Neither soda, not sugar are dangerous. Here’s what is:
From the NYTimes:
So what’s dangerous is mindless food-nannying that misinforms, scares and reduces the quality of your life.
Neither soda, not sugar are dangerous. Here’s what is:
From the NYTimes:
So what’s dangerous is mindless food-nannying that misinforms, scares and reduces the quality of your life.
@ksuek Yes, as you rightly point out products, including non-alcoholic beverages, are clearly labeled. Adding a warning label to one set of products is arbitrary and won’t change health behaviors in any meaningful way.
Food alarmists damage our health in 3 ways:
1. They cause anxiety and unnecessary stress about what people eat.
2. They scare people away from normal healthy and necessary foods.
3. They damage the credibility of all wellness studies and articles so that no one will believe any of them anymore, putting legitimate warnings at risk.
I recently read a list of “Things never to eat for breakfast!” The list included but not limited to: Cereal of any kind, Toast, orange and all other fruit juices. bacon, sweet rolls ad infinitum.
Michelle’s “Healthy school lunch” (one spear of broccoli and one baby carrot) is not healthy.
Sugar content is already labeled, in grams, is it not? Clearly, one can get at least a relative amount of sugar content. Seems like a redundant, expensive and therefore unnecessary way to get the message about moderation across.