• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Soda, Politics?

stsburns

American Infidel
DP Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2005
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
46
Location
Pergatory
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
SPECIAL REPORT: Soda Ban Lacks Scientific Fizz
The California legislature's top lifestyle nanny has finally scored a win. Deborah Ortiz's bill to phase out soft drinks in schools passed the state Senate last week and was sent to the state Assembly.

It's not the California senator's first anti-soda bill. Last year Ortiz tried to pass legislation that would have imposed a two-cent tax on every can of soda, and a nine-cent tax on every two-liter bottle sold in California -- at a cost to consumers of as much as $300 million a year. Ortiz is also sponsoring a bill -- using the Center for Science in the Public Interest's (CSPI) "model" language (word-for-word) -- that would require all chain restaurants to slap nutritional information on every item sold.

The soda-ban legislation uses two highly flawed Harvard studies to claim that soda contributes to poor health. The Ortiz bill claims: "A study of 9th and 10th grade girls found that those who drank colas were five times more likely to develop bone fractures." That's from a study by Grace Wyshak, who failed to measure bone density, and didn't ask how much soda her subjects consumed. Wyshak also admits that "causality cannot be inferred from [her] data."
Source
Yes, you did read the post correctly. There are people that want to ban soda in schools? Next week there going after potato chips, just kidding! :2funny:
 
stsburns said:
Yes, you did read the post correctly. There are people that want to ban soda in schools? Next week there going after potato chips, just kidding! :2funny:

Funny you mention this subject LOL Was with a friend of mine the other day who is a HUGE Limbaugh fan, and she was listening. He was talking about how a research group is saying soda should come with labels warning of obesity in children. Is this not the funniest thing you ever heard? This guy quotes that children have 5-7 cans of soda a day? Well, that's alot of soda but damn... isn't it the kid's parent's job to limit the soda? oops, I only let my kids have 1 soda a day? Should I have waited until they told me I needed to do that? funny funny funny
 
I know, this is the most ludacris thing I have ever heard! Im still laughing about it. But it should be the parents job to limit soda's there childern drink, not the state or the government.
 
Parents cannot supervise childrens soda consumption when they are in school. And regardless of how good parents they are, any child would drink soda if he had the chance, regardless of how much their parents said not to.

Soda is unhealthy and when compared to milk, a very poor choice. It also spurs coroporate sponsorship of schools. Read Fast Food Nation. It tells of a school practically dominated by Coca-Cola. They even had a "Coke" day. All the children were made to wear red Coke shirts. One child wore a blue Pepsi shirt. He was suspened.

Am I being paranoid and pointing to small examples? Maybe, but soda has no place in school in my mind. At least not in anything but a High school.
 
You promote it, by defending the kids. Next you say its sponsorship! Then you talk about the healthy difference between milk and soda! But we all know schools need money! You would be amazed how much money the school would be making off one vending machine. Our schools need all the funding they can get a hold of, instead of the government cutting off a financial resource? Besides we already know there are many other factors that make children obese. Putting the blame on one product doesn't seem like its entirely what the discussion is about? I mean would they ban soda's from the teachers lounge too! What is there main objective to doing this, possibly control? Yes the T-shirt thing is overboard, but it has nothing to do with consumption!
 
stsburns said:
You promote it, by defending the kids. Next you say its sponsorship! Then you talk about the healthy difference between milk and soda! But we all know schools need money! You would be amazed how much money the school would be making off one vending machine. Our schools need all the funding they can get a hold of, instead of the government cutting off a financial resource? Besides we already know there are many other factors that make children obese. Putting the blame on one product doesn't seem like its entirely what the discussion is about? I mean would they ban soda's from the teachers lounge too! What is there main objective to doing this, possibly control? Yes the T-shirt thing is overboard, but it has nothing to do with consumption!


Not only that, but in my view, to say a child is incapable of making the choice between milk or soda out of the parent's eyes seems like a defeatest attitude. My daughters are 12 and 9. My oldest HATES soda, so I don't have anything to worry about there. My youngest, at times, has tried to bend the soda rule, but for the most part does excellent with it. Both go to school with soda machines on premises. Both do not buy soda at school, because their schools use lunch money accounts. They give a number to the cafeteria personnel, and the cost is deducted from the money I give to the school each month. They have no money when they go to school, therefore buying soda isn't an issue. Perhaps if more schools used lunch accounts, this wouldn't be an issue? Just a thought.
 
debate_junkie said:
Not only that, but in my view, to say a child is incapable of making the choice between milk or soda out of the parent's eyes seems like a defeatest attitude. My daughters are 12 and 9. My oldest HATES soda, so I don't have anything to worry about there. My youngest, at times, has tried to bend the soda rule, but for the most part does excellent with it. Both go to school with soda machines on premises. Both do not buy soda at school, because their schools use lunch money accounts. They give a number to the cafeteria personnel, and the cost is deducted from the money I give to the school each month. They have no money when they go to school, therefore buying soda isn't an issue. Perhaps if more schools used lunch accounts, this wouldn't be an issue? Just a thought.

Or more kids should have parents like you...How many kids don't have a "soda rule" to bend?
 
When I was in Middle and High School. We had bigger problems in our lives than worrying about gaining a few pounds from drinking soda! I mean other classmates were always asking me for "Cough drops" or "candy", personally I thought they were RX drug addics! I mean I would be more worried about if they were part of "Druggy" crowd or "Preppy" crowd than I would be if they drunk soda at school! That was the point I was trying to make! They have bigger problems to worry about.
 
Updated: The FDA is going to start putting warning labels on soda, just like cigarettes. My guess it will be something like this:

Caution: Contents of can under pressure, Use with Caution.
Side effects: May cause hypertention, cavities,
and extreme weight gain. Also can be used as a
liquid candy bar.

Well I just put all of the reason's CNN said soda was bad into my "Hypethetical Warning Label", because many posters use CNN as a credible source. :mrgreen:
 
Back
Top Bottom