Berkeley will be first in the nation to ban candy, soda at checkout aisles https://t.co/5Q2QuR9Wlv
— Berkeleyside (@berkeleyside) September 23, 2020
The federal government had a responsibility to regulate the food industry, and they refused to do it.
Now we have hilarious rates of obesity in this country.
That problem isn’t going to be solved by banning junk food in the checkout aisle.
Many Americans can relate to the tempting, passing glances at the colorful assortment of confections while waiting in line at the grocery store. But one city in Northern California is making a move to help people resist the unhealthy urges at checkout in favor of healthier options.
The Berkeley City Council unanimously approved a Healthy Checkout Ordinance at its meeting on Tuesday that will be reviewed next month.
The recommendation, presented by council members Kate Harrison and Sophie Hahn who co-authored the ordinance, would require stores over 2,500-square feet to “sell more nutritious food and beverage options in their checkout areas.”
“We’re not saying you can’t have these goods. We’re just saying they’re not going to be right at the eye level of your children when they walk into the store and you’re waiting in that long line at check out,” Harrison said, according to ABC News San Francisco station KGO.
The city is well known for its ties to the Slow Food movement — a global nonprofit that seeks to create better food systems and help communities change the world through their relationship with clean, healthy foods. Shoppers would see the change at local stores like Safeway, CVS, Berkeley Bowl, Trader Joes and Whole Foods.
The ordinance would be adopted officially after its second reading at the City Council meeting on Oct. 13. It won’t go into effect until March 1 and enforcement won’t begin until Jan. 1, 2022.
“Today’s food landscape plays a large role in determining what people purchase and consume,” the the ordinance stated. “Cheap, ready-to-eat foods high in salt, saturated fat, and added sugars dominate checkout aisles, where shoppers are more likely to make impulse purchases and where parents struggle with their children over demands to buy treats at the end of a shopping trip.”
If they want to ban them, then why not just ban them?
What is the point of this weak, half-assed measure?
At the very least, states could start applying the restrictions that are on tobacco products to products with HFCS and trans-fats. I don’t know why you’re not allowed to buy vape juice until you’re 18 but you’re allowed to buy soda pop and potato chips. No one on earth can argue that the latter is safer than the former.
This is just more nanny bullshit, frankly. This is like when New York banned super-sized soda and the government was openly telling people to just buy two sodas.
This shouldn’t be a behavior modification program. It is a public health crisis and should be dealt with as a public health crisis. The federal government has refused to ban these products, so it makes sense that state and city governments would start banning them.
Moving them around in the store is just a way to harass and annoy fat people without actually reducing their fatness.
We know that certain very specific foods are causing the obesity problem. There is no confusion here. If we had real food on the shelves in stores, 98% of the people who are currently obese would not be, because it is virtually impossible to become obese by eating real foods. Certainly, it is impossible for a person under the age of 40 to become obese eating real foods.
Historically, before these new processed products were invented, there were fat people but they were all old.
The government hides behind nonsense about how this is a free country when asked why these foods are legal. But this is just a lie. When the lobbyists want to take away freedoms, they come up with some reason as to why it isn’t actually a freedom. And just in general, even before the coronavirus hoax, it was totally ridiculous for the United States to be claiming to be a free country.
Moreover: the government does and has banned certain products because they are unhealthy and dangerous. Right now, the government is regulating vape products under the claim that it is a matter of public health, and again: there is no single possible reality in which vape is less healthy than ultra-processed food.
It is not an issue of freedom. The government pulls out this “freedom” bullshit only selectively, and never when it applies to real freedoms that are actually enumerated in the Constitution. They have already taken our freedom of speech (First Amendment), and they are constantly saying they are going to take our guns (Second Amendment), and yet we have the freedom to poison ourselves – just like we have the freedom to have gay anal sex, and women have the freedom to divorce their husband, ruin his life, ruin their children’s lives.
Here’s a few freedoms you don’t have, beyond the obvious:
- You don’t have the freedom to buy food and know it won’t contain known toxins
- You don’t have the freedom to protect your children from being exposed to homosexuality
- You don’t have the freedom to get married and have a stable family that you can count on being there through sickness and in health, despite the fact that the bitch signed a contract
I would be happy with putting an 18+ restriction on unhealthy foods. That would go a long way towards reducing consumption, and it would also require places like McDonald’s and other fast food outlets to begin using healthier products. McDonald’s isn’t going to start checking IDs in the drive-thru, so they will just pay extra to provide you with healthier food, and the market can decide if that means they have to raise the price.
What is the point of having a government at all if they cannot ensure the safety of the food supply?