Skip to content
My WebMD Sign In, Sign Up
Regulate Sugar Like Alcohol: Yes or No?
avatar
Olivia_WebMD_Staff posted:
Researchers from the University of California, San Francisco, say that excess sugar is so bad for us that it should be regulated like alcohol or tobacco here in the U. S.

Check out the story and give us your opinion.
Reply
 
avatar
jenna291 replied to 1dazygal's response:
Foolish that its even coming up - any excuse to raise food prices.
Eating sugar is a CHOICE. This is a foolish debate.
 
avatar
rachael67 responded:
Of course we should regulate it!!

And tomorrow the government should step in and regulate the the number of books we own...

The following day they should choose our clothes...

After that we should have laws which decide which foot we should step on first each day!

After a month or so of all these regulations I will open a company which will sell posters condemning the intrusion of government in our lives!!! I'll sell stocks, and we can all share the wealth!!
 
avatar
sadblossom responded:
A BIG absolutely NOT! This is rediculous!
This should be a given right decision.

What now...........are they going to tell us how much bread we are allowed, after all it does contain YEAST as does Beer.

Give the American people a break.

Totally outrageous!!! Angers me as well!

Pat~sadblossom
 
avatar
Anon_55224 responded:
I think the government should

1) Eliminate corn subsidies, so that the price of corn syrup skyrockets.

2) Tax beverages with added sugar at a rate of 100%.

The money saved/raised could be used to extend healthcare to all Americans, which according to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (which America helped draft and pass in 1948), is a basic human right.

Check out some of our other rights:
Article 23.
  • (1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
  • (3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
Article 24.
  • Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.


[a name="a25" id="a25"> Article 25.
  • (1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
  • (2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.
 
avatar
lazydazey responded:
NO! We have enough regulations and enough taxes! The way our government is going before long they will try to tax us on the air we breathe!
 
avatar
Anon_160335 responded:
No in my opinion.
 
avatar
bob249 responded:
It depends on the regulation.

Like many previous posters, if I had to show ID to buy a package of sugar, then I am clearly against it.

On the other hand, if food processors, especially cereal makers, were required to reduce the amount of sugar and sugar substitutes in their products, that would be worthwhile.
(Just try to find a cereal without sugar added. I mostly choose bite-sized shredded wheat.)

And, every once in a while government regulation gets it right.
E.G., when was the last time you had to replace an exhaust system?

That came about as a result of government regulation. For the benefit of younger readers, prior to the mid-1970's, exhaust systems had to be replaced about every three years.
Car manufacturers wouldn't do that until required because it adds a few hundred dollars to the cost of a vehicle.
 
avatar
katmandulou responded:
NO!

I'm allergic to most artificial sweeteners, and why should I pay a tax for REAL sweeteners? Artificial means chemical, and we surely don't need that!!

I equate this to the government saying they're going to tax anything without peanuts. So many people are allergic to peanuts, why should they have to pay more for something they can eat safely?Lou
 
avatar
honorstar responded:
Absolutely NOT!
How about instead "Stop Sugar", "Stop all the chemicals in Sugar" and all food, that makes people addicted to it?
 
avatar
brunosbud replied to Rod_Moser_PA_PhD's response:
Agreed. In fact, I'll go one step further...

We need to apply electric shock, not regulate!
 
avatar
Lindyinda responded:
No! It would be just more Government controling our lives. One more step in takeing freedom away. No Thanks.
 
avatar
hootyowl2 responded:
It wont work. Look at all the candy factories and what-not with people loosing their jobs, etc...

I once read in Reader's Digest years ago --prob back in the 80s-- that daylight savings time was invented for candy factories to make more money at Halloween. I guess there were other supporters.

At any rate, it appears any idiot can get hired at those useless think tanks.

I have diabetes, but I still would not support such a stupid law. If I do not have the good sense to limit my intake of not such healthy foods, it is my fault, not someone else's and I do not need the govt telling me what to do.

Hooty
 
avatar
Anon_320 replied to hootyowl2's response:
Daylight savings time was first proposed in the 1890s, when there were few, if any, candy factories, and years before kids ever trick-or-treated. It was implemented in the US in 1918, but earlier in other countries. There were various reasons for DST, including saving fuel, but helping candy factories for Halloween wasn't one of them.

Anyway, I'm with you about regulating sugar. It's a ridiculous notion.


WebMD Talk Show

Feel like a friendly debate? Take the gloves off and defend your viewpoint.

Learn More

Related News

There was an error with this newsfeed

Expert Blog

Diagnosis: Reality Check

Putting perspective on health news and names in the spotlight.Read More