Soda Jerks

Hey, how about a war on carbonated soft drinks? You know, for, like, the children?

Last week, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, at the insistence of the legislature, bravely terminated the sale of sodas in California's schools.

Never mind that studies like this one find no meaningful correlation between soda consumption and childhood obesity.

Here's another one, published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal, hot off the press. The researchers conclude:

Of all children, 15.3% attended schools where soft drinks were sold. These children drank an average of 4.0 cans of soda pop per week compared with 3.6 cans drunk by children attending schools without such sales. Children from schools with and without sales of soft drinks consumed an average of 33.5 and 32.5 g of sucrose per day respectively. Availability of soft drinks at schools was not associated with significantly increased risks of overweight.

Oh, good. The Spurlock crowd had me worried there for a second.

(Nanny, shouting in the background: "Alarming! Unacceptable! Think of the children!")

How bad is a gram of sucrose? The Center for Consumer Freedom points out that it amounts to four calories a day, or the equivalent of two peanuts.

(Nanny: "Outrageous! More laws! Down with Big Sugar!")

But, if California politicians are hellbent on teaching those damn sugarpushers a lesson, why did the bill also ban diet sodas from schools — drinks that don't contain a single calorie?

(Nanny: "Coca-Cola is evil! Let's pass a new law! Free V-8 juice for kids! And tofu! More tofu!")

And so it goes.

      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

UPDATE: I just put up a corollary to this post over at the Agitator. Read it there, then click back here to add your two cents to the debate.

Comments

[Garth]

While I agree with your general point, I think that there are some other considerations that might be taken into account. The first is that there is really no compelling reason to sell anything like this in the schools. Presumably there are water fountains to take care of thirst and a lunch period to take care of starvation. And for those who for health reasons are snackers (diabetics) they can always bring their own. Growing up we never had vending machines in the school.

A second reason might very well be that while a soft drink here or there is not life threatening in any way, they certainly are not good for you and perhaps the school should refrain from making them seem acceptable as a sort of lesson. Americans are getting fatter and it is from eating too much and exercising too little – drinking empty calories is a nice habit not to have.

Or do you also think that they should put cigarette machines in schools and if not, why?

A third is the mess. Kids spill. Kids litter. Vending machine fare comes with a certain amount of a risk of this. For this reason many schools in my day tried to stamp out gum: it ended up under the seats. I understand that in the Netherlands littering is not an accepted social norm. Take a look around this country and you will see that we have a slightly different standard.

As to diet soft drinks, they certainly pose the littering problem and the jury remains out on whether stuff like aspartame is actually totally safe. Certainly drinking those over water is not the greatest choice one could make.

So while I agree that the nannies are foolish to focus on the health risks (egad! The Horror!), there remains no legitimate compelling reason to offer soft drinks in schools.

[Evan Williams]

"Let's pass a new law! Free V-8 juice for kids! And tofu! More tofu!"

V-8 is incredibly high in sodium. Tofu is made from soy, whose isoflavones can adversely affect the testosterone balance in males if consumed at certain levels.

Garth,

"there remains no legitimate compelling reason to offer soft drinks in schools."

Well, no legitimate reason under your subjective standards, of course...that standard being: does it create a chance for littering? does it pose a problem of messiness? is it vitally unnecessary for physical subsistence?

Unfortunately, there are a great many things that do not meet those standards, but are around for other reasons. By your logic, they should just offer water and a carefully measured protein-amino-carbohydrate-fat mixture in the form of gruel. After all, that's all they "need", right?

[Nick]

I know what it's like... my current client company is involved in their own vending machine tyranny, and it's starting to get on my nerves.

http://schweitn.blogspot.com/2005/09/vending-machine-oppression.html

[Garth]

Hi Evan! Good to see you in print in an Agitator-related forum again. Let's get the whole gang over here for a back and forth from time to time!

To answer your rebuttle first I will say "yes" but then let me add the following: I have no problem with there being vending machines in schools I was merely positing other reasons why the schools might consider limiting or removing them. Personally I have no problem with there being all kinds of products on offer at the schools just so long as the schools get just compensation for hosting those and they do not interfere with the educational mandate that my taxes are paying for.

Soif McDonald's wanted to put a small franchise in every public school and paid a nice rent, I really would have no problem with that. The problem we as a society might have with that is that parents might have a different opinion such as not wanting their kid access to McFries at any time of the day. Since teachers are no longer permitted to police other people's children (a HUGE failure of society IMHO) parents might reasonably insist that schools not have Micky-Ds on school grounds or at least have some means of monitoring which kids have access to the establishment's food.

Ah yes, I am assuming that kids do not honor parental wishes when out of sight: another huge failing of our society these days--parents as friends first and parents second.

The same can be said of vending machines. Could it be possible that the elected officials are reacting to what they believe their constituents want them to and if so then are they not doing their jobs?

Of course, as a minarchist, I think they should not have this in their job description I just think that under the status quo this is what we should expect.

[Nick]

Thanks for The Agitator link... but I actually don't represent a vending machine company. I think you made that mistake because I talked about "my client". I'm actually a consultant, and was refering to the vending machines at my current client (as opposed to the consulting company I work for). Neither company I work for are vending machine companies.

Thanks

[Martin Owens]

This nonsense has already been tried on the local level. My son's high school in Sacramento banned wicked soft drinks and evil candy last year.

Result? Within 48 hours a junk food underground had been established. In backpacks, in jackets, in car trunks,in kid brother's little red wagon, chips and soda and candy bars continued to arrive on campus. Even more predictably, the snack consumption rate per capita went up. Nothing tastes as zesty as forbidden fruit, even if artificially flavored. Bold entrepreneurs made a tidy profit, reselling at 300% or higher. Business at nearby fast food joints boomed.

At the end of six months the consumption of snacks at the school was as high or higher than it had been before. The student council was broke, because it had depended on the snack machines for the money to back the homecoming dances and so forth. No one in the administration remembered to allot them a new source of funds ( the school authorities were all busy on a yet another state-decreed reorganization, supposedly to motivate the kids who don't give a damn and drop out anyway).

The machines were quietly restored. So now, they're banned again? Time for the free market to return....

[Ben]

This whole vending machine madness has been going on for years. As I am only in my mid twenties, I remember when I was in High School and the soda machines were not in service during school hours. 15 minutes before first period until 5 minutes after the end of 7th the soda machine would not relinquish it's liquid goodness.

The thing that I don't understand is that most school's use their vending machines to raise money for student groups and activities. I am sure that once the Dr. Peppers are replaced with bottled water, the kids are going to hang on to their $1.25 since you can get water a drinking fountain if you want it for free. The health nuts have good intentions at heart, but they are going about it all wrong. I say start with those damn school lunches--who remembers Pizza day with those grease soaked squares of government cheese on cardboard?

[Rogier]

Garth:

My apologies for the mistake. That was dumb of me. I'm fixing it right away.

Rogier

[Kevin O'Reilly]

Here's a solution: get rid of vending machines *and* school lunches. The kids eat whatever they bring from home or the outside.

[Dan]

Doesn't anyone think of the teachers? All I know is when my little buggers get their hands of soda, it's like gasoline on a fire. So perhaps instead of removing soda, they should just have decafinated drinks (yuk). Ya know, being that all of our children have ADD or subtract or some mental disturbance anyway we should remove all stimulants. For that matter, I think we should put thorazine in their morning coffee. I know it helps me...

[wade]

kids go ape on coke and sunny d. fact.

[Dudley Steademan]

I think they should be allowed because of the simple fact that overweight students can choose what to buy from the vending machines provided in the school. The overweight students in my school choose to eat crap food from our vending machines. Students that are in shape or not overweight play sports and participate in PE. Most overweight student don't participate in sports, after school activities, or PE. When the energy taken in is greater than the energy expended, a person gains weight.

Culver High School Student
- Dudley A. Steademan