That sounds great! I especially appreciated the caffeine and kids warning.
I used to work as a Parent Educator/Home visitor with kids 0-12 and I've seen way too many baby bottles filled with coke or even MOUNTAIN DEW! Never mind the pictures of bottle rot teeth that are damaged before they even come in or talk about nutrition and brain development, or obesity in children.
I realize the warnings can't quite say "this product is not intended as a substitute for baby formula" but anything that alerts parents that soda may not be the most appropriate beverage for their kids would be good.
It is long overdue. I know I can attribute a lot of my weight gain to soda after soda. I drank a 6pack a day before starting this new way of eating. Never drank water because the soda was all I <thought I> needed.
A friend of mine recently went to the dr because of probelms swallowing and acid reflux. Pain in her chest as well. She was diagnosed with a narrowing esophogus, the result of years of too many soft drinks. She now has to try meds but if it doesnt help (and it doesnt seem to be) she will have to have surgery to widen the esophogus. She is also 95lbs so it doesnt only affect us overweight gals. Soda is dangerous!!
Kim
Well, let me be the voice of dissent.... what's next, warning labels on candy? On potato chips? On snack crackers-- the ones that seem like they'd be healthy but are actually very high in fat? Where would it end? And, if more and more foods get warning labels, nobody would ever read any of them.
I've been drinking too much Mountain Dew for the past 15 years... and I knew it was a bad habit, but, a little warning label on the can wouldn't have mattered.
I think it would be better to spend money on educating kids... commercials, magazine ads, whatever.... on the dangers of high sugar consumption. Show diabetics with their insulin shots, show overweight people struggling with daily life... whatever images are the most powerful.
Kids also need to have a lot more education on reading food labels and making their own food choices. Let's incorporate it into math classes (calculating calories for the day), art class (portion sizes), and, of course, health and gym classes.
OK, I'm getting off my soapbox now...
Edited to add: Ok, the parents putting soda in their baby bottles are definitely not thinking. I can't imagine! My two year-old drinks several large cups of ice water daily. Other than that, she has milk, and one serving of 100% fruit juice in a day. I would never give her soda, although on occasion she has snuck a taste of someone else's. Why on earth would a person put soda in a baby bottle??
I couldn't agree more, Amy. If you aren't paying enough attention to know that soda isn't exactly good for you then a label isn't going to do you much good either. However, I happen to be of the opinion that it isn't a matter of people not knowing that soda is bad for you but, instead, comes down to not really caring (I know that was the case for me). In some cases, economic background comes into play - you can buy a lot soda for the price of a gallon of milk. Again, though, that is a matter of choice since water is cheaper than either one.
As for parents putting soda in their children's bottles, well, that is just bad parenting and no label is going to fix that either.
It isn't that I care if the labels are required, I just don't think it is going to make a difference.
From Jeff Foxworthy (from my hometown and of "you might be a redneck" fame):
Show me a 2-year-old at the county fair, wearing nothing but a diaper and sucking on a baby bottle full of Coke ... and I'll show you a future NASCAR fan.
Well, let me be the voice of dissent.... what's next, warning labels on candy? On potato chips? On snack crackers-- the ones that seem like they'd be healthy but are actually very high in fat? Where would it end? And, if more and more foods get warning labels, nobody would ever read any of them.
I've been drinking too much Mountain Dew for the past 15 years... and I knew it was a bad habit, but, a little warning label on the can wouldn't have mattered.
I think it would be better to spend money on educating kids... commercials, magazine ads, whatever.... on the dangers of high sugar consumption. Show diabetics with their insulin shots, show overweight people struggling with daily life... whatever images are the most powerful.
Kids also need to have a lot more education on reading food labels and making their own food choices. Let's incorporate it into math classes (calculating calories for the day), art class (portion sizes), and, of course, health and gym classes.
OK, I'm getting off my soapbox now...
Edited to add: Ok, the parents putting soda in their baby bottles are definitely not thinking. I can't imagine! My two year-old drinks several large cups of ice water daily. Other than that, she has milk, and one serving of 100% fruit juice in a day. I would never give her soda, although on occasion she has snuck a taste of someone else's. Why on earth would a person put soda in a baby bottle??
My sentiments exactly.
I saw this on TV this morning - the news made it sound as though this were already in the works by the FDA. Nope, just some more hype.
Who died and made the Center for Science in the Public Interest the food police? I'm sure most people in the US and most of the world know that regular soda has sugar and caffeine - the ingredients are right on the can, for crying out loud. IMO we are free to make choices - to choose to drink soda, be it regular or diet or whatever. If someone wants to drink a case every day or have a Coke in the morning instead of coffee, again - that's their choice.
It's one thing to be a consumer advocate group - advising consumers and such, but when a group attempts to bully and strongarm the public and companies, that's going to extremes IMO.
I just get tired of reading about how 'evil' companies are for selling hamburgers, ice cream, candy, etc. and how they are 'responsible' for the obesity epidemic. As I see it - the companies are giving the public what they want, but I haven't seen them force-feeding anyone. In fact, most of the big food companies, including Coke and McD's, keep their nutrition information easily accessible on their website - I especially like McD's "Nutrition Tips for Dining at McDonalds" and Taco Bell's Nutrition Calculator.
To me, it all comes down to moderation, freedom of choice and personal responsibility (there it is again! ). I can see if this label thing gets passed by the FDA, if soda pop has to have a warning label - they'll be going after the candy companies next. After all, they called soda "Liquid Candy" so the next logical step would be to go after Hersheys and M&M/Mars and even Sees and Godiva with the warning labels. None of these foods are bad really, in *moderation*, and after all both soda and candy have been a part of the American tableau for well over 100 years. The difference between 1886 (when Coca-Cola was invented and first sold in Atlanta) and today is that huge leaps in manufacturing and distribution in a relatively short time period has made Coke, for example, a beverage made in small amounts and sold only at soda fountains - now we can buy it by the case lot and since we all have access to refrigeration can keep it at home and, paraphrasing Robert Woodruff (long time CEO of Coca-Cola through most of the 20th Century) 'within arm's reach of desire'.
There wouldn't be an obesity epidemic if we could only keep our intake of stuff like french fries and ice cream and candy and regular soda low. When I was a kid McD's was regarded as a rare treat (part of the reason was because the nearest McD's at the time was a 15 minute drive away - remember those red and white tiled structures with the golden arches on each side?). It's quite different these days - there are now *14* more within 10 miles of the one Mom and Dad took us to when we were kids.
And supersize...when did THAT start exactly? I always think it REALLY started when warehouse stores such as the Price Club/Costco appeared on the horizon, with the huge sizes of everything and especially candy and frozen fast food stuff. I mean what would happen in YOUR house if you had a five pound box of Nilla Wafers sitting in the kitchen or pantry? (I know what would happen in mine. )
Complicating things (as I see it) is the fact that most of us have either a blue collar laborer or farmer type of heritage, where everyone did hard physical labor on a daily basis (even the kids),burned a lot of calories. We (the descendants of these farmers and workers) are a far more sedentary bunch, but we're eating probably almost as many or as many calories as they did...but not expending nearly as many calories. So that calls for moderation IMO - but again it's up to that person to make the choice to have occasional moderate servings of something vs eating megaservings on a daily basis.
Whew...anyway I think it's a bunch of crap, the label thing.
I don't think I have touched non-diet sodas since back in HS... and back then I didn't drink them very often. I think when I went on WW one year, I added up my points and a can of regular soda was about FOUR, if I remember correctly. I am also addicted to caffiene....... I used to drink about 2-3 diet mt dews every day. I've recently decided that even diet sodas have got to be pretty bad for my body, so I am weening myself of of soda and onto coffee. The worst thing was that the sodas didn't seem to be really working anymore, which meant if I wanted energy.. I had to drink MORE of them. No thanks! Drinking a moderate amount of coffee apparently has some health benefits, too...
i used to drink drinks and juices everyday all day. i never drunk water. after being found i had diabetes i cut out drinks even diet drinks, juices and sugar. i now drink water 4-5 times a day or kool-aid with sweeten low. i think sodas is bad but let the ppl make they own choice.
I have to step in and defend Center for Science in the Public Interest. Yes, their tactics are bold and often over-the-top, but I think that's on purpose, to grab the media (and the public's) attention. They specialize in looking at common foods that lots of people gobble down mindlessly and shining a spotlight on it. They use a lot of colorful, strong language, but again, it's a strategy aimed at getting the message noticed. Do they really expect that their efforts will lead to warning labels on soft drinks? Probably not. But, by coming up with the idea, they might get the attention of some people who don't think these drinks are "that bad" because their just drinks. How many people have you run across here and elsewhere who are overweight but never realized that the 2 or 3 Big Gulps they were chugging down every day was a significant part of the problem? And, do you think that places like McDonald's would be offering so many "healthy" choices and tips on sensible eating and activity if it weren't for pressure from these groups?
The first thing I remember hearing about them doing is evaluating the nutritional info for an average serving of fettuccini alfredo at restaurants. They bought the dish at, I dunno, 4 to 6 restaurants, dumped them all together and had it analyzed for nutritional content, and calculated what the average serving of that would be. It was shocking. What grabbed the headlines, though, and got the story noticed was, in part, their phrase "heart attack on a plate." They did the same thing with Kung Pao chicken and movie popcorn, and other things I'm sure.
I'm ALL FOR CSPI, and I hope they keep on keepin' on.
I agree with whoever said the money spent on labeling soda would be better spent elsewhere. Everyone knows what is in it and that it is bad, if you are drinking it, it isn't because you don't know, it is because you don't care.
As for the parents with soda in a baby bottle, that is also one of my pet peeves. C'mon how stupid can you be. My ex mother-in-law used to do stuff like that. I finally told her once that if my kids were still small enough to be drinking from a bottle there shouldn't be anything in it but milk, water, or juice. Often the kids cousins would have kool-ade or soda in their bottles. That just makes me crazy!!
On the one hand, I think it's a silly thing to do. People NEED to have some responsibility for their own actions. If you (general you, of course) need a warning label to tell you that drinking gallons of Coke every day is a bad idea, well, there's something wrong with your logic skills. I liken it to the guy who tried to sue McDonalds after he ate there 3+ times a week for a year and became obese. What did he THINK was going to happen if he ate greasy fattening foods that often? I dislike McDonalds and their "food" as much as the next dieter but it's not McDonalds' fault that he overate that way, just like it's not Hersheys' fault that I had a chocolate bar in my house and pigged out on it last night. That's MY fault. It's my responsibility to make better choices than that. So on the one hand, I think it's silly.
On the other hand, too many people don't realize how bad soda is for them. I know that when I was in college, I didn't think twice about having a bottle of diet coke with breakfast, one with lunch, one between afternoon classes, and another at dinner. My roommate and I should have bought stock in diet coke for the volume of it that we had in our room and consumed every day. It was common, it was available, it was refreshing, and I didn't even think twice about it. Now, I have had one soda this week and feel guilty about it because I'm trying to quit drinking it entirely. A warning label would be a nice little shove in the right direction for me. I know how bad it is, but it'd still be helpful to have it spelled out in plain english on every single bottle as an extra deterrent.
I've seen the soda in the baby bottle phenonenon too. I can't imagine giving soda to my children (a preschooler and a toddler). They've got enough energy to run me ragged as it is, why on earth would I amp them up further with caffeine and sugar?
I remember that, as a kid in the 80's, getting a coke was mainly an "out of the house" type thing. We got them when going out to eat, ballgames, skating rinks, parties, etc, but we never had soda in our house until the 90's. And even then, it was mainly TAB for my mom. I remember being 10 years old and using allowance money to get a bag of Doritos, Slim Jims, a picante pickle, and a Coke on Friday. nowadays, kids expect at least chips to be in the cupboard and cokes in the fridge. I buy my son one Sprite, and he has to stretch it out all week. If he drinks it all, too bad. I buy chips about once a month. I'm not spending several dollars a week on sugar water.
About the possible labeling. The type of people who would put coke in a baby bottle (and boy, are they out there, I see them every day around here) are not the type of people who read warning labels to begin with. Warning labels are there to cover the butts of companies, to protect people who like to claim injury through ignorance. "I didn't know smoking was bad for me! I need a million bucks for my lung cancer." These type of people already know it's not good to feed their toddlers Funyons and Pepsi for dinner. They just don't care, is all.
Sodas might now get warning labels.
). I can see if this label thing gets passed by the FDA, if soda pop has to have a warning label - they'll be going after the candy companies next. After all, they called soda "Liquid Candy" so the next logical step would be to go after Hersheys and M&M/Mars and even Sees and Godiva with the warning labels. None of these foods are bad really, in *moderation*, and after all both soda and candy have been a part of the American tableau for well over 100 years. The difference between 1886 (when Coca-Cola was invented and first sold in Atlanta) and today is that huge leaps in manufacturing and distribution in a relatively short time period has made Coke, for example, a beverage made in small amounts and sold only at soda fountains - now we can buy it by the case lot and since we all have access to refrigeration can keep it at home and, paraphrasing Robert Woodruff (long time CEO of Coca-Cola through most of the 20th Century) 'within arm's reach of desire'. 
)
