New tactic in war on obesity: Attack portion size

[alp227]

This past week, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I) tried a new tactic: He proposed limiting sugary drinks sold by restaurants, cinemas, street vendors and stadiums in his city to 16 ounces. (Grocery stores would be exempt.)

“We know that portion size influences consumption,” said Thomas Farley, New York’s health commissioner. “We know that portion sizes have risen dramatically. And we know that sugary drinks have this uniquely strong connection with weight gain.”

The move intensified the debate over how far government should go to steer individual behavior in the name of health and drew immediate scorn from the $75 billion-per-year soft drink industry.

“Here they go again,” said Chris Gindlesperger, spokesman for the American Beverage Association, an industry group. “The New York City health department has an unhealthy obsession with attacking soft drinks. It’s over the top. It’s overreach. The city is not going to address the obesity problem by attacking soda, because soda is not driving the obesity rate.”

A group funded by restaurants began running ads in New York branding Bloomberg — depicted in a dowdy dress with a scarf around his neck — as “the nanny.”

full: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/new-tactic-in-war-on-obesity-attack-portion-size/2012/06/02/gJQA4wzi9U_singlePage.html

I'm not quite comfortable with the idea of regulating portion size, unless anyone has a more compelling reason why a company shouldn't be able to sell a junk food product if the product is in popular demand among consumers. If adults want to pig out on as much junk food as they want, let 'em do it. But government should at least be out there to educate the public that such foods are unhealthy and that people's choices affect everyone's health insurance premiums.

On Thursday, PBS NewsHour anchor Judy Woodruff moderated a very good debate about this issue between the NYC health commissioner and Andrew Moesel of the New York Restaurant Association. Woodruff was fair to both sides and asked compelling questions. (Transcript)

Then on Friday's The Young Turks, this issue got Cenk and Ana into a shouting match at the 6:30 mark and Ana even accused Cenk of sinking to a Fox News level:

[K8-EEE]

1. Portion sizes need to be attacked

but regulating them won't work -- I think the calories on the menu thing is a good step in the right direction.

"Value meals" are no bargain for your health. They need to offer sensible portions at a reasonable cost - so people don't feel ripped off if they DON'T get fried and a giant soda!

[enlightenment]

3. It isn't just fast food that serves over-large portions.

I have wished for years - and often suggested to restaurants - that they offer a 'half size' portion. Sure, it's nice to have an entire meal left over to take home, but that only works if I'm in a position to take it home. Some of the restaurants are starting to offer smaller portions of their meals, but usually only during lunch; a very few are offering them at all meals.

We don't need regulation - you can't legislate behavior in any meaningful way. If we made a move to using smaller plates, though, it would be a good start. Plates in restaurants are the size that serving platters used to be . . .

[K8-EEE]

4. I agree!! Europeans are always astonished at our "dinner on a platter" portions

As an alternative to a $12 Dinner On A Platter they could have a plated (small plates!) dinner with half portions for $6.

[enlightenment]

6. Exactly.

I collect Fiesta Ware - the original stuff - and recently went with a friend to look at some of the modern version of the dinnerware. My 1940s 'dinner plates' are the size of the modern 'lunch plates' - a full inch difference, at least.

I honestly believe that if people could see how much difference that inch makes, given our habit of filling plates from rim to rim, they would start to understand how much more they are consuming without even thinking about it.

I could see an effective ad campaign, if someone wanted to use it, utilizing the change in plate size over time. Not suggesting anything except how much difference it makes. Studies have shown that plate size impacts our perception of 'fullness', even if we are eating less. Almost all diet plans suggest eating from smaller plates for that reason.

It is possible to change attitudes without making up rules and regulations that only serve to irritate people. Bloomberg can outlaw large soda cups, but he cannot stop people from drinking a lot more soda than they need to drink. Morality legislation and sin taxes are an exercise in futility.

[krispos42]

2. What if I drink diet?

Do I have to tell the person at the counter what kind of soft drink I'm getting?

What if I tell them I'm getting a diet then get a 32-ounce regular? Who gets the fine, the restaurant or me?

16 ounces isn't a whole lot when you're trying to eat a meal, especially when you walked in needing a drink simply to replenish what you lost to sweat and urine.


This whole thing is just stupid. What about refills? Will there be a stadium-style limit on how many sodas I can buy at once?

[truedelphi]

5. You might want to check out Jon Stewart's show from

Wednesday or Thursday night. He had a laugh your ass off, crazy response to this whole idea of Bloombergh's. Including the notion that it is silly to attack soft drink portions, when you can get a 14 ounces of pastrami sandwich with a bowl of cheese. (The shows are usually posted over at Comedy Central dot com.)

And some ice cream concoctions that would be legal according to the new Bloomberg food rules as long as it was frozen, but illegal once it melted. I guess you'd have to eat them extra fast so you won't get in trouble.

[canoeist52]

7. This is clearly an attack on the 1%'s freedom, as soon enough

They will be the only class of people that can afford to eat out.

[WriteWrong]

8. A better tactic: How about limiting people sitting on their fat asses?

The idea of a country full of people who SIT AT DESKS all day, and are NOT obese, is utterly ludicrous.