Nanny Nutrition

Thank God for Sacramento’s Democrats.

Where would we be without these legislating geniuses? These big government politicians have made the most astonishing discovery: They’ve found that sodas contain - wait for it - sugar. 

And they want to make sure every single person who buys a soft drink in California is warned of the clear and present danger that comes with ingesting this poison.

Politicians never learn.

In 2013, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg pushed through a heavy-handed measure that outlawed large cups of sugary drinks in his city. It was called the “Sugary Drinks Portion Cap Rule” and it essentially outlawed the sale of cups larger than 16 ounces containing soft drinks. Two years later, the New York Court of Appeals struck down that slice of crazy, saying the New York City Board of Health had exceeded its authority.

Of course it had.

The anti-soft drink bill working its way through California’s state legislature would require most sweet drinks to carry a health warning, similar to the one on tobacco products.

"Senate Bill 347, which goes to the Assembly next, would require labels on drinks with added caloric sweeteners that contain 75 calories or more per 12 fluid ounces.
“The label on container would say: “STATE OF CALIFORNIA SAFETY WARNING: Drinking beverages with added sugar(s) may contribute to obesity, type 2 diabetes, and tooth decay.”

Since when did telling people what to eat and protecting their tooth enamel become the job of government?

Let’s just call this what it is, nanny nutrition. 

Do these politicians believe Californians are witlessly quaffing Coke because they believe the beverage is made with kale?

Do they think customers can’t tell the difference between Dr. Pepper and carrot juice?

Shoot, why pick on soft drinks? Why not send California’s sugar patrol out to slap warnings on bags of Oreos? On ice cream? On the doors to every bakery?

Fact is, people drink sodas for the same reason they eat ice cream, cookies and cakes.

They taste good.

It’s hard-wired into our DNA. Writing for livescience.com, Meredith Small explained why humans crave sugar:

The human tongue can detect four basic flavors — salt, sour, bitter and sweet, but humans are naturally drawn to sweet because we are primates, animals that evolved eating fruit in the trees. 

Monkeys and apes spend their days in the forest searching for ripe fruit. They have been selected to prefer sweet, ripe fruit over unripe, bitter fruit because it has higher sugar content and supplies more ready energy. Ripe fruit also has more water, which can be hard to find high in the canopy. 

So it makes sense for primates, including us, to have a highly developed palate for sweet things. And we primates have extended that preference beyond mere fruit.

Yes, sugary foods - when consumed in excess - will make some of us fat and unhealthy. Especially if we don’t climb trees all days like our primate ancestors.

Prohibition was repealed in 1933. That should have ended meddling by government in how we quench our thirst.