. I'm 100% positive he is trying to do some good... He just doesn't see the harm and how dangerous these ideas of his be misused by the wrong person and will surely be very harmful to a democracy in the future... ( What I'm worried about is not Bloomberg's actions directly - I'm worried about what may follow and trust me - more and more of this stuff will come by more and more bureaucrats until the people are left powerless and with nothing but **** ). Unless the people's rights and liberties are secured by constitutional law it would all be too easy for somebody to come along and take it all away in the name of "public good". The slippery slope he's putting us all on - has no end... I've seen it many times before in history... and if you didn't notice in the news it's been happening again right now in modern times throughout much of western Europe for the last 10-15 years. Just ask anybody in London what its like to live under an ever more oppressive, ever more controlling Orwellian police state. Even they are starting to get alarmed by the changes they've seen in government control and meddling with their lives - just the last 5 years.
The cost of treating that consumer for diabetes for several decades, a future event when those of us over the age of 60 won't even be around to see it, is worth the immediate cash infusion into the economy. Those who are over 60 owe the fast food industry a debt of gratitude.
If you're under 60, especially if you're in your twenties or younger? What can I say? Your generation is so screwed. Just keep telling yourselves that when you get diabetes, you will die long before you have to see the day when your weight will go out of control and healthcare costs or insurance will rise above your reach.
Or, if you want to be labelled by fast food execs as "malcontents" and "Occupy Troublemakers," you can bankrupt them through laws designed to run their industry into the ground. It's your generation and your call.
Apparently Liberal's don't want to pay for those with poor diets. This must mean Conservative's don't care about high costs of health care from obesity. What's the choice?
Since over eating causes Obesity, they will next ban food!