View Full Version : Ban The Soda. We're Too Fat

31st May 2012, 17:09
Want to talk about the government sticking its nose where it doesn't belong?

Seems His Un-Royal Highness Michael Bloomberg (Mayor, NYC) has decided to do something about the ever increasing numbers of obese people not only in this country but in this city as well. (Could have fooled me. Every time I look around here in NYC I rarely see someone fat, let alone obese.)

Anyway, His Majesty is trying to get the city council to pass an ordnance which will prohibit the sales of sugar laden beverages over the size of 16 ounces. His reasoning behind this is that it will help stem the tide of obesity/fattiness in NYC.

What a dumb $ss. (We in NYC already know that anyway.) I wonder if it ever occurred to his Majesty that if someone is that dead set on drinking "sugar-laden" beverages they'll simply finish one 16 ounce bottle and then order another one!!!! And another... and another......

When will the government ever mind its own business and leave responsibility to those who should bear the same?


Solid Rust Twotter
31st May 2012, 18:54
CS Lewis:
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

31st May 2012, 18:59
leave responsibility to those who should bear the same?

like them?

http://ts3.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=4645282588852802&id=8c5835f48a0f2c24a5e7d9dbb3a39143 (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2011/11/29/americans-heavier-than-ever-but-most-still-say-their-weight-is-about-right/obese/)

west lakes
31st May 2012, 19:00
I get the point about the sweetener, I recently got some kool-aid that suggests a cup of sugar or low calorie sweetener per 2 quarts, I'm making it up with about the equivalent of 3 or 4 teaspoons of a natural sweetener and it is fine

31st May 2012, 19:04
Spot on SRT. But do keep in mind that His Un-Royal Majesty Michael Bloomberg, Mayor of NYC and Number One Resident Narcissist had the city council re-arrange the city charter so that he could remain mayor after his 2-term limit expired. he's on his 3rd term and rumor has it he'll be seeking his 4th.

So, if he does indeed seek and obtain a 4th term what those of us who either live or work in NYC will see is:

1. Restaurants and food establishments will not be allowed to sell foods with high fat content, beverages with high sugar content, no salt shakers on the tables, no water glasses on the table, etc.

2. Smoking will be prohibited anywhere within the 5 boroughs of New York City. That includes within your own home.

3. The bridges leading into or out of NYC will cost $15-$20 to cross. (Each way, per day.)

4. Spanish will be the defacto language of NYC agencies.

5. Michael Bloomberg will become King Michael I of Manhattan And All Of Its Immediate Environs. Coronation at 5. The beating of his subjects following at 6. Stay tuned.

31st May 2012, 19:25
[QUOTE]Smoking will be prohibited anywhere within the 5 boroughs of New York City. That includes within your own home[QUOTE]

Is that really true ? If so I would have expected an avalanche of lawsuits about personal freedom, invasion of privacy and many others.

31st May 2012, 19:32
It's not true yet, but there is a "movement" underway by the city council, at the behest of King Micheal I of Bloomberg whereby smoking will become prohibited in apartment complexes housing more than x number of units. Said movement is similar, in many respects, to a bowel movement.

Lawsuits may occur as a result, should this become law. Then again, King Michael I of Bloomberg couldn't care less. If it were up to him, personal freedoms would be null and void, here in the Kingdom of NYC.

31st May 2012, 19:42
Bloomberg is a helicopter pilot and flies his personal Agusta SPA A109S helicopter and regularly violates the operations curfew at the heliport near his home in Manhattan.

Bloomberg's Helicopter Breaks Curfew At East 34th Street Heliport, Say Neighbors (VIDEO) (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/23/bloombergs-helicopter-breaks-curfew-east-34th-street-helicopter_n_1539020.html?flv=1)

Um... lifting...
31st May 2012, 22:12
regularly violates the operations curfew

Then so does his pilot.

Bloomberg doesn't fly alone and he hangars his helicopter in NJ. There are no instrument procedures into E. 34th and no hangars. I believe hizzoner holds a private certificate with single, multi, and airplane instrument privileges. I also believe he holds a private helicopter certificate without instrument privileges.

While Bloomberg can perhaps get away with claiming ignorance of the curfew (though a good pilot tends to know the hours of the airfield he operates to and from), the guy who makes his living flying Bloomberg's aircraft probably can't.

31st May 2012, 23:34
Bloomberg doesn't fly alone

Ah, sad to say I must have fell for the typical press nonsense and lies about one of their heroes. :(


"Sorry boss, we can't land that late, there is curfew at that time until 08:00 Monday morning."

"Who the hell signs your paycheck, I'm the damn mayor of that city, we'll land when I say we'll land. If anybody says anything, screw 'em, I am the MAYOR!".

Or a variation of that; 'It's good to be King.'* :p

* Apologies to Mel Brooks. ;)

1st Jun 2012, 01:21
I don't want to get off on a rant here* but if hizzoner wants to use General Aviation facilities located in the downtown area, after hours or not, more power to him. At least he recognizes the value and utility of GA, unlike of that feckwit mayor of Chicago who tore up Meigs Field. :E

*With apologies to Dennis Miller.

Two's in
1st Jun 2012, 01:33
At least he recognizes the value and utility of GA, unlike of that feckwit mayor of Chicago who tore up Meigs Field.

The idea of a sympathetic role model is he needs to be perceived as sympathetic, maybe? Sad and pathetic are not quite the same thing.

1st Jun 2012, 02:16
Adding suggar to our food (beverage and/or meals) is:
1-completely useless
2-dangerous for health

We don't need any added suggar. Adding suggar is a trick from the food industry to make us addicted so they can make more profit, that's not more complicated than that: economic 101.

We are supposed to be free citizens nowadays but our soul and our bodies are slaves, completely brainwashed and addicted because of the deregulated economy that is now out of control: economy is not here to serv human being anymore, it has become an independant monster without ethic living for itself, with the complete approval from the happy crowd asking more and more until sickness and death.

Sad but so true.

Loose rivets
1st Jun 2012, 03:09
Suggar makes your teeth do this. :}

Sugar on the other hand...:p

1st Jun 2012, 05:14
Demolition Man should called it the Bloomberg Plan...


1st Jun 2012, 08:36
The radeng househoold gets by on 3 tablespoons (a tablespoon is 15ml) of sugar a week when we're both at home. That's because you need a tablespoon of sugar for the bread - you can definitely tell if there's been no sugar, as it helps the yeast work.

1st Jun 2012, 12:39
Um.... lifting.. wrote:

Bloomberg doesn't fly alone and he hangars his helicopter in NJ

Now there's a thought. Perhaps King Michael I of Bloomberg can take up permanent residence in that sh*t hole of a state. This way he can be closer to his helicopter.

On second thought, perhaps we should give King Mike a Chinook as a replacement. And then have him flown over Afghanistan, hovering for hours at a time over a known "insurgent" stronghold.

1st Jun 2012, 18:19

Yes sugar, I really should pay attention when I type.

We really have to learn to appreciate different flavour and taste.

Um... lifting...
1st Jun 2012, 21:48
To take the devil's advocate side (just to do it), it appears that folk feel that hizzoner shouldn't be able to mandate what people pour into their bodies, be that caffeine, nicotine, purine, Ovaltine, saccharine, aspartame, sucrose, glucose, or corn syrup with high fructose. OK.

However, government at another level is insisting that everyone purchase health insurance for everyone else.

A wee conflict, one supposes.

1st Jun 2012, 22:09

Want to appreciate different flavors and tastes? Come to my favorite taqueria and let's do a test...see if you can tell the difference between Serrano, Habanero, and Mirasol peppers. I know you don't drink (heaven forbid!), so I will watch with cold Bohemia in hand.

11th Jun 2012, 07:34
Back on topic, folks living in London will be pleased to hear that Boris has just been over to New York, and is considering* a similar large sugary drink ban for London. Here's (http://www.boris-johnson.com/2012/06/11/hail-mayor-mike-and-the-paper-cups-that-will-not-runneth-over/) what he has to say: it's worth a read. There is some sound psychology behind the New York move, based on the finding that "people eat what's in front of them".

New York is next month installing a cycle hire scheme, modelled on London’s, in the hope of getting people out of their cars. But now Mike Bloomberg is going a stage further. Mike is a businessman turned politician, but he began as a scientist, with a training in physics.

As he puts it, you cannot get around the laws of thermodynamics, and if you eat more than your body burns, you will get fatter. That is why he is asking the New York Health Board – which he effectively controls – to approve a ban on soft drink cups larger than 16 ounces. If you want to drink more than 16 ounces of Sprite or Coke or Dr Pepper, you will be perfectly at liberty to do so: but you will have to buy more than one cup. And he quotes all sorts of tests that show human beings will generally eat what is put in front of them. If you put more in front of them, they will eat more; if you reduce the size of the portion, they will eat less.

It sounds, on the face of it, like a pretty hysterical piece of nanny-statery. Mike Bloomberg has appeared to cast himself in the role of Mr Bumble the beadle, denouncing all those kids who have the effrontery to ask for more. As you can imagine, the proposal is the butt of plenty of jokes on TV shows, and a rabid reaction from Big Soda: an indignant Coca-Cola has been on the phone from Atlanta.
The Science Is In! :8

* I mean "considering" in the original sense of the word: he's thinking about it. Not the modern political spin-doctor sense of "we've already decided, we're just figuring out how we're going to spin this". :oh:

unstable load
11th Jun 2012, 17:53
I watched a piece on the telly with Sir Alan Sugar (cue ironic laugh) who said that he lost a load of weight by simply eating his meals with a tiny fork. It took a lot more shovelling and half way through the meal, he'd satisfied his hunger and (got bored, I guess) stopped eating.

11th Jun 2012, 18:11
That & the fact he cycles 200 miles a week. I gather the brain takes 20 minutes to get the message that the stomach is full, so extending the time it takes to eat is a decent mechanism Courses. Aperitif, bread, starter, main, desert + cigarette between plates depending on your social mobility.:rolleyes:

11th Jun 2012, 18:34
sprogget wrote:


How dare you write the word cigarette, sprogget. Have you no shame? You know what smoking cigarettes does to your health don't you? And think of all those around you who have to endure your selfish addiction. Plus, your smoking infringes on my right to clean air as well as offends my (PC) sensibilities.

Off with your head. To the gallows I tell you.

<I smoke, sprogget. I'm just being a wise ass because I saw the word cigarette. Which has now caused me to want to wander outside and have a puff or two!>

11th Jun 2012, 19:01
rgb, how close to reality is this commentary ?

Dial 911 for Mommy - Taki's Magazine (http://takimag.com/article/dial_911_for_mommy_gavin_mcinnes/print#axzz1xNeMximC)

Or is it a pi$$ take ?

11th Jun 2012, 19:09

The commentary is spot on and the story line concerning the cops, ambulance, fire trucks et. al., is a daily occurrence here in the Big Apple.

Matter of fact, a recent "crime" happened last week when the police were summoned by a dog walker whose dog was bitten by another dog. 3 cop cars showed up, sirens blaring and guns drawn.

So, yes, even New Yawkers are becoming pussies. (And not "babies", as the author of the Op-Ed calls them.)

11th Jun 2012, 19:29
Jeez rgb, you guys gotta do a better job of stopping the snivelling leftie Limey PC fluffies manifesto infiltrating your society !

It's hard to imagine things getting so bad, especially when I think back to the tiimes when I lived in Midland, TX, in the early 1980's !! :E

11th Jun 2012, 20:22
and ........ I've just heard on our local news that a new survey has decided that salt is good for you, and cutting back on salt as we have been constantly told for the past few years will cause diabetes, heart failure and arterial disease.

Medical "profession" changes its corporate mind every ten years or so.

Coffee, salt, eggs, sugar - pays yer money and takes yer choice, what's next?

I've never been a total 'Vegetarian', but long ago 'took care' - without becoming paranoid, less fat, red meat, dairy produce sugar, salt, alcohol etc. etc. moderate exercise but again not obsessive, not overweight, but still managed to enjoy life, and when I had to have arterial stents inserted I complained bitterly to the Cardio that it had all been a monumental waste of time ? He didn't totally disagree but suggested that there is actually little that one can do, heart disease being a pernicious killer regardless, but that I might just have delayed the process for a few years - maybe.

Eat, Drink, and Be Merry, for tomorrow you'll be Dead !

Sounds about right to me.

12th Jun 2012, 08:15
Salt is good for you, do not cut it out. A Dr friend has more salt on her food than whats in the bloody sea, but she is the extreme. This is my Grandfather in law
Smoker who has 10 cigars a day celebrates his 100th birthday - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2419455/Smoker-who-has-10-cigars-a-day-celebrates-his-100th-birthday.html)
He's now 104! So drink, smoke, shag etc be merry, because when your time is up........kick the man with the scythe in the bollox and run!

Windy Militant
12th Jun 2012, 08:22
Why are they on about banning sugary drinks? All the bat farstards I know drink sugar free diet soda. :E

Worrals in the wilds
12th Jun 2012, 08:55
He didn't totally disagree but suggested that there is actually little that one can do, heart disease being a pernicious killer regardless, but that I might just have delayed the process for a few years - maybe.My grandmother had high blood pressure for years, despite being underweight and eating all the right things. She always thought it was very unfair, but the doctor told her high blood pressure is often genetic. It didn't kill her, so maybe the healthy lifestyle helped.
Why are they on about banning sugary drinks? All the bat farstards I know drink sugar free diet soda. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/evil.gifOn the basis that it cancels out the accompanying 3000 kilocalorie KFC extravaganza? :} I've heard the argument more than once.

About a year ago I attended a first year biophysics class where as an exercise the lecturer asked the two hundred uni (college) students present to estimate the calories in a particular fast food meal package.

About eighty percent of them underestimated the amount substantially (actual value is about 1300 kcal, most students guessed 400 kcal).

I'm convinced that most people don't have a clue about how little food they really need, and how dense a lot of these takeaway foods really are. When even intelligent kids who've enrolled in a BSc don't have a clue, God help the rest of the population. :ouch:

Load Toad
12th Jun 2012, 09:32
It isn't without historical precedent to ban foods because they are 'unhealthy' is it - indeed Jews and Muslims still won't eat pork long after the banning of such has ceased to be necessary.

12th Jun 2012, 12:55
Why our food is making us fat | Business | The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/jun/11/why-our-food-is-making-us-fat)

Blame Nixon...
Why are we so fat? We have not become greedier as a race. We are not, contrary to popular wisdom, less active – a 12-year study, which began in 2000 at Plymouth hospital (http://www.earlybirddiabetes.org/), measured children's physical activity and found it the same as 50 years ago. But something has changed: and that something is very simple. It's the food we eat. More specifically, the sheer amount of sugar in that food, sugar we're often unaware of.
The story begins in 1971. Richard Nixon (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/richard-nixon) was facing re-election. The Vietnam war was threatening his popularity at home, but just as big an issue with voters was the soaring cost of food. If Nixon was to survive, he needed food prices to go down, and that required getting a very powerful lobby on board – the farmers. Nixon appointed Earl Butz (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/feb/04/usa.obituaries), an academic from the farming (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/farming) heartland of Indiana, to broker a compromise. Butz, an agriculture expert, had a radical plan that would transform the food we eat, and in doing so, the shape of the human race.
Butz pushed farmers into a new, industrial scale of production, and into farming one crop in particular: corn. US cattle were fattened by the immense increases in corn production. Burgers became bigger. Fries, fried in corn oil, became fattier. Corn became the engine for the massive surge in the quantities of cheaper food being supplied to American supermarkets: everything from cereals, to biscuits and flour found new uses for corn. As a result of Butz's free-market reforms, American farmers, almost overnight, went from parochial small-holders to multimillionaire businessmen with a global market. One Indiana farmer believes that America could have won the cold war by simply starving the Russians of corn. But instead they chose to make money.

13th Jun 2012, 00:39
OK, Boris has considered it, and seems to have settled on No. At the end of this clip he tells Jon Stewart that New Yorkers can take refuge from the soda law in London:

The Daily Show: 06/11/12 Recap - YouTube