U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > New York City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 09-18-2012, 07:33 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn New York
17,505 posts, read 29,475,384 times
Reputation: 25492

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by leoliu View Post
After reading SobroGuy's informative post, I will try desperately to avoid any chinese toothpaste from now on...


have you ever seen Chinese peoples teeth, that alone would tell me.............


just sayin'
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-18-2012, 07:37 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn New York
17,505 posts, read 29,475,384 times
Reputation: 25492
Imagine that the big size was never invented, then we would have a ban on it and people wouldn't have gotten so crazy over it.


Instead of calling it a ban, which is kinda "dictatoring", the companies should just not make that size no more, and not make a big ta-do out of it.

So when you get to the counter you see the size cups they have ( usually all sizes are on display) and you pick one. If someone asks, where is the huge size?, the person behind the counter could simply say, oh it doest come in that size anymore.....................
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2012, 10:14 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn
40,048 posts, read 33,136,682 times
Reputation: 10588
Take a look at all the different varieties of salad dressing you can buy at the supermarket. Does the Mayor realize how absolutely laden with sodium they are? Hey, look, if you're gonna declare war on sugar, salt can't be too far behind! (Never mind the mind-blowing kinds of salt-laden junk food. If he went after big cups of soda with gusto, he'll have a field day with that).
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2012, 10:19 AM
 
6,459 posts, read 11,534,240 times
Reputation: 6390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred314X View Post
Take a look at all the different varieties of salad dressing you can buy at the supermarket. Does the Mayor realize how absolutely laden with sodium they are? Hey, look, if you're gonna declare war on sugar, salt can't be too far behind! (Never mind the mind-blowing kinds of salt-laden junk food. If he went after big cups of soda with gusto, he'll have a field day with that).
He has. He's banned food donations to homeless shelters, because no one knows how much the salt content is.

Bloomberg is focusing on the WRONG things. Worrying about what people are putting in their bodies VOLUNTARILY is none of his concern. We all know that eating MickyD's everyday is not healthy and will make you fat. We all know that drinking a gallon of soda everyday will make you fat. Everyone is aware of the health risks of eating this way. Personally, I can never finish a 16 oz drink anyways, but I have a problem living in what is now becoming a "nanny" city.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2012, 11:38 AM
 
30,335 posts, read 43,124,405 times
Reputation: 12856
Quote:
Originally Posted by MobileVisitor09 View Post
SobroGuy: And when people don't have insurance to pay for their bad habits, the government (aka taxpayers) pay for their lifetime of treatments, and if they can't work due to these health problems the government (aka taxpayers) support them for life.



This isn't really related to the soda ban debate, but, just to clarify:

No hospital is legally permitted to deny a patient emergency medical care or care for childbirth; however, they are allowed to refer a non-emergency patient to an outside physician or clinic (without being seen), and/or transfer an emergency patient to another facility once stabilized.

I believe what he was getting at was the following: Low-income individuals without health insurance (whether working PT, not eligible for subsidized insurance, illegal residents, etc.), will put off a visit to a primary care physician for a preventable/treatable condition due to lack of funds. The condition often exacerbates over time due to lack of treatment, and eventually the individual ends up in the emergency room of a hospital. As mentioned, virtually no hospital is permitted to deny a patient emergency care (if they enter through ER); these individuals are 'billed later' or put on a payment plan, but, research shows these bills are rarely paid in their entirety, if, at all. The 'billed' amount for these types of visits ends up in collections, and, the hospital eventually writes it off as bad debt. To recoup the funds lost from these types of transactions, it has been argued that hospitals practice cost-shifting and increase rates for insured patients, (i.e., my astronomical $2K bill at Hopkins for an IV and a shot last year), contributing to medical inflation, and subsequently extra burden on the insured.
You went with exactly where I wanted you to go with it. The ban is for poor people - plain and simple.

So why are we not putting a ban on how much kids they have, as that further drains the system with Medicard-sponsored checkups, etc. Why are we stopping at just soda and cigarettes?
__________________
"The man who sleeps on the floor, can never fall out of bed." -Martin Lawrence

Forum TOS: //www.city-data.com/forumtos.html
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2012, 11:49 AM
 
Location: Baltimore, MD / NY
781 posts, read 1,125,051 times
Reputation: 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeventhFloor View Post
You went with exactly where I wanted you to go with it. The ban is for poor people - plain and simple.
I went nowhere. I was explaining another poster's comment regarding hospital billing.

But, back to the point, the prevalence of obesity is highest within low-income neighborhoods. Within New York, the percent obese in areas such as East Harlem and the South Bronx range anywhere from 30% - 44%. These are also areas where you'll find a higher-than-average concentration of fast food restaurants, (that sell the large-sized sodas covered under this ban), second rate supermarkets, and corner stores.

Further, the ban is for those who fall prey to McSupersized sodas and meals, regardless of SES.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2012, 11:56 AM
 
Location: Baltimore, MD / NY
781 posts, read 1,125,051 times
Reputation: 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeventhFloor View Post
So why are we not putting a ban on how much kids they have, as that further drains the system with Medicard-sponsored checkups, etc. Why are we stopping at just soda and cigarettes?
I didn't see this last piece--there's no need to ban anything like you suggest, and that's not at all what I was or am insinuating.

This just emphasizes the importance of providing decent, accessible, timely preventative healthcare and education regarding nutrition and health to all, especially those most vulnerable.

In terms of obesity, the topic at hand, it won't be a battle won overnight, but, at least Bloomberg is making an effort to improve public heath in NYC--whereas in other areas of the country, this is not even an idea on the table nor will be for quite some time.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2012, 12:25 PM
 
8,747 posts, read 17,621,261 times
Reputation: 4168
Seventh I think you are looking at things the wrong way when you say the ban is for poor people. The Mayor acknowledges that poor people of color in NYC are significantly more overweight/obese than other groups, have much higher rates of diabetes, and health related issues, least educated on nutrition (and most other things), and on and on.

What the Mayor is doing is trying to level the playing field..he knows the culture that is pervasive in the community...fried foods, lack of exercise, poor nutrition, excessive amounts of junk foods everywhere you look...the cards are stacked against people in these communities. The Mayor cannot force bodegas to close, carry only healthy foods, force people to eat only fruits/veggies etc, but he can help people make better choices by trying to limit the excess and egregiously bad food, and that's what he is doing. He got out the transfats, put calorie counts on the menus, limiting sodium, and now eliminating the giant size sodas. You view it as an assault on the poor, I see it as trying to give us some support to make a better decision, even if it means eliminating a poor choice...this is a positive thing for the poor, not a negative thing.

I think a reasonable person can mandate that people who drive a car should be licensed..and we all agree right? Does that mean then since the government is "dictating" we have a license, what's next that they "dictate" how many hours we are allowed to sleep! Of course not...so why are you screaming this silliness now? You can still buy 25 16 ounce sodas...nobody is stopping you. So again...I am not clear how this is an assault on freedom, how this is an assault on the poor, or government telling us what to do anymore than requiring us to have a drivers license, or companies telling us what to do by creating only certain sizes..why not 120 ounce cups?

Last edited by SobroGuy; 09-18-2012 at 12:54 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2012, 12:29 PM
 
1,142 posts, read 2,022,311 times
Reputation: 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by SobroGuy View Post
Seventh I think you are looking at things the wrong way when you say the ban is for poor people. The Mayor is acknowledges that poor people of color in NYC are significantly more overweight/obese than other groups, have much higher rates of diabetes, and health related issues, least educated on nutrition (and most other things), and on and on.

What the Mayor is doing is trying to level the playing field..he knows the culture that is pervasive in the community...fried foods, lack of exercise, poor nutrition, excessive amounts of junk foods everywhere you look...the cards are stacked against people in these communities. The Mayor cannot force bodegas to close, carry only healthy foods, force people to eat only fruits/veggies etc, but he can help people make better choices by trying to limit the excess and egregiously bad food, and that's what he is doing. He got out the transfats, put calorie counts on the menus, limiting sodium, and now eliminating the giant size sodas. You view it as an assault on the poor, I see it as trying to give us some support to make a better decision, even if it means eliminating a poor choice...this is a positive thing for the poor, not a negative thing.

I think a reasonable person can mandate that people who drive a car should be licensed..and we all agree right? Does that mean then since the government is "dictating" we have a license, what's next that they "dictate" how many hours we are allowed to sleep! Of course not...so why are you screaming this silliness now? You can still buy 25 16 ounce sodas...nobody is stopping you. So again...I am not clear how this is an assault on freedom, how this is an assault on the poor, or government telling us what to do anymore than requiring us to have a drivers license, or companies telling us what to do by creating only certain sizes..why not 120 ounce cups?
I'm all for educating people on the choices they make but forcing people to do things, well that's a line for me. If there is a demand for a 32 oz soda, that means someone wants a 32 oz soda.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2012, 12:57 PM
 
Location: Brooklyn New York
17,505 posts, read 29,475,384 times
Reputation: 25492
Quote:
Originally Posted by skilldeadly View Post
I'm all for educating people on the choices they make but forcing people to do things, well that's a line for me. If there is a demand for a 32 oz soda, that means someone wants a 32 oz soda.

same thing for cigarets, no one is putting a gun to your head to buy them, but now smokers that want them have to pay a lot of extra tax.

but now when you think of it, if cigarets are supposed to be so bad for you, why not ban them all together........like they are doing with the large sodas....



something isnt righ there.


I hardly think a large soda could harm a person more than smoking does. plus drinking a large soda doesnt infringe on my health, but someone smoking next to me does.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > New York City

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2022, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top