Please use the comment section below to explain your position on the New York City proposed "Soda Laws" as you wrote on the back of your "Discussion Preparation" worksheet. You may type up in a Google or Word document, then copy/paste OR you may type directly into the comment area (beware of possible opportunity to lose your work - "TIMED OUT"). Your comments will be published when all are received.
Please state your position clearly and use complete sentences and well-constructed paragraphs to defend or explain your stance.
Start your post with your first name, last initial, EDA period # and EDA teacher name. Double-return between paragraphs, please. Use proper capitalization, punctuation, language and spelling.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteGavin Lee Carr Per.1
ReplyDeleteI think that there shouldn't be a soda ban because everyone has the right to choose what they want to do with themselves. whether it be jumping off cliffs or eating the healthiest food all their life people should not be controlled by a system that wasn't of their own creation.
I agree that everyone should have a right to choose but they should have a right to choose from healthy products.Some people never got taught all of the damages of soda or sugary drinks can cause, so they never bother to care.
DeleteCliff D. Mrs. Carr Period 1
ReplyDeleteI agree with Mayor Bloomberg's proposal and vote yay on the Soda Ban Laws. Sure, it's not going to solve all the problems, but it is the first step in the right direction. Passing tons of other bills restricting all unhealthy foods all at once is a very bad idea, because many more people would be outraged, so it is better to take smaller steps to eventually achieve a larger goal. The goal is to make Americans healthier, and this is a good first step.
It's unethical for the government to control everything we consume. People should be able to eat and drink whatever they would like. Even if you take away soda and all unhealthy foods from a person, they may still not exercise. It's really up to the person what type of life they want to live, not the government.
DeleteIf the soda laws were passed, people will still be able to eat and drink whatever they would like. The only thing this law is restricting is the size of the bottle. People still have the option to buy 1 liter soda bottles and drink the whole thing if they want! Ultimately, it is the person's decision to decide what kind of life to lead, but the government can help provide encouragement for a healthy lifestyle.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJessica P. EDA Period 1 Mrs. Carr
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s idea of banning oversized servings of sugary drinks won’t change a thing. People will probably just buy more of the small sized drinks or get a refill (which in many cases, are free). Like it was stated in the articles, soda isn’t the only thing causing diabetes, obesity, etc. There will still be sugary juices, milkshakes, hamburgers, and so much more foods/drinks that also carry a large amount of calories. Also, oversized drinks will only be banned in public places (like theaters, restaurants, etc.), but what about the big galloons of soda at the local market? People can still buy and drink that. What I would request to help end this problem would be to maybe ban refills, along with the oversized drinks, and like I read in one of the articles, required vegetables or fruit with every meal at fast food and restaurant places. Maybe even at the theater.
spencer m
ReplyDeleteeda period 1
i really don't think that the government (or anyone for that matter)should be allowed to regulate how much we eat and drink. i highly dis agree with this solution and believe there are many better options. one idea is to continue with the health propaganda commercials.
I think that the government is trying to help us not hurt us. It is their responsibility to ensure our health, and by passing this law it is helpful. I will say that it does need improvements but overall I think its good thing.
DeleteDanyella Thrall
ReplyDeleteEDA Period 1
Mrs. Carr
I voted yay. I think that it's important to show america that how they are living now is not healthy. Even though the points that people made opposing the ban were very reasonable. I still vote for the ban. People aren't born obese, or to become obese. They make decisions in life to become that way, they live that lifestyle. The ban will help decrease the number of unhealthy, and obese people in america. Even though it will ultimately be the peoples choice on what they do, it is important to guide them in the right direction. The ban could possibly will prove that, and maybe even be a message from reality. “The way your living is unhealthy, and soda isn't making it any better.”
Mary Lou W.
DeleteEDA Period 1
Mrs. Carr
There are some good key points in your response, but there are way more factors to becoming obese than just soda. Fast food companies and unhealthy living styles also contribute. A person can drink soda every day for the rest of their lives, and not become obese. As long as they work out and eat healthy meals with reasonable portion. Drinking soda is only a contributing factor.
Uriem F
ReplyDeleteEDA,Per:1
Ms.Carr
I am all for this proposal. I think this issue being addressed is important because if something isn't done about America's obesity issue, we aren't going to head to a brighter more efficient future. I also think Bloomberg banning oversized drinks is great because it’s heading toward the right direction. It’s much better to reduce than completely get rid of because it takes time to get used to change. As an improvement to his proposal I would make sure sure kids and adults are better educated about obesity and is seen as a serious matter. Kids can be educated at school and adults could be informed in news providers like tv, newspaper, and the radio.
Although your argument may be true, this is not a good way to change. People should have the freedoms to at least choose what they want to have. If these drinks are removed, it won't matter. There are equally bad or worse products out there, even ones of smaller servings and of equal or lesser value. Plus, obesity isn't like a disease, where removing one thing in an environment can stop it. You must go down and talk to these people or at least put some sort of warning label. Removing large soda drinks is way too drastic, especially in this economy.
DeleteCristian R, EDA Period 1, Mrs. Carr
ReplyDeleteI think this issue is important to discuss, because sugary drinks do affect a person’s health and can led to obesity. Also if they don’t do anything about the issue later on more Americans will be obese. The solution that was proposed is great because it won’t allow fast food places nor restaurants to sell soda cups that are larger than 16 ounces. It is also good because if food places no longer sell giant soda cups people will start to drink less soda perhaps become healthier, and won’t become obese. I also think that they should have a restriction on the size of French Fries at fast food place, because they contain a lot of grease, salt, and fat. The restriction should be that they can only sell medium size French Fries. The reason I think this is because since French Fries have a lot of grease and fat if someone eats large fries daily they can become obese and unhealthy because of all the grease and fat. If you lower the size of the fries the consumers will not be getting as much grease and fat as they use to be.
I see what you mean, but most people won't just give up soda so easily. They will probably just buy more servings of the smaller sizes drinks or get refills, instead of just saying, "Large sized drinks are banned? I'll just drink one small serving then and be healthier." The same goes for other foods, like the french fries. If large amounts are banned, people will most likely just buy more of the smaller sizes. In my opinion, a better solution would be to ban refills. That way people won't have as much access to a sugary drinks.
DeleteBea C.
ReplyDeleteEDA P1 Carr
I think Mayor Bloomberg's idea of outlawing 16 oz. and larger sugary beverages in public venues is a good idea. It's a good start, but it's not the only thing that's causing Americans to be obese. There's still high calorie food sales and people not exercising as much as they should. This law will help Americans a little bit. There's nearly 400 calories in a 32 oz. Coca-Cola Classic, which is almost as much as McDonald's quarter-pound hamburger. Healthy diet and exercise will help us not be obese. We're still selling high calorie food to one individual which is probably twice the serving size we're suppose to take in. Again, it's a great start that can do us some good, but it's not the whole solution.
So we basically said the same exact thing. In my comment, I said I would vote yay for this law once it is fine-tuned and it looks like you are that way too. I do like your view on the aspect that there are other items that are the cause for America's obesity, not just soda. So, we have the same opinion.
DeleteAndrew W
ReplyDeleteEDA p.1
Mrs. Carr
I believe that Micheal Bloomberg is headed in a good direction with good intents but I have to be honest here. I believe many of the citizens are right. This ban won't change the way many people eat or how much they eat. There will probably be free refills on unhealthy drinks that meet the size requirement if there aren't free refills already.
Once again, I liked the proposal but I don't think there will be much of an effect with all the other bad foods out there to eat. There is ice cream, french fries, cheeseburgers, and an enormous amount of more unhealthy food and drinks. The list could go for days and soda is just one item on that list, so in conclusion I say that a ban should be made that applies to a larger amount of food and drinks, not just one item in particular.
I agree that he is headed in the right direction but not in the right way. he is going down a slippery slope about what can and cant be banned as far as food and all other freedoms.I agree that other things could be banned more appropriately than sugary drinks.
DeleteAlex B. EDA Period 1, Mrs. Carr.
ReplyDeleteI think that this law is a step in the right direction, but it is still quite a bit off of the target, which is why I words, once this law is fine-tuned, then I voted nay. In other will vote yay. This law states that soda will not be sold in large sizes. I can see where this law is going: trying to tackle America’s obesity problem. This law only applies to restaurants, not grocery stores or Starbucks, who actually have a large amount of sugar in most of their drinks. Let’s say a consumer is in a restaurant and is a big fan of soda. When he orders his extra-large Coke and is refused it, he will either order a medium and refill it several times, or go to the store across the street and buy an even larger quantity of it. And who is to stop them from just going across to a gas station and getting one of the even larger sizes, or buying a couple bottles of Coke? Even with the ban, a large majority of restaurants offer free refills on their drinks, which adds up to even more than a large most of the time. The problem here is that the ban will only apply to restaurants, not gas stations, grocery stores, or the twelve packs they can buy at just about any store. Therefore, I strongly believe this law is a great concept, just poorly written, and it targets the wrong areas.
I agree that it is a step in the right direction. The law can help people into taking a smaller amount than usual if they're going out, contributing a little bit in their health. Sure, the consumer could just buy more soda elsewhere, but we could also just make the serving sizes smaller in fast food joints, etc. In other countries, their proportion sizes are smaller than America's and probably have less obese. We could always charge way more in large serving sizes and charge refills, just a suggestion.
DeleteRobrt M.
ReplyDeletePeriod 1
EDA
Our nation faces a terrible crisis today. A staggering number of people are obese and young people are being diagnosed with Type 2 Diabetes whereas Type 2 use to only exist in adults. Unhealthy eating has been the downfall of many people's lives. Yet what have we done about it? We have made changes in schools and healthy food is available and nutrition facts for many food places are being made public, but we are still serving the same unhealthy culprits for this catastrophy. Why is that?
I personally disagree with the proposed soda ban because it is an infringement on my rights as an American citizen and it restricts the people who can run fine with their big soda. I think we could encourage lots of excercise and better nutrition in schools instead.
You said schools have been making healthier food available. That is true, however, how many children are going to choose the healthy food? Many of them take what is tasty to them (usually junk food) and hardly consider the nutrition facts. That goes for grocery stores also. Furthermore, if the government can make healthier food an option in schools, they should be able to decrease the portion sizes of sugary drinks.
DeleteThis ban does not take your rights away because the proposition is that we decrease the portion size of sugary drinks. They never said how many of the drinks we can or cannot buy. If we drank smaller portions of these drinks, we would more likely not get refills. If there is more to drink in one portion, then people would finish it, knowing there is more to drink.
Drew Garbe Period 1 Mrs. Carr
ReplyDeleteI think that it is a good idea to restrict soda, because soda is very unhealthy and should be drunk in small amounts and every once in a while. It is also a contributor to America’s obesity problem, because so much sugar can be taken in by only drinking 32oz. Although the law could use an improvement, because if someone were to get a 16oz drink at a restaurant they can get a refill for free and drink 32oz, which is over what the law says you should drink. It should cost money to be able to refill so people may rethink buying another 16oz. I think that this law needs improvements but is a good first step to raising awareness about portion sizes.
i understand that sugary drinks have been linked to obesity but i don't think the government should be able to control what we eat and drink. adults should be able to control what they eat and drink without the government telling them what they can and cannot drink and eat.this isn't like the issue of companies putting unhealthy chemicals in our food without telling us its not really a health risk its something people have control over and should be able to understand.
DeleteRachel W.
ReplyDeleteEDA Period 1
Mrs. Carr
I think it is very important that we go through with this solution.If the government can ban drugs and alcohol at certain degrees and ban specific ones completely, I believe the same thing can be done with sugary drinks, but not completely abolishing them. America's obesity problem is an embarrassment, and people wonder why other countries insult us for it. Americans being obese is the main stereotype for our country, but we can make it change. After all, stereotypes only exist from facts and statistics. Mayor Bloomberg should not be called names for his proposal; it is the right thing that should be done. People just don't want it to allow this to happen because so many of them are addicted to the temporary taste of soda, etc. We need to accept that sugary drinks are unhealthy, and we can have a great, if not better life than the one in which we drink soda,etc.
You said that people wonder why other countries insult us for our obesety. I do not believe that these insults should impact what we do as a country; they are opinions, and who are they really coming from? You based half of your argument about how it is a stereotype that America is obese. Stereo types rarely come straight from facts and statistics. There are other factors to look at. Maybe only fat, lazy people go to France and China, maybe only fat people stick out so they think America is full of them.
DeleteI also do not believe that Mayor Bloomberg takes seriously the names he may be called on his case. What names are you talking about?
You said that Bloomsberg's proposal is the, "right thing that should be done," The ban would take away rights and freedoms of American citizens. People should not be owned by or have things taken away by their government. It is not their job; it is ours to say what food we want to eat
Sunset F. Per 1 Carr
ReplyDeleteI think this idea has potential, but the way it is being delivered isn’t right. Sugary drinks aren’t the only cause of obesity. There are many other factors as well. Lack of exercise, over eating, and genetics all contribute to the obesity rate. If I were Governor Bloomberg I’d do something with the food and exercise too. I’d build new parks with sports fields and hiking trails. I’d also make healthier foods more available.
I agree with you Sunset (partially). There are many factors that contribute to obesity. However, sugary soda is definitely one of those factors. Restricting the soda size limit won't solve the obesity problem, but it is one of the steps to solving it. Passing a bunch of laws at once won't be popular and won't pass, but making laws more gradually will be easier on the citizens and the companies.
DeleteJennifer R., EDA Period 1, Mrs. Carr
ReplyDeleteThe issue about banning large sized sodas is actually quite simple. The proposed solution is a really good idea because sugary drinks are a problem in the United States. Kids drink too much soda and they don’t eat healthy afterwards. If the proposition goes into effect, obesity and other health problems will drop by a significant amount. People will be much more healthier and active. Sure people will whine and be mad if the suggestion about banning large soda passes, but they’ll get used to it and it’s for the better. They’ll be skinnier and that’s what pretty much everybody wants. Besides, soda damages you on the inside. So I think that passing this proposition will be a good thing and will benefit all the people in New York. Who knows, perhaps they will propose the soda ban here locally someday.
Alright,so to start of do u like to dink sugary drinks? If so your stating the fact that kids drink to much of sugary drinks and don't eat healthy which is correct, but also means you do the same.Your against this proposed but also your doing it too. Your either against it or not.
DeleteYes I do like to drink sugary drinks, but with moderation. I do not go overboard. There is a difference between drinking soda and putting a limit on yourself which is what I do. When people drink soda, the majority of them just keep on drinking and drinking. The purpose of the soda ban is to not eliminate all the sodas, but to put a limit on the quantity we consume. Just because I drink one sugary drink does not mean that I am against the proposed ban. I say yes to the soda ban.
DeleteTrevor C. EDA Period 1 Mrs. Carr
ReplyDeleteI strongly believe that the NY(New York) 24oz Soda Ban should not be passed for the following reasons... 1.) It’s not going to stop Americans from getting Type I + Type II Diabetes and other health problems. 2.) It’s going to cost our government a lot of spending money to pass the Soda Ban law. & 3.) We are still going to consume large quantities of Soda regardless if the Soda Ban law passes or not.
True, it won't stop the diabetes problem, And the government doesn't necessarily have to spend money if the law passes, It's just reducing the companies from spending large quantities of soda to the American public. And yes, maybe we will still drinks lots of soda, but by preventing the companies from selling LARGE AMOUNTS of it, the soda consumption level will still go down.
DeleteJaden N. eda per 1 Carr I do not think that it is good to ban the sell of large size sugary drinks just for the reason that it limits the freedom to do what you want when you want.
ReplyDeleteI don't think anything will happen because either people will get free refills on there small size sugary drinks or they will simply bring there own large sodas with them.
I think a good solution would be limit the size of french fries sold by fast food restaurants and only to a certain amount.
I like your second paragraph, but if only french fries were limited in size, people would still be unhealthy due to the fact that cheeseburgers and many other foods are a huge contribution to America's obesity.
DeleteAustin G Period 1 EDA
ReplyDeleteI say this solution isn't a good one. The article
says that there are other food and drink that are equally bad or worse in stores or restaurants. This solution would be good as a start, but maybe if we moved onto bigger health-risky foods and drinks, then it'd be better. That would change it to the beginning of the solution.
Well, Austin I see where you are coming from but if we got rid of bigger health risk food and drinks to begin with they're would be lots of complaning and angry people saying that the government is being to forceful. That is why it's good to start with something simply like reducing the size of a soda and take it from there. People might start to feel better because their health is improving and will become more appose to getting rid of worser foods or drinks that are in stores or resturants.
DeleteMisael Gurrola EDA Period 1
ReplyDeleteI think this solution, is pretty much unnecessary, because people are always going to try and find away around a ban. Also, most people enjoy their unhealthy fast foods, and know the risks involved, but choose to eat/drink the way they do anyways. Also, in NYC fast food is plentiful, convenient, and cheap therefore that is what people will eat. It would be better to really control the sugar in the drinks, not the size.
It's really amazing that we share the same views! I also like your point about people always finding loop holes in laws. It's true. And if they go through with the soda ban, people will probably find another way around it.
DeleteMary Lou W
ReplyDeleteEDA Period 1
Mrs. Carr
This proposed law is a good idea. Soda is one main contributes to obesity, and although there also many other factors, this is a great start. 12 oz of soda is all really someone needs to fulfill a sweet tooth. There could be some revisions to the law though, to close up loopholes that fast food companies will most likely exploit. If we slowly spread this across America, there could hopefully be a decrease in cardiovascular diseases and diabetes due to high amounts of sugar in soda.
There have been reports about people drinking themselves into a coma. Soda is something we all could live without. It was tested that by drinking soda everyday you have a 1 in 5 chance in becoming obese or have diabetes. This soda ban, will hopefully bring down the amount of people that are obese and people with diabetes.
You have a very strong point, and I was very intrigued to see the facts, and how soda and sugary drinks may affect people. The law could be improved as you stated but, people will still find a way around it. It is just the nature of humans. This nations was brought up on freedom, liberty and justice. If this ban and law were to be past, it will cause an uproar. The ban is taking away people’s freedom of choice to live how they want. The ban may decrease the number of unhealthy people in america, but its free will. People make decisions throughout their life that are the cause and effect to their health. Taking away soda, or sugary drinks may help one person, but not all people. Loopholes or no loopholes, this law will be taken advantage of. Mayor Bloomberg's ban may be effective, but it most likely won't work the wonders people are wishing and hoping for. -Danyella Thrall
DeleteCzionne M
ReplyDeleteEDA Period 1
Mrs. Carr
I agree with Michael Bloomberg's proposal to ban over sized servings of sugary drinks in New York's food-service establishments. However, I don't believe that it will make a big impact on obesity levels and the rise of diabetes. Any person can go to a food-service establishment and order a small sized sugary drink, but then s/he can go to Food 4 Less or Costco and buy as many gallons of soda as they want.
Although there are issues and better solutions with Bloomberg's solution, I still think that it is good. His solution still helps reduce the amount of sugary drinks that people have. Bloomberg's solution will also help reduce the amount of obese people and stop the rise of diabetes. It states in the "Forget large sodas, how about banning French Fries", in paragraph 24, experts have claimed that sugary drinks are a leading cause of obesity, and in the first article, paragraph 6,"Just one soda a day doubles a women's risk of diabetes."
Again, I believe that Michael Bloomberg's solution isn't the best solution, but it is effective.
Man, you basically have the exact same perspective on this as I have, this is a pound of bologna
DeleteAnthony Gonzalez,Carr p.1
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion oversized drinks should be banned.Not only do they make people want to drink more and more soda but over time soda can cause diabetes and increase obesity.With us lazy Americans,half of us not exercising and over-sized drinks,who knows how obese one can get.I think a good solution would be increasing the price of soda and making the labels easy to understand so people know what they are drinking.
Though i do agree with you it would be better if we tried to limit the amount people drink. i think it boils down to whether a person has the right to do what they please as long as it doesn't affect anyone else. I think someone should have this right and if they choose to kill themselves by overeating or if they choose to be the healthiest person in the world it is their decision to make and no one else should make it for them.
DeleteKevin H., EDA Period 1, Mrs. Carr
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, banning soda will have no effect on the people. If you banned soda for its fattening and unhealthy properties it would not have any health difference for the people. Fast food restaurants are still out there. If the fast food restaurants can’t sell soda, they’ll probably just sell fatty milkshakes and sugary lemonades and other drinks that have the same effect as soda on the people. Cinemas will still sell fatty popcorn and sugary coffee drinks, street vendors will still sell fatty hotdogs and hamburgers, stadium concessionaires will still sell fatty cotton candy and Slurpees. There will be a substitution with the same properties as soda, therefore, there would be no effect in banning soda.
To improve the previous proposal, I declare that no soda should be mentioned or advertised to the consumer by a salesperson in restaurants, cinemas, street vendors, or stadium concessionaires; although, soda may still be sold and served if and only if requested by a consumer. That would be all.
I completely agree with you. Although your proposal is going to be hard to accept for businesses, because they need to advertise their goods to the consumer, they would probably not agree.
DeleteJulian Martinez, EDA, Carr Period 1
ReplyDeleteI believe the ban of oversized sugary drinks would be a good idea, but then again people would still be able to buy more of it. Some solutions would be to raise the prices. Therefore the consumers won’t pay too much attention to the sugary drinks and probably chose something healthier. I also think that us American’s always find a way out of things we don’t necessarily like.
Matthew M.Period 1.Mrs. Carr
DeleteI don't think that there should be a soda ban in New York City. There are many people in NYC who like soda and they would agree with me. The way to solve this would be to sell smaller containers of soda not to completely ban soda.
Veronica R. EDA Per.1 Carr
ReplyDeleteI think we should stop giving out sugary drinks, well because people are in a risk of getting sick.Such as obesity and diabetes, in fact if drinking sugary drinks and say ‘’Oh its just Soda’’, do they really know how much sodium is in the Soda, although is drinking sugary drinks better than getting type 2 diabetes? Mostly Men and Women get type 2 diabetes and it can mostly kill, and can cause cancer.In this case these issues are good ideas but no need to add that much sugar.Well i mean people who have diabetes need a bit sugar, but dose not mean to go overboard and shut down all restaurants.
Mostly many people are addicted to sugary drinks and onto this population people get overweight and get sick.What i say is to band all over sized drinks and help people get healthy.It will help to increase the obesity rate,greatly it will also prevent cancer and other diseases.
I agree with you that they should stop giving out sugary drinks because people can get sick. I think we're on the same page that sugary drinks are unhealthy and can cause some serious health problems. However your opinion does confuse me a bit. It seems to me that you are for the soda ban yet you say that you are against it. I see that you believe that they should ban all over sized soda drinks and try to help people be healthier. I agree with you on that point. Even if they did lower the sugar they would probably add more sodium in the can to make up for the lost flavor which is equally as harmful as how it was before.
DeleteAvichai
ReplyDeleteMcmillan
P.1 Carr
EDA
I think that it is a good way to try and decrease the amount of obese people in the world, but, on the other hand, the craving that humans have for sugary substances is just too unbearable. It, in most cases, overpowers your desire to lose weight and the intent you have to keep your diet on track. Don't get me wrong, if this law were to be passed I’m sure it would be effective, just not as effective as desired or presumed. Overall, I think it could be the start to the fight against obesity. You think, oh, its only one cookie, it won't do any harm, then you end of eat a whole box of oreos. Then, next thing you know, you can care less about your diet, because once you have had the sugary and tasty food, you don't want to go back to vegetables and water..
Whose side are you on? Yay or nay?
DeleteOn your last 2 statements, you started talking about cookies... what does that have to do with the whole topic of this debate, "Soda Ban". The ban on oversized sugary drinks in food-service establishments is not the most effective, but it will still help.
DeleteI think that the issue is something that most people say its a bad thing, but nobody really does anything about it. the mayors law was clear. its not that it restricts the PEOPLE from buying over sized drinks, its the companies selling the over sized products. companies know that craves sugary treats, and the companies are using that against their customers. i think that it would be better to keep selling sodas, but at higher prices so it does not become a necessity of the american diet in the future... if it isn't already.
ReplyDeleteI voted Nay on the Mayor's proposal. The NY(New York) Soda Ban is not going to temperamentally ban soda. What the Mayor is purposing is that we put a stop to 16oz.+ sodas. No matter what happens you just have to remember people will still find ways to consume large quantities of sugary sodas. Also remember, sugar is addictive and people will still buy it even if the price skyrockets.
DeleteMatthew M. P.1 Carr
ReplyDeleteI don't think that there should be a soda ban in New York City. There are many people in NYC who like soda and they would agree with me. The way to solve this would be to sell smaller containers of soda not to completely ban soda.
I personally voted "yay" on the soda ban in New York. I can understand what you are trying to say but if you think about the people's health it would be the healthiest choice. I see where your trying to go with this but if you would think deeper mostly everyone finds a way out of things. Once people find a way out of smaller portion cups, would your opinion change? If people would buy more of it or instead if buying big sizes they buy a bunch if little portion sized sodas. How would you feel about banning the soda now? How many life's can be saved from getting diseases if it were to be banned, just think about it.
Delete