Researchers from the University of California, San Francisco published an utterly reckless report calling for the government to regulate sugar as they do alcohol and tobacco. This study reeks of typical Food Police tactics: 1) a flawed study, 2) outrageous scare tactics, and 3) draconian government control. This isn’t the first time “experts” have compared cupcakes to cocaine.
The scientists want government to tax sugary foods, control sales to kids under 17, and ban food/beverage television commercials. And yet, according to an article in TIME magazine by Bonnie Rochman, they don’t think this is asking too much:
“We’re not talking prohibition,” Schmidt said. “We’re not advocating a major imposition of the government into people’s lives. We’re talking about gentle ways to make sugar consumption slightly less convenient, thereby moving people away from the concentrated dose. What we want is to actually increase people’s choices by making foods that aren’t loaded with sugar comparatively easier and cheaper to get.”
Who are they trying to fool?
The notion that government will wean Americans off of sugar is absurd, but the First Lady Michelle Obama, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, and others have parroted this strategy for sugar (and salt). In September 2011, CNSnews.com reported Secretary Vilsack said:
“You know, as we deal with this issue of reducing sodium and sugar, it sounds simple to do, but you all know better than I do, it’s not as simple as it sounds. It’s going to take time for people’s taste to adjust and they will adjust over time, but it will take some time. So, we have to make sure that what we do is create the appropriate transition.”
Any attempt by government to regulate, tax, or ban specific food products is an assault on food freedom. The problem is not Americans’ love of sweet and savory, but the Food Police’s addiction to the nanny state.
Tell us what you think. Do you believe government should ignore or implement the researchers’ recommendations? Share your comments on Facebook.