Soda-size cap is a public health issue
Nutrition and public policy expert Marion Nestle answers readers' questions in this column written exclusively for The Chronicle.
What troubles me about the freedom-to-choose, nanny-state argument is that it deflects attention from the real issue: the ferocious efforts of the soda industry to protect sales of its products at any monetary or social cost.
To confuse the public about corporate profits as a motive, the beverage association enlisted two distinguished civil rights groups - the NAACP and the Hispanic Federation - to file an amicus brief on behalf of its lawsuit.
Never mind that the obesity rate for the communities these groups represent is considerably higher than average in New York City, and that these neighborhoods would benefit most from the soda cap.
Financial arrangements between soda companies and ostensibly independent groups demand scrutiny.
Last fall, the East Bay Express exposed how the soda industry exploited race issues to divide the electorate and defeat the Measure N soda tax initiative in Richmond.
Public health measures are about alleviating health disparities and giving everyone equal access to healthy diets and lifestyles.
In funding this lawsuit, the soda industry has made it clear that it will go to any length to protect its profits, even if it means discrediting the groups that would most benefit from this rather benign public health initiative.