The Conservative Cave

Current Events => General Discussion => Topic started by: Chris_ on July 07, 2010, 03:35:32 PM

Title: San Francisco Bans Colas and Other Soft Drinks
Post by: Chris_ on July 07, 2010, 03:35:32 PM
Quote
Sugary-drink ban starts to affect S.F. sites
Coca-Cola is out, and soy milk is now part of San Francisco's official city policy.

Under an executive order from Mayor Gavin Newsom, Coke, Pepsi and Fanta Orange are no longer allowed in vending machines on city property, although their diet counterparts are - up to a point.

Newsom's directive, issued in April but whose practical impacts are starting to be felt now, bars calorically sweetened beverages from vending machines on city property.

That includes non-diet sodas, sports drinks and artificially sweetened water. Juice must be 100 percent fruit or vegetable juice with no added sweeteners. Diet sodas can be no more than 25 percent of the items offered, the directive says.

There should be "ample choices" of water, "soy milk, rice milk and other similar dairy or non dairy milk," says the directive, which also covers fat and sugar content in vending machine snacks.

It's all part of Newsom's effort to combat obesity and improve San Franciscans' health, similar to a national effort being championed by first lady Michelle Obama.

The mayor's administration points to studies linking soda to obesity, including a UCLA one released last year that found adults who drink at least one soft drink a day are 27 percent more likely to be obese than those who don't, and that soda consumption is fueling the state's $41 billion annual obesity problem. The study also found that 41 percent of children and 62 percent of teens drink at least one soda daily.

"There's a direct link between what people eat and drink and the obesity and health care crises in this country," Newsom spokesman Tony Winnicker said. "It's entirely appropriate and not at all intrusive for city government to take steps to discourage the sale of sugary sodas on city property."

Restricting soda

San Francisco certainly isn't the first municipality to set nutritional standards for vending machines on public property. The state and at least four counties have adopted or have recommendations for similar policies. Santa Clara County's policy, adopted in 2008, is not as restrictive as San Francisco's, allowing up to half of vending machine content to be standard soda. It's unclear how strict the other policies are.

Bob Achermann, executive director of the California/Nevada Soft Drink Association industry group, said he hasn't received complaints about San Francisco's rule, but said "it certainly sounds a bit proscriptive."

"This is all about choice. There is probably nothing more personal than what you drink and eat," Achermann said. "Singling out beverages in this whole equation of how to fight obesity is not going to be the answer."

A multifaceted approach

Newsom floated the idea last year of imposing a fee on retailers that sell soda but has yet to follow through with legislation. His administration says it's trying a multifaceted approach to tackling obesity, including the Shape Up San Francisco exercise program and periodic Sunday street closures to encourage outside activity.

"This is not about the soda police or a crackdown on soda," Winnicker said. "People absolutely remain free to choose to drink unhealthy sugary sodas anywhere they want."

Selling them is another matter.

While the mayor's order contains exceptions for vending machines covered under already negotiated contracts, it directs department heads to have new contracts conform to the new standards.

That's the case in the current bidding process for a five-year lease to run a cafe in the basement of City Hall. The vending machine requirement will also be included when bids go out for a cafe at the Hall of Justice, Deputy City Administrator Amy Brown said.

Chong Park, who's managed the City Hall Cafe; for nine years, says she averages less than $100 a month on her cut from two gleaming red Coca-Cola machines at the doors to her cafe. But with the future lease on the space up for grabs, she's trying to bring the stock in her refrigerator cases in line with Newsom's directive, and that's going to impact her bottom line, Park said.

She gets about 15 percent of her business selling those sodas, and replacing them with 100 percent juice will be expensive, Park said.

"The future is going to be affected," Park said. "But I don't want to be in trouble with the mayor. I like him very much."

Reem Nasra, who runs the Mint cafe at the Civic Center branch of San Francisco Superior Court, has put in a bid for the City Hall cafe.

"As far as meeting the guidelines," Nasra said, "I don't have any issues with that."


doc
Title: Re: San Francisco Bans Colas and Other Soft Drinks
Post by: Thor on July 07, 2010, 06:18:31 PM
What these clueless ****ing idiots fail to realize is that "Splenda" or Aspartame adversely affects the body, worse that high fructose corn syrup. If the soda manufacturers would revert back to actual sugar or saccharin, we'd all be better off.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-mercola/americas-deadliest-sweete_b_630549.html?ref=fb&src=sp
Title: Re: San Francisco Bans Colas and Other Soft Drinks
Post by: Chris_ on July 07, 2010, 06:21:08 PM
What are they going to do to make up for the lost tax revenue from soda sales?  Sodas are some of the highest profit items out there.
Title: Re: San Francisco Bans Colas and Other Soft Drinks
Post by: bkg on July 07, 2010, 06:21:24 PM
What these clueless ****ing idiots fail to realize is that "Splenda" or Aspartame adversely affects the body, worse that high fructose corn syrup. If the soda manufacturers would revert back to actual sugar or saccharin, we'd all be better off.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-mercola/americas-deadliest-sweete_b_630549.html?ref=fb&src=sp

Diet Coke is nectar... nectar dammit!

Title: Re: San Francisco Bans Colas and Other Soft Drinks
Post by: LC EFA on July 07, 2010, 06:27:55 PM
What these clueless ****ing idiots fail to realize is that "Splenda" or Aspartame adversely affects the body, worse that high fructose corn syrup. If the soda manufacturers would revert back to actual sugar or saccharin, we'd all be better off.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-mercola/americas-deadliest-sweete_b_630549.html?ref=fb&src=sp

Coke is still made with real cane sugar over here.

Took me a while to figure out why coke in the US tasted different.
Title: Re: San Francisco Bans Colas and Other Soft Drinks
Post by: Chris_ on July 07, 2010, 06:31:47 PM
PepsiCo sold Mountain Dew, Pepsi, and something else (I forget) with cane sugar here for a while as a promotion.  I'm not a regular Pepsi drinker, so I didn't really notice much difference.  We can get imported Mexican Coca Cola here, but it's still made with corn syrup.  It does come in the original glass bottles, though.
Title: Re: San Francisco Bans Colas and Other Soft Drinks
Post by: cavegal on July 07, 2010, 06:34:35 PM
It is way beyond me how these people live in another reality.   :banghead:  My head is hurting so much just today on the  :banghead:  !!
Title: Re: San Francisco Bans Colas and Other Soft Drinks
Post by: Mike220 on July 07, 2010, 06:36:29 PM
We can get imported Mexican Coca Cola here, but it's still made with corn syrup.  It does come in the original glass bottles, though.

That sucks. We can get it with real sugar around here. 10 for $10 at the local Kroger. Or sometimes I'll pick up a case when the girlfriend and I go to Costco. There's still one Dr. Pepper plant that uses real sugar in Dublin, TX. Not cheap, but I like it better than the normal stuff.
Title: Re: San Francisco Bans Colas and Other Soft Drinks
Post by: Hawkgirl on July 07, 2010, 07:28:09 PM
I was a Diet Coke, Diet Pepsi drinker for almost my entire teen/adult life.  It seems every time I drank either, I would get itchy.  I decided to only drink regular Coke/Pepsi.  Itchiness never experienced again...and I lost weight.

I'm a firm believer of all things natural....Real Milk, Real Cheese, Real Coke. :-)
Title: Re: San Francisco Bans Colas and Other Soft Drinks
Post by: soleil on July 07, 2010, 07:31:53 PM
Let me decide what is unhealthy for my body. Next thing, the'll be closing the Mickey D's up the street. Ok, not here in MS where we love our fatty foods, but still. I can see schools, I suppose. But public property? I want a damned coke. Not something laced with whatever sugar substitute they use.
Title: Re: San Francisco Bans Colas and Other Soft Drinks
Post by: Celtic Rose on July 07, 2010, 09:14:43 PM
Let me decide what is unhealthy for my body. Next thing, the'll be closing the Mickey D's up the street. Ok, not here in MS where we love our fatty foods, but still. I can see schools, I suppose. But public property? I want a damned coke. Not something laced with whatever sugar substitute they use.

Santa Clara County, less than an hour away, is the one that banned Happy Meal toys at McDonalds in unincorporated areas.

Title: Re: San Francisco Bans Colas and Other Soft Drinks
Post by: debk on July 07, 2010, 10:00:59 PM
Fruit juice might be high in good vitamins...but it's also high in sugar.

From....http://www.hookedonjuice.com/

Quote
WHAT IS THE SUGAR CONTENT OF FRUIT JUICE? We’ll use orange, apple, cherry and grape juice as examples. Even with no sugar added, fruit juice contains about the same amount of sugar as the same amount of soft drink. Because apples, oranges and grapes are naturally full of sugar. (No surprise there: Processed sugar comes from plants, usually corn or sugar cane or sugar beets.) The table below compares the sugar in 12 ounces of juice (no sugar added) with 12 ounces (one can) of Coca-Cola. If you look at the nutrition label on a can of Coke or fruit juice, the “carbohydrate” is mostly sugar. Four grams of sugar carbs equal approximately 1 teaspoon of sugar.

12 ounces of >>>>>>>  Coca-Cola      Orange Juice    Apple Juice    Cherry Juice        Grape Juice
Total carbohydrates          40 g               39 g               42 g             49.5 g                60 g
Carbs from sugar               40 g               33 g               39 g             37.5 g                58.5 g
Sugar (teaspoons)             10 tsp             8 tsp             10 tsp            9 tsp                15 tsp
Calories                           145                 165                165               210                    240

WHAT DOES THE CHART TELL US? It tells us that no matter which juice you choose, they all have more calories than the same amount of Coke. It tells us that juice — 100 percent juice, no sugar added — contains about the same amount of sugar (or even more — 50 percent more for grape juice) as the same volume of Coke. For this comparison we used: Classic Coke, Tropicana HomeStyle Orange Juice, Walnut Acres Organic 100 Percent Apple Juice, Eden Organic Montmorency Cherry Juice (no sweetener added) and R.W. Knudsen Unsweetened Concord Grape Juice. The numbers in the chart were calculated from the nutrition labels on the containers


Oh yeah....that Coke is really bad for you....and the Grape Juice is just perfect! NOT!! :thatsright:
Title: Re: San Francisco Bans Colas and Other Soft Drinks
Post by: DumbAss Tanker on July 07, 2010, 10:32:27 PM
It sounds like SF will become a real paradise...a 'Workers and Peasants People's Paradise.'
Title: Re: San Francisco Bans Colas and Other Soft Drinks
Post by: AllosaursRus on July 07, 2010, 10:54:12 PM
It sounds like SF will become a real paradise...a 'Workers and Peasants People's Paradise.'

They're doin' their damnedest to turn the hole damn city into the Hait Ashbury of the 60's!

Doin' a damn good job, too!
Title: Re: San Francisco Bans Colas and Other Soft Drinks
Post by: JohnnyReb on July 08, 2010, 10:08:24 AM
Being San Fransissyco it's a wonder they didn't replace the cola's with "Golden Showers in a bottle".
Title: Re: San Francisco Bans Colas and Other Soft Drinks
Post by: DumbAss Tanker on July 08, 2010, 10:10:44 AM
Next year, dude.  Next year.