Compelled.
Wednesday, July 2, 2008 9:26This should make me happy, but it doesn’t. Hypocritical? Read on…
Why isn’t a health and fitness professional happy that the government is taking steps to outlaw junk foods in schools? Because I believe in free will. And (paranoically) I believe that having government compel you to do something is the first step in losing what few true rights you have left. Or, stated differently, would you feel the same way if they were banning baseball instead of junk food?
From a less philosophical and political point, here are the main problems with creating “health directives”:
1. They may be based off of misunderstanding or misinterpretation of science.
Can anyone say “cholesterol?” Reams and reams of studies and millions of dollars’ worth of science have yet to vindicate the hypothesis that dietary cholesterol contributes to heart disease, and yet your doctor will still advise you to limit your egg consumption to less than 6 a week.
2. They don’t go far enough to solve the problem.
In the article, the legislation would prohibit drinks that include more than 35% of calories from sugar. It’s a start. However, allowable drinks like fruit juice and skim milk are still sub-par choices - fruit juice still being high in sugar and skim milk (as Scott Kustes so rightfully points out) being a processed food, since milk in nature contains all of its milkfat. Limiting snack food sizes to 180 calories is useless, since kids can just buy two bags of chips instead of one.
This kind of legislation is akin to placing wad of chewing gum on a leak in a dam. Sure, it looks like you’re doing something and may even make you feel better about yourself, but are you really doing anything meaningful to solve your problem?
3. They may not actually be done in your self-interest.
Scanning the article, you may notice this little snippet:
Under the new rules, developed with intense involvement from the American Beverage Association and other drink and food manufacturers…
Who, I’m sure, have your best interests in mind.
I’m all for improved quality of life and better health for everyone. But I don’t think we need Big Brother forcing us to conform to his version of what’s healthy.
Kaiser (4 comments) says:
July 8th, 2008 at 2:34 am
I rarely do but I’ve got to disagree with you in this case -
While public school food could hardly be considered healthy, they can still do their part to teach healthy eating habits -
The problem with cookies and ice cream in school are they’re the only choices of snacks in an unsupervised environment (their eating that is) -
This creates another problem - big brother telling you WHAT to eat- which sadly is basically how things work in most situations -
I’m all for the option to eat whatever you want, because God knows I indulge in it from time to time - but only in a situation where you’ve got a full range of choices and you have proper supervision (I know, these don’t exist - I’m just talking about in a perfect world)