In a previous post, I criticized coverage of New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's plan to ban the sale of sugared sodas larger than 16 ounces. None of the stories that I saw told me whether this was likely to work. Surely, I thought, somebody has done research on this; most coverage dealt with whether it was appropriate for the government to meddle with food choices.
This morning, The New York Times has a front-page story by Winnie Hu discussing Bloomberg's efforts to promote the plan. It makes a minor nod to research by asking Kelly Brownell, the director of the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale University and a prominent obesity researcher, what he thinks of the policy. He said making the environment healthier was a better approach than educating people about obesity, and that the Bloomberg plan was "a necessary step" toward curbing obesity. Alas, we get nothing about whether there is data to back up those claims, or whether those assertions are Brownell's educated opinions, or guesses.
If this policy doesn't work, we're expending a lot of time and hot air for nothing. If it works, maybe, on balance, a little more government intrusion is tolerable.
If we don't know whether it works, our opinions are no more durable than the bubbles in a supersized Coke.
- Paul Raeburn


Comments
Thanks, Mary. I haven't been tracking this too closely, but I still haven't seen a story that looks at research such as that you've linked to.
Sorry -- Hu is the writer!
The writer should've talked to Brian Wansink at Cornell. He's done all kinds of research into portion size and other stuff (like Hu's comment). Check him out -- this one's on popcorn portions. http://foodpsychology.cornell.edu/research/summary-popcorn.html Of course, we have to make the assumption that over-eating contributes to obesity.
Pascal,
I wasn't questioning the relationship between annual soda consumption and obesity.*
I was questioning the relationship between large-size sodas and obesity. If we even had research relating total soda consumption to the portion size preferred by the consumer, that'd be something.
* Though I would go out on a limb and suggest that calories are calories.
Stephen--Exactly on point. We could do all kinds of things that seem to make sense, even highly intrusive things, but we'd be wiser to study them first.
Pascal--Thanks for the links. I'm curious about the research, but, more than that, I'm puzzled by why so many stories failed to do any reporting on it.
I'm not sure if it is the kind of research you're looking for, but, in the last few years, there have been a few, looking like this one:
Bubbling Over: Soda Consumption and Its Link to Obesity in California
http://healthpolicy.ucla.edu/pubs/Publication.aspx?pubID=375
This one is more economic-centered:
The Public Health and Economic Benefits of Taxing Sugar-Sweetened Beverages
http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMhpr0905723
I would suggest you look at the references. I am not sure exactly what you are looking for, but it seems you will surely find food for thought.
I have a feeling that such initiatives are based on "Supersize Me," or the memes it promulgated, not on research. And given the failure of artificially sweetened drinks to curb obesity, it's hard to see why this would work.
Now if a school system banned all food dispensers, only served fresh juice and light meals in the lunchroom, confiscated all food brought to school and locked students in the school from 8:00 to 3:00...