Mommy Florida to Say “Don’t Eat that, Dear”
The State of Florida may be the latest jurisdiction to tell its residents “don’t eat that fatty food! Shame!”
OK, I don’t expect an employee of the public health department to come by your table at the Cheesecake Factory, but some legislators do want to require restaurants to post the number of calories of each dish on the menu.
The American Red Cross favors the bill, though a spokesman says if you “want fries with that” every so often, that’s your choice. But then again, how often is too often? Call me paranoid, but I’d say that information-disclosure requirements are the first step in a series of steps that end up in a prohibition.
As long as government continues to pay for half of our medical spending (and has a substantial say in nearly all the rest of it), we’ll continue to see the mommy state in action.
Busybodies R Us
The American Academy of Pediatrics wants someone (the USDA, perhaps?) to redesign that classic American food, the hot dog. Why? Because some children choke on hot dogs, and a few–an undetermined number, perhaps a dozen a year–even die as a result. The author of the statements says, “If you were to take the best engineers in the world and try to design the perfect plug for a child’s airway, it would be a hot dog.” He went on to say, “”No parents can watch all of their kids 100% of the time. The best way to protect kids is to design these risks out of existence.”
But as a friend of mine put it, “Here’s your choke-proof hot dog: Take smaller bites!” And if you’re a parent, cut those killer hot dogs up into smaller pieces. That’s what we do in my house and it’s not that difficult.
If a company wants to come out with a “safe” hot dog, have at it. But we don’t need the food police to require a redesign.
Mississippi Raises Prices of Your Sudafed
From the Clarion-Ledger: “Gov. Haley Barbour has signed House Bill 512, making any medicine that contains pseudoephedrine — a key ingredient in methamphetamine — a controlled substance as of July 1.”
That in turn will mean that if you have a routine, it-comes-every-year, easily addressable condition popularly known as “hay fever,” you’ll have to pony up for a visit to your doctor.
One judge quoted in the article blithely waved off the extra cost, which he cited as a $20 copay.
And a box of Sudafed otherwise costs, what, $10?
Expect More Tantrums in Colorado
The Colorado Senate has approved a tax on soda pop and candy. I’m guessing that part of the appeal is that it can be sold as an anti-obesity move, and work its way through to lower insurance costs for everyone.
My favorite response to this came from the daughter of Jon Caldara. She said, and I’m paraphrasing since I can’t find the specific quote: “If they raise taxes on candy, it will be more expensive. Parents will buy less candy, which means that children will have to throw more tantrums.”
That child has a bright future as an economist.
The Childhood Obesity Campaign
First lady Michelle Obama launched her “Let’s Move” campaign, aimed at eradicating childhood obesity. Before the she made her announcement, attendees heard speeches from the president of the American Academy of Pediatrics, an urban farmer, two mayors, and a student.
The urban farmer seemed out of place, because he made little effort to connect his locavore ideology to the problem of childhood weight gain. Of course, children will be healthier if they eat lots of fruits and vegetables, but there’s no reason those fruits and vegetables have to be grown in their cities instead of, say, shipped in from a field in California. The farmer railed against buying food from foreign countries — which, again, is no reason to avoid food from California, even if you accept his protectionist premise. Then he concluded with a few more off-topic pronouncements, including, “When farmers are in business, schools are out,” which sounds to me like an argument against relying on local food for children’s nutrition, and a recommendation that cities grow food in vacant buildings. (Not vacant lots, vacant buildings.)
The mayor of Hernando, Miss., offered more relevant comments, although he too gave the obligatory nods to farmers’ markets and urban gardens. He had a lot of ideas about things cities can do to invite physical activity, such as repairing sidewalks and building playgrounds. The mayor’s emphasis on local policies rather than federal mandates was refreshing. (You see, I have local biases of my own.) And I appreciated it when he said that government should not tell people to be healthy because “that’s a private decision.”
The mayor of Somerville, Mass., advocated a more invasive approach for government. His “Shape Up” campaign goes so far as to place a public stamp of approval on certain menu items at restaurants. Even more troubling is the mayor’s declaration, “The healthy choice must be the easy choice.” This recalls the attitude expressed by a student in Clayton when she spoke in support of the proposed smoking ban: If a choice is good, the city should ensure that it is also easy and fun. In other words, you shouldn’t have to make any sacrifices or be at all inconvenienced when you do the right thing — not if the government can help it. Take that way of thinking just a tiny step further, and the government will be making your choices for you.
While most of the speakers had creative plans for cities and schools, none of them explained why the federal government should play a role or why change couldn’t come from the ground up. The first lady emphasized that her campaign won’t try to impose Washington’s vision on everyone, but it’s hard to believe that when she says she’d like to turn convenience stores into produce markets.
Missouri House Holds Anti-pseudofed Hearing
Got hay fever? The state of Missouri might make your life a little more difficult, as a House committee (odd for the Kansas City start omit which one) recently held hearings on the idea of making some allergy meds that were openly sold as over-the-counter products not that long ago available by prescription only. These medications contain pseudoephedrine, which is used in the production of meth.
Law enforcement officials already got restrictions–patients now have to submit their names to a state database–but now they want to double down. Said one cop, “Every year we have enacted half-measures and partial measures.”Hey, I suppose if you’re tired of half-measures you could simply ban Sudafed and all similar products. How’s that war on drugs working out for you anyway? Gasoline is used in molotov cocktails, which, like meth, are destructive. Maybe we should make people who want to buy gas first get the approval of an auto mechanic?
The point is, any product can be used to harm someone. Law enforcement officials want to do their job, naturally. But they don’t, and shouldn’t, get their way every time. (On a related note, we could solve a lot of crimes if we suspend the Bill of Rights, but we don’t.) The needs of patients with legitimate health concerns ought to weigh in as well. Given the number of people with seasonal allergies, I say, “Free my Sudafed!”
Pseudofed Madness!
The “war on drugs” may soon claim more casualties. Utah is considering legislation to ratchet up the state’s “monitoring” of drug prescriptions in real time. The idea is to detect “doctor shopping” in the pursuit of painkillers. Granted, people who resort to doctor shopping are screwing up their lives. Then again, you’ve got to ask at what point is it appropriate for a unit of government to monitor self-destructive behavior. If I’m not mistaken, alcohol abuse takes a greater toll than abuse of prescription painkillers. Should the state compile a real-time database that tallies every time I buy a six-pack? Sedentary lifestyles are deadly, too. Perhaps the Department of Healthy Living should require all sofas to send out an electronic notification should the same butt occupy a given cushion for for a proscribed amount of time?
Note also that the author of the legislation cites, in support of his agenda, that fact some people have robbed pharmacies, only to retrieve prescription drugs. Not sure how an enhanced database would have solved that problem!
In Mississippi, Gov. Haley Barbour is pushing legislation that would force people who have season allergies to get a doctor’s slip before buying what used to be over-the-counter medications. That’s going to prolong the suffering of some people with allergies, and increase health care spending.The governor said, “I think this is a small price to pay in order to cut out methamphetamine traffic in Mississippi.” Ah yes, the “if it saves one life” excuse used to justify a range of new laws.
In Ohio, the sheriff’s association wants to tell doctors and other medical professionals who prescribe medicine how to do their job. The sheriffs want to require doctors “to consult the statewide database before prescribing narcotics for patients complaining of chronic pain.” An official with the state’s medical society, not surprisingly, says it would impose an “administrative burden on the Ohio physicians.”
Meanwhile, Maryland will consider legislation to allow medical marijuana. Though the law would be more restrictive than many of the laws in the 14 states that do allow for legal pot, it’s a positive step in the direction of self-government.
I suppose some day it might be easier to buy marijuana than Sudafed, given the history of meth vis-a-vis maryjane!
Government Bings on Anti-obesity Campaign
Many Americans have made a resolution to lose weight in the new year. That’s admirable. What’s not so admirable is the recent barrage of efforts advanced by government officials to “help” them slim down by taxing or even outlawing foods deemed unhealthy.
San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom attracted national attention in late 2009 with his proposal for a tax on sugary beverages. It was his second attempt to levy a soda tax to fight obesity. Other big cities have mounted similar efforts. Most recently, New York City public health officials generated nationwide disgust with their graphic advertisements of a man guzzling liquefied fat as part of their anti-soda campaign.
Government efforts like these may be well-intentioned, but they’ve done nothing to curb the rise of obesity in this country.
Consider the drive for more comprehensive menu labeling at fast-food restaurants. Many officials claim that Americans would make different choices if they knew the caloric truth about their food.
But people already have plenty of information about what’s on their plate.
Chain restaurants have made nutritional information available for years — on Web sites, napkins, placemats, posters and even menus. And since 1994, all packaged food sold in the United States has been clearly labeled with nutritional information.
Despite all that information, Americans are fatter than ever. Between 1995 and 2007, the percentage of obese Americans increased by two-thirds.
This isn’t surprising. Most of us know that a salad is healthier than a bacon cheeseburger.
Even if activists were able to discourage the consumption of certain foods and drinks through bans and taxes, it’s not clear that obesity rates would change.
Take soda taxes. The only two states that levy a specific tax on soda — West Virginia and Arkansas — have among the highest obesity rates in the country.
It’s no secret that Americans are gaining weight. But it’s not clear that we’re getting quite as fat as government busybodies are telling us.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention use the Body Mass Index to determine obesity rates. BMI is essentially the ratio of a person’s weight to their height. A score between 18.5 and 25 is considered healthy. Anything between 25 and 30 is overweight, and a score of more than 30 labels a person obese. Using this formula, the CDC claims that two-thirds of American adults are overweight while one-third are obese.
But the BMI is a notoriously inexact tool. Indeed, a decade ago the government arbitrarily slid the number for a healthy BMI down from 27 to 25.
Overnight, more than 25 million Americans went from being healthy to “overweight.”
The BMI also doesn’t differentiate between mass from muscle and mass from fat. So a gym rat in perfect shape can still qualify as “unhealthy” because of his bulging biceps. In fact, the reigning MVPs in professional hockey, basketball, baseball and football are all “overweight,” according to the BMI. Many professional football players are obese!
The primary culprit for the country’s weight gain has been an epidemic of physical inactivity. Fully 60 percent of Americans don’t regularly exercise, according to the CDC. A quarter of folks aren’t active at all.
Americans’ love affair with electronics is largely to blame. According to a study from A.C. Nielsen, the average American spends a whopping 60 days a year in front of the television. The same study found that the average amount of time Americans spent playing video games went up 25 percent in the past four years.
Taxing or banning tasty foods won’t make us thinner — it will just deprive us of yet another small pleasure. Perhaps we can all resolve to keep nosy government officials away from the dinner table in the new year.
Fat Citizens, or Fat Government?
This next item comes from the “Friday Facts” publication of the Georgia Public Policy Foundation:
Last July the Congressional Budget Office estimated that a federal three-cent-per-12-ounce soft drink tax would generate $24 billion over the next four years. Proponents argue that it reduce obesity rates in America and use the revenue on child nutrition and obesity prevention programs. That way, the thinking goes, even if people still drink soda the tax will help the fight against fat. “But governments don’t always spend sin tax money the way they promise,” Veronique de Rugy points out in Reason magazine. “Americans may be fat, but the federal budget is morbidly obese; our hunger for chips and soda is nothing compared to the feds’ hunger for our money. If I had to choose between putting the average citizen or the government on a diet, I know which would be better for our fiscal health.”
The Strange Politics of Drug Prohibition
When government gets in the business of regulating what goes into your body and who can give you treatment, health becomes political.
And when health becomes political, strange things happen. Witness two stories from Michigan:
| Marc Kilmer Maryland Public Policy Institute View Posts |  |
| Beverly Gossage Show-Me Institute View Posts |  |
| Sally Pipes Pacific Research Institute View Posts |  |
| Donald R May Surgeon View Posts |  |
| Joseph D. Coletti John Locke Foundation View Posts |  |
| John LaPlante The Prometheus Institute View Posts |  |
| Peter Nelson Center of the American Experiment View Posts |  |
| Grace-Marie Turner Galen Institute View Posts |  |
| Nathan Benefield Commonwealth Foundation View Posts |  |
Posts on Innovation
