Posted on 02/03/2006 7:03:12 AM PST by ZGuy
GET READY for the next mass-tort crusade: protecting our kids from the ravages of Big Cola. According to reports, a group of lawyers is gearing up to file lawsuits that will seek to blame Coke, Pepsi and others for obesity, tooth decay and other childhood health ailments. An article in the Boston Globe Magazine has called it part of a "national legal movement to make soft drinks the next tobacco." Instead of tar and nicotine, we'll be hearing about corn sweeteners and caffeine; maybe Dr. Pepper can stand in as the new Joe Camel.
Ridiculous? More like inevitable. For some time, a noisy campaign has been underway to portray the food and beverage industry as the villain in the nation's ongoing battle with the waistline. Without the snack hucksters' machinations, it seems, we'd all eat raw bell peppers and be reed thin.
Backed by "progressive" foundations, nutrition advocates are demanding a national obesity policy aimed at changing our collective diet, by force of law if necessary — or quite possibly by force of litigation. As one advocate, Michael Jacobson of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, put it: "If someone is saying that a 64-ounce soda at 7-Eleven contributed to obesity, that person should have his day in court."
That brings us to Northeastern University law professor and associate dean Richard Daynard, point man in the forthcoming courtroom onslaught against fizzy drinks. Long quoted in the media as a cheerleader for tobacco lawsuits, Daynard has now set out to assemble a legal strike force to file obesity actions. He wants to duplicate the success of the tobacco campaign, whose strategies included invoking "the children" and launching scores of suits on novel legal theories in hopes that one would stick.
WALTER OLSON is senior fellow of the Manhattan Institute.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
You can't drink soda in public places. Public places, of course, includes private property that is publicly accessible.
Now the soda drinkers can line up on the sidewalks with the smokers and all have yellow teeth together.
RIDICULOUS LITIGATION, PING!!!
Look for a "Twinkie Tax" to be proposed with the funds to be used for "Childhood obesity programs". And as with the tobacco settlement money, less than 5% will actually go for its stated purpose.
I am hooked on Dublin Dr. Pepper (made with real Imperial Cane Sugar). It tastes way better than the corn syrup chemical tasting Dr. Pepper.
They better stay away from my DP.
If kids went out and ran and played like they did before video games, it would also help.
The problem is, too many lawyers.
Beyond that, people, including children, should be allowed to choose. They're old enough to buy their own snacks, they should be old enough to choose foods themselves. But it really isn't fair when the only "choices" cause diabetes, obesity and heart disease.
And, these diseases are big business for the pharmaceutical industry. We all pay in the long run.
Smoke Gnatzies jumped on the bandwagon to condemn and demonize smokers and wouldn't listen it was really about smoking, but about control by the "we're smarter than you" crowd. I doubt they will pay much attention to this either. Not until it's something they wish to continue doing will they wake up and by then, there will be no one left to stand with them.
$2.50 per can (sin)use tax. It's for the children.
No truer words have been spoken.
PUFF!
Heres a novel idea. Bring your own damn snacks from home and don't buy them from a vending machine.
Though that would involve some actual self reliance, responsibility, and initiative. So we can't expect that.
Well, that's one reason I stopped going to 7-Eleven. The guy who worked there was always grabbing me, throwing me to the ground, sitting on me, and pouring those 64-ounce pops down my throat.
The litigation culminated in the 1998 settlement in which cigarette makers agreed to alter marketing practices, pay oodles to state governments (financed by hiking cigarette prices) and — not incidentally — fork over upward of $10 billion to the lawyers who had organized the suits.
Just a coincidence, I'm sure. I mean, even though these lawyers are motivated solely by the public interest and concern for our health, they still have to earn a living, right?
More of the same.
I actually sent that suggestion to McDonalds when my daughter was young. She loved salad so I sent a suggestion that they offer the chicken nuggets or burger with a small salad instead of the fries..... It's only been 15 years so I'm thinking I might hear back from them soon...
Here's a novel idea- how about holding the consumers responsible for their own mis-use of a product.
isn't one of the texas governor hopefuls advocating a "sugar tax"?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.