Posted on 06/28/2006 1:35:42 PM PDT by freemarket_kenshepherd
They wanted to sue over sodas in school, they even complained about 2 percent milk, and now they’re after fruit juices. But to the Washington Post, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) is just another health-conscious consumer advocacy group.
The June 28 Washington Post featured CSPI’s latest complaints about fruit drinks on the front page of its weekly Food section. Staff writer Candy Sagon began by reporting on the additional business juice vendors are enjoying as the nation’s three largest soft drink makers agreed to end soda sales to public schools.
But Sagon quickly shifted to complaints by groups such as CSPI.
Noting that just 12 states “regulate the sale of fruit drinks” in public schools, Sagon recorded the complaint of the center’s Margo Wootan. She wants only “bottled water and drinks that contain no less than 50 percent fruit juice” with no extra sugar sold in school while drinks like Hawaiian Punch and Hi-C are given the boot.
Those drinks, Wootan complained to Sagon, are nothing more than “soda without the bubbles.”
But Sagon left out the role Wootan’s organization played in the rise of juice drinks in public schools. The soda ban brokered by former President Bill Clinton in May was brought about in part because of planned litigation by CSPI, a group Sagon labeled merely as “a consumer advocate group.”
For a consumer advocate group, CSPI sure does oppose consumers having much choice. Aside from its work to ban sodas and limit fruit drinks in public schools, CSPI opposes public school students having a choice in milk in the lunch line.
In a news release two years ago, CSPI slammed “the dairy industry” for making “it harder for schools to serve only low-fat milk” which CSPI defines as either skim or 1% milk.
“We’re all for variety, but schools should provide a variety of good choices, not a variety of bad ones,” Wootan preached in her April 26, 2004 statement.
The Business & Media Institute has previously recorded the media’s uncritical reporting on the CSPI food police.
[cross-posted to BusinessandMedia.org]
Nanny state ping. Call up the troops.
The CSPI is sueing KFC chicken and the oil it uses to cook them.
The CSPI in 1998 sued KFI and forced them to use the oil they are now sueing them for saying it is bad.
Communist, gotta love them.
The gift that keeps on giving. Tar and feathers is what this group of asshats need.
Dangerous? Be friends with a sociopath. That'll kill you. Next? Engage in male gay sex or promiscuous heterosexual sex in the ghetto ( yeah, blacks have more AIDS). A person could live in McDonalds, smoke every day and suck on coke with extra sugar and still be safer than either of the above. I don't think the MSM will mention either...
So how long until they want to just give kids pills for their meals? Any child slightly over or underweight would just disappear from school.
Their widely-touted objection that Olestra causes "anal leakage".
So...it's OK to lecture kids on the joys of homosexual sex (including teaching them to "fist" each other), but keep the eeeeeeeeevil fruit juice and 2% milk out...?
From post #5 Dangerous? Be friends with a sociopath. That'll kill you.
Next?
Engage in male gay sex or promiscuous heterosexual sex in the ghetto ( yeah, blacks have more AIDS).
A person could live in McDonalds, smoke every day and suck on coke with extra sugar and still be safer than either of the above. I don't think the MSM will tell the school children.
Ping!
You might be interested in this one.
(I agree with this one, though).
I'm all for the free market, especially when it comes to schools. There shouldn't be gov't-run schools, period.
And I don't agree with lawsuits or regulations telling a parent what a student can bring to eat in school.
But, if they want to regulate what a gov't-run, taxpayer-funded school sells, I'd go further to say gov't-run schools should sell only 100% fruit juice and water to drink. It's a different issue altogether.
I am not in the least against kids eating healthy.
I AM against the NGO Foundation Funded Healthy People 2010.
Another thing he MSM has said little about is cervical cancer. Only lately are there many articles on cervical cancer, and that's because there may be a vaccine for it. Up until this piece of news, the MSM, particularly women's mags -- have kept it quiet that cervical cancer is sexually transmitted.
You're right. I believe there is a correlation between number of partners and cervical cancer. And you're right - the MSM won't touch that with a 10 foot pole. You've discovered something else liberals believe in - promiscuous sex for women. Good catch.
Do you know if this organization, CSPI, is one of the culprits working toward the "Healthy People" initiative?
NANNY STATE PING!!!!!!!!!
CSPI is NOT, I repeat NOT, a consumer advocacy group. They are out ot kill the hospitality industry, and any food production industry in the US. Ultimate NANNY-STATISTS
Well, personally I think they should serve chocolate milkshakes at lunch.
Even though it has long been known that the vast majority is caused by an STD, the MSM keeps spouting the same old lie that smoking causes cervical cancer.
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.