More than 100 health organizations and municipal public health departments, along with more than two dozen scientists, have asked the U.S. surgeon general to issue a report on sugar-sweetened soft drinks – akin to the landmark 1964 report on tobacco.
It never ends, does it?
A surgeon general’s report, the letter says, could evaluate the science and appraise the health effects of sugar-sweetened beverages. And it “would pave the way for policy measures at all levels of government.”
Well, duh. Why else would the swivel-eyed, biscuit-hating, vegan, coffee-fearing cranks of the Center for Science in the Public Interest be involved?
“I think people are coming around to the notion that sugary drinks aren’t healthy, and one of the astonishing things is that per capita consumption of [nondiet] carbonated drinks has gone down by 24% between 1998 and 2011, which is a big under-the-radar change in people’s drinking habits,” said Michael Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, an organizer of the letter.
What was that?
"...per capita consumption of [nondiet] carbonated drinks has gone down by 24% between 1998 and 2011..."
Does that not tell you something? How much empirical evidence would you like before you give up on a crusade that blames drinks—which provide just 7 percent of calories to Americans—on your bogus epidemic?
Jacobson said Friday that the “goal isn’t to wipe out sugary drinks completely,” but to return “soft drinks back in the place they were 50 years ago, an occasional small serving.”
Sorry dude. Heard it too many times before. "All we want is non-smoking seats in restaurants, we're not trying to stop people smoking completely." It doesn't work like that with you guys, does it? Not really the compromising kind, are ya?
Besides, who are you to decide that Americans are going to go back to one occasional small serving? Get a job, sir, preferably one that involves minding your own business.
And among the questions that remains in the debate over caloric soft drinks is whether there’s any addictive aspect – a question that remains unsettled. “That’s the blockbuster question – is sugar addictive? It’s certainly controversial.”
It's not controversial. It's not addictive. It doesn't meet any psychiatrist's criteria for addiction, the Center for Science in the Public Interest isn't a serious organisation and this is a non-issue. Next.
Jacobson said. “It may be that it tastes good so people like it.”
Bullseye. That's all it is. Now go away. If you want to know what makes people obese then don't write letters to the Surgeon General. Go see her personally and follow her to the canteen.
|Surgeon General Regina M. Benjamin|