Warning labels

On my way to work yesterday, I heard a news report talking about a group trying to put warning labels on pop cans. They want them to say something like, "Sugar-based beverages have been found to cause obesity." The spokesperson for the group cited teenage obesity as the reason for such a label.

Okay, I take issue with this on two counts. First, this is stupid. What moron can't read the back of a can of pop and see "Calories: 150" clearly labeled? Not only this, but everyone of our dear teenage children go through or have been through The Presidential Fitness program or whatever they call it. Part of this PE curriculum is to explain that, in general, the average person needs about 1200 to 2500 calories per day, depending on size and how active the person is. It really doesn't take a math genius to realize that drinking 10 cans a pop a day will make you obese. The spokesperson on the radio finished by stating, "It's liquid candy!" Um. Duh.

Second, it's disingenuous. Do these people really think this is going to change anyone's mind or affect anyone? We've had labels on cigarettes for decades and I still see people my age smoking. In fact, among college students, smoking is still very popular. The problem is that folks my age and younger have an invincibility complex that is kind of part of being this age. Long-term consequences aren't on the radar screen of most young people, it's just a fact. Telling someone that drinking pop causes obesity is likely to be met with blank stares.

No, either these people are turning a blind and deaf ear to 30 years of cigarette labels that had little effect or they have another agenda. Given that humans will do what is in their own best self-interest far more often than not, I find it easier to believe in an agenda. What's the agenda? What can they stand to gain? Well, 10-to-1, this organization is filled with and backed by lawyers. If you can get the government to establish that something is a health-risk and that "Big-Soda" was trying to cover that up by not placing such a label out on its own, they have a basis by which to sue "Big-Soda" and earn buku-gobs of money in settlements and fees. This is the exact tactic that was used to get Big-Tobacco and the lawyers are moving on because that cash-cow is starting to look a little lean.

Thus, I see this tactic as just being a way to make people think these people are good people while giving these same people a lever to make profit off of an otherwise legal business. People with this idea aren't high-minded, they're tax collectors, they've just found a way for the private citizen to collect the tax (and without any voter representation being present). Disgusting. Period.