Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s proposed soda ban has met with a lot of commentary from both sides of the spectrum. Groups have called Bloomberg the “nanny mayor” while others applaud his fight to end obesity.
In the storm of quips his campaign has generated, it’s interesting to note how local politicians responded to the soda ban.
Councilman David Greenfield thinks that pushing the soda ban, instead of his proposed NYC helmet law, makes no sense as public-health issue.
“The reality is, a helmet is instant safety,” Greenfield said to Capital New York. “Nobody is going to argue with the mayor that drinking a lot of sugar is bad for you. But people don’t die dead flat of a heart attack from drinking a Big Gulp, right? It’s something that accumulates over time. So it’s a little bit bizarre to me that he’s not worried about the instant hazards but seems more concerned about the long-term health implications of big sugary drinks.”
Councilman Domenic Recchia said that children need more physical education in schools. He’s concerned with PE class cuts and questions Bloomberg’s choices.
“If obesity is so important, why is gym being cut?” Recchia asked in the New York Daily News.
The soda ban proposal does not requires City Council’s approval, only the approval of the Board of Health. As the New York Times noted, Bloomberg hand-picked the members of the BOH.
With the over-sized soda ban most likely to pass, what are your thoughts on this? Yay or Nanny?