Monday, February 27, 2012

Mark Bittman: Government Is 'on Our Side' When It Stops Us From Eating What We Want to Eat

New York Times columnist Mark Bittman, who last year expressed enthusiasm for the "fun" and "exciting" project of micro-managing other people's diets via carefully calculated taxes and subsidies, today asks: Why not start with poor people? Bittman likes the idea of preventing food stamp recipients from using their taxpayer-funded scrip to buy products that do not meet with his approval. But he would not stop there:

Added sugar is not the only dangerous food. But unlike animal products, for example, which we also overconsume, it has no benefits. Yet we down it at the rate of 150 pounds per person per year, and while scientists argue whether it is addictive in humans (it meets the criteria for addiction in animals), it is most certainly habit-forming. [Robert H.] Lustig and his co-authors suggest [in a recent Nature article] that actions like imposing taxes on added sugar or establishing a minimum age for purchase of sodas (they mention 17 in their paper) would reduce consumption.

The question "Is this necessary?" is unavoidable. But as obesity and its consequences ravage our health care system, we struggle not only with our own diets but also with preventing our children from falling into the same traps... Read more..........

1 comment:

  1. no natural sugar but the chemical/man made sweeteners I'm sure he thinks are best. no natural undoctored potatoes, but GMO potatoes are best, no wild fish but lab made..what's behind it and big ag/chem


Everyone is encouraged to participate with civilized comments.