I can't believe the Florida Health Department would fire a physician for speaking out against the junk that our society is overridden with. I say more power to him. That's exactly the kind of message healthcare professionals need to get out there, without worrying about stepping on someone's toes.
I agree with you, but I have a feeling that they were more worried about possible copyright infringement with the whole flip on "America Runs on Dunkin"
I think a lot of advertising really is horribly irresponsible and unethical. I refuse to not hold businesses responsible for their choices. There *is* a human being somewhere making those choices.
I heard an ad for McDonald's yesterday, promoting having breakfast there Every. Single. Day. Just ridiculous.
"He angered staff members by barring doughnuts from department meetings and announcing he would throw the fat-laden sweets away if he saw them in the break room. He also banned candy bars in the vending machines, putting in peanuts instead."
I wish they would do this where I work. I am a hospital nurse and we have a McDonald's of all things in a heart hospital! And don't get me started on the food in the cafeteria and what we serve our patients.
i do think it was extreme to fire the doctor. however i am of the opinion that it's not the donut that is so bad it's how much of it you eat. now me personal i have to stay away from sugar because my blood sugar rises quickly (even fruit makes me blood sugar rise). but if someone decides to have a donut say once of month to treat themselves it's not necessarily bad. but if it's eaten in excess then yes.
I'm thinking it's not just one specific issue that got this guy fired. Anyone who plays food cop by throwing away coworkers food is someone who "doesn't play well with others."
Banning candy from vending machines? Not the worst thing in the world, but if you're already overweight, peanuts aren't necessarily much of an improvement over candy.
I think mostly though, self-righteousness really leaves a bad taste in people's mouths. Making choices for himself, expressing his opinions... that's a lot different than dictating other people's choices and throwing away their food without permission.
A person can do a lot of harm by doing good in a nasty way.
I didn't get the impression that he threatened to throw out the employee's lunches or anything like that, only donuts and other junk that were purchased (presumably) with department funds for meetings and the like, though I could be wrong.
While I dislike the authoritarian approach myself (Toby Cosgrove pulled some stunts like this at the Cleveland Clinic while I worked there years ago) I think it's important to consider that none of us have a right to be supplied with a cache of donuts at every business meeting or have vending machines stocked with Snickers bars in every hallway. It amazes me sometimes how we've come to expect and demand easy access to junk food at all times and rise up with righteous indignation when our favorite treats aren't supplied.
Why is it that on one hand, we talk about cleaning up our dietary environments and making good food choices and trying really really hard, yet get irate when someone stops spending departmental money on crap so that you can make good choices that will let you succeed?
Isn't it a bit hypocritical to complain on one hand that the government/society/obesity-promoting environments are preventing one from losing weight, while complaining equally loudly that one's rights to junk food are being infringed upon by "the man"???
While I dislike the authoritarian approach myself (Toby Cosgrove pulled some stunts like this at the Cleveland Clinic while I worked there years ago) I think it's important to consider that none of us have a right to be supplied with a cache of donuts at every business meeting or have vending machines stocked with Snickers bars in every hallway. It amazes me sometimes how we've come to expect and demand easy access to junk food at all times and rise up with righteous indignation when our favorite treats aren't supplied.
You gotta start somewhere, I guess. It's the Health Department, for heaven's sake. If you don't walk the walk, how can you expect anyone to take you seriously? I applaud this guy's thinking. With obesity, diabetes and other chronic problems related to them reaching epidemic proportions, you need strong leaders to set the example and you might as well start by some housecleaning in your own workplace. If he was being a **** about what people brought in their own lunches, that's a different matter, but I don't think the workplace (the health dept) needs to reinforce bad eating habits.
I mostly agree, but the article said he angered staff (so I'm wondering what he did to tick people off). I also did not assume that departmental money was being used. Even when I worked in a corporate environment, staff meeting donuts were rarely paid for by corporate funds unless it was a huge multi-department function, and even then there would be quite a few healthy options on the table. There'd be donuts, as well as bagels and muffins (which could a lot worse than donuts if you didn't share them, considering the size of some of these), but there would also be huge bowls of fresh fruit, which I really appreciated because I generally don't "do" donuts. I haven't eaten donuts in the morning, or any high carb or "sweet" breakfast item like pancakes since I was 12 years old, and first made the connection that sweet breakfasts make me queasy and sick afterward.
In all the places I've worked, for regular staff meetings and the break rooms, any food item brought in was paid for out of someone's private pocket (so that's what I was assuming in this case). The supervisor holding the meeting might buy them, or someone just "being nice" would bring in the food. While I didn't always appreciate other people's choices, I figured that the food choice belonged to whoever had decided to bring it in/buy it. When it was MY turn (and often when it wasn't), I brought in things to share that I could and wanted to eat.
I do think that in this case the "how" may have been a lot more important than the why. He was angering people and just didn't care. No "sorry, I understand why you may not like this, but I feel it's important." That he is quoted in the article speaking about military experience and bluntness is probably more telling of the real reason behind the firing - a lack of diplomacy.
I think that's what's written between the lines, it wasn't his message, but his delivery. Railing against fast food, and eliminating from the workplace (given the nature of this workplace) is one thing, but targeting one food and one business in particular - it's just poor diplomacy (and inaccurate). Donuts may have been a symbol to him of all that is wrong with our culture's food choices - but blaming donuts and only donuts, is a bit twisted. Blaming it all on donut shops in general and Dunkin' Donuts in particular, is missing the bigger, and more accurate point.
Even substituting peanuts for candy! There weren't healthier options for the vending machines than peanuts? Something a little lower in fat and sodium, perhaps?
I think there's a lot more to this story than has been reported.
Regardless of how the donuts were paid for and whether or not he stepped on any toes, I still believe that he was absolutely right to declare, no donuts in my meeting! It wouldn't surprise me if the only thing he did to 'tick people off' was refuse to supply them with junk food throughout their work day. Nowadays, if you take away the Reece's cups somebody will probably get hurt
What I got out of the article is that there was pressure from donut shop owners...who were also lawyers and the County Commissioner. Politics and business versus "zealot" truth in nutrition....hmmmm....why am I not surprised by the outcome here?
And murph, a McDonald's at a heart hospital? Oh, the irony....why is it lost on the decision-makers?
Fla. doc fired over 'doughnuts equal death' sign
