CNN's Laura Schmidt, who is a colleague of previously mentioned author Robert Lustig, wrote an editorial suggesting we regulate sugar like we do alcohol. What?
At the end of the article in the comments section, of course, there are the detractors. Which I assume include most sane Americans, whether they commented or not. But here're a couple who put on their angry eyes:
PatMacDaddy a year ago
Yes. Eating whatever we want is a matter of our personal freedom. But what if there is no freedom of choice because there is no sugar-free stuff to choose from?
How many of you can relate to this:
I can't be the only one. When there's sugar as one of the choices, it doesn't feel like a choice.
Ms. Schmidt says something that I completely agree with:
Unfettered corporate marketing actually limits our choices about the products we consume. If what's mostly available is junk food and soda, then we actually have to go out of our way to find an apple or a drinking fountain. What we want is to actually increase people's choices by making a wider range of healthy foods easier and cheaper to get.
I support cigarette regulations. I support a lot of the alcohol regulations. I don't want cocaine to be a legal choice for my children. I'm beginning to believe that sugar has become just as much a public health hazard in the long-term.
So, if you think using government regulations is a slippery slope, what would you propose we do to help those that really do want to be healthy but find it too hard in today's world?
Also, my kitchen is still a mess.
Also, my kitchen is still a mess.
