As if there’s not enough indignity in the federal food stamp program, the food police want soft drink purchases banned from the program because they are “arguably” unhealthy.
As stated in their new Journal of the American Medical Association commentary, the rationale of Kelly Brownell and David Ludwig is:
The government purchases millions of servings of sugar-sweetened beverages for [food stamp recipients] each day. This practice arguably erodes diet quality and promotes chronic illness among individuals who are at increased risk of obesity-related disease because of limited financial resources. Moreover, the costs of treating chronic illness associated with incerased sugar-sweetened beverage consumption in this population will fall primarily to taxpayers
“Arguably”? What kind of scientific standard for public policy is that?
On the other hand, we are pleased to see that our efforts over the years fighting the food police on soda haven’t been trumped by some sort of “consensus” that soda consumption is certainly harmful.
JunkScience.com readers will remember that Brownell ally Walter Willett once told the Washington Post:
“…Anyone who cares about their health or the health of their family would not consume these [sugar-sweetened] beverages. Parents who care about their children’s health should not keep them at home.”
So maybe Willett would admit that soft drinks are arguably okay to have at home?