As a non American some of these numbers are just mind boggling. Only putting the warning on drinks with more than 50g of added sugar, a 'medium' Dr Pepper with 67g of sugar and a large with 96g.
Crazy how you probably wouldn't get a slice of cheesecake factory cheesecake on the side of your Macdonald's meal; but never think twice about a medium soda that has the same amount of added sugar
Why is this targeted at chains with 15+ locations? Is the soda in a single location mom&pop restaurant any less bad for you? No. Why is this not just a blanket rule for the city?
Tiny label with a symbol most people will not immediately grok? Please...
Mexico has big labels saying things like "EXCESO DE GRASA" o "EXCESO DE AZÚCAR" which make it super clear what they're warning about. I used them to find the high-calorie snacks for hiking :)
America needs better unsweetened beverage options. Japan and Taiwan (and probably other Asian countries too, I haven't been) have a crazy good selection of teas and tea-like drinks that taste great and have zero sugar. Unfortunately, to someone who drinks soda every day, those probably taste bitter and "nasty", it takes some time to recalibrate your tastebuds and appreciate their flavor. But the options need to exist in good quantities first before it can become a common choice, and I'm sure soda is more profitable so we're probably never getting out of this...
Agreed. Here in the US if they say "sugar free" there is usually some other sugar replacement. I don't need dried mango's with added sugar or sweetener, they are sweet enough as is. I'd love to see an unsweetened option. As someone who is trying to remove sugar from my diet anything sweet is almost too much for me.
It's interesting how they're passing this after the public failure of the soda ban, one would think they'd be looking into more productive areas of legislation. I don't drink sugar and generally don't go out, but this doesn't seem to be solving consumer problems
It's fake work. You do some social restriction (usually on food) that follows upper middle-class aesthetics, the media cheers, and dinner parties are supportive. Even better if you specifically target it towards the poor*, or food that only poor people eat.
This, for example, is targeted towards chains. If every restaurant you eat at has fewer than 15 locations, it doesn't exist. Where do upper-middle class people eat?
-----
[*] like the fake work that RFK, Jr. is doing trying to make it impossible to buy soda and snack foods on SNAP. Only positive press he's gotten from NYT etc.. Yes, make those poor people eat better! But somehow also fat acceptance.
The big, real problems aren't really solvable on a city level. And opposition can quash any obvious solutions.
Unfortunately this does lead to a lot of small, weak rules being passed because elected officials have to "do something" in order to stay in the public eye to get reelected.
It’s a raw calculation between 0 to 5 stars on how healthy the food is. It’s basically calories (with some bias to the type of calories) divided by fibre+protein. These days you don’t see products in supermarkets or chain restaurants without the stars shown on the front of the box. It’s become an expectation of customers. Even snacks like tim tams clearly show .5 stars on the front indicating they are high in calories for how filling they are.
It works well. A high protein and high fibre food can indeed have high calories and score well. But you know what? High protein and high fibre foods are extremely filling. So fair enough!
Obviously any such system is high level and misses all the micronutrients etc. but in general calories divided by fibre+protein provides a reasonable guide. One behavioural thing i’ve seen come out of this is parents allowing children to pick snacks and cereals themselves provided it’s 4+ stars. This usually leads to kids adding wheat bran cereals and muesli bars to the cart by their own choice. Kids love freedom and guidelines that it must be 4+ stars give that freedom without overly sugary crap being allowed. It’s also great for adults wanting to spot clearly unhealthy food for their own goals. Setting a guideline of only 4.5+ foods in the cart is so simple. You can still find good snacks, it’s just that they’ll undoubtedly be very filling too.
22 comments
[ 4.1 ms ] story [ 50.4 ms ] thread200$? What is that, a fine for ants?
How often will the $200 fine be assessed? Unless it's daily, it won't likely make a difference.
a big chain like McD's may literally sling millions of burgers in a similar timeframe.
it's also a lot easier to enforce this with a single corporate entity then track down hundreds of one-off mom-and-pop locations.
Mexico has big labels saying things like "EXCESO DE GRASA" o "EXCESO DE AZÚCAR" which make it super clear what they're warning about. I used them to find the high-calorie snacks for hiking :)
This, for example, is targeted towards chains. If every restaurant you eat at has fewer than 15 locations, it doesn't exist. Where do upper-middle class people eat?
-----
[*] like the fake work that RFK, Jr. is doing trying to make it impossible to buy soda and snack foods on SNAP. Only positive press he's gotten from NYT etc.. Yes, make those poor people eat better! But somehow also fat acceptance.
Unfortunately this does lead to a lot of small, weak rules being passed because elected officials have to "do something" in order to stay in the public eye to get reelected.
I look forward to the counter-ad campaign from Big Gulp.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Star_Rating_System
It’s a raw calculation between 0 to 5 stars on how healthy the food is. It’s basically calories (with some bias to the type of calories) divided by fibre+protein. These days you don’t see products in supermarkets or chain restaurants without the stars shown on the front of the box. It’s become an expectation of customers. Even snacks like tim tams clearly show .5 stars on the front indicating they are high in calories for how filling they are.
It works well. A high protein and high fibre food can indeed have high calories and score well. But you know what? High protein and high fibre foods are extremely filling. So fair enough!
Obviously any such system is high level and misses all the micronutrients etc. but in general calories divided by fibre+protein provides a reasonable guide. One behavioural thing i’ve seen come out of this is parents allowing children to pick snacks and cereals themselves provided it’s 4+ stars. This usually leads to kids adding wheat bran cereals and muesli bars to the cart by their own choice. Kids love freedom and guidelines that it must be 4+ stars give that freedom without overly sugary crap being allowed. It’s also great for adults wanting to spot clearly unhealthy food for their own goals. Setting a guideline of only 4.5+ foods in the cart is so simple. You can still find good snacks, it’s just that they’ll undoubtedly be very filling too.