In May 2012, the Sugary Drinks Portion Cap, or as it is more commonly known as the New York City Soda Ban, was introduced by Mayor Michael Bloomberg. The ban said that places like restaurants and movie theaters could not sell soda in cups larger than 16 ounces. The intention of the Soda Ban was to limit the amount of sugar-sweetened drinks that was consumed by people in New York and it was also an attempt to introduce a way to help find some kind of solution to the obesity problem in America. The ban itself started a lot of controversy not only in New York but across the nation. It brought more information into light about what increased sugar consumption can do or what it could potentially be doing to human health, but it also brought to attention if the government has a right to place bans on what is consumed by the people. Upon examining the specifics of the New York City Soda Ban and its intentioned goal, it has become more apparent that there is a problem with the amount of sugar being consumed by people and the only way to help alleviate this problem may be some kind of step in from the government.

The Sugary Drinks Portion Cap is an amendment to article 81 of the New York City Health Code that says that soda in cups larger than 16 ounces cannot be sold by restaurants, movie theaters, sports games, etc. that are run by the city. So places that are run by the state are unaffected by the ban like 7-eleven and other grocery stores (Neistat). That immediately causes a way to get around the ban. In an interview with MSNBC explaining the ban, former Mayor Michael Bloomberg said, “We aren’t taking away anyone’s right to do things. We are simply forcing you to understand that you have to make the conscious decision to go from one cup to another cup” (Rothman). Bloomberg wanted the goal of the ban to not be to block people from doing what they want but to make them maybe think twice about what they are consuming, and that was achieved. After the ban was proposed, many news article were published about obesity and its causes and many news and talk shows took time to look not only at the bill but also again what was causing obesity. This general buzz was exactly what Bloomberg wanted in proposing the ban.

From the National Institutes of Health under the US Department of Health and Human Services, the causes of obesity, “include diet, lack of exercise, factors in a person’s environment, and genetics” (What Causes Obesity & Overweight). This broad definition given by the US government covers all of the possible causes because the cause of obesity ranges for different people. But it is so broad also because there still is not one definite cause. Many like to point the finger at sugar. A few years ago, the United Nations came out with information that said, “There are now 30% more people who are obese than there are undernourished” (Lustig 27) and this kind of rise in obesity is contributed to the fact that, “Every country that has adopted the Western diet—one dominated by low-cost, highly processed food” (Lustig 27). The highly processed foods are ones that contain large amounts of added sugar, like soda, and “over the past 50 years, consumption of sugar has tripled worldwide” (Lustig 28). This extremely dramatic increase is because foods and drinks with so much sugar are cheap to make and in turn cheap to the public. This starts a chain reaction of people spending less on what they put into their bodies and then obesity rises because what people are putting in their body is so bad for them.

When the term “added sugar” is thrown around so much, it needs to be known that most commonly when it is said, the term is referencing high fructose corn syrup. This is the cheap to make alternative to glucose, or sugar, added to many sodas to give the sweet flavor (Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition). The additive is also being called an empty calorie, or one that, “is likely to take residence as fat around the belly and less likely to engage the appetite-control mechanisms that help put the brakes on eating” (Beil 23). This means that the food and beverage that contains high fructose corn syrup is not doing anything nutritional to the body. It is just instant satisfaction of a sweet taste that does not make the brain think they are full but actually tricks the brain into wanting more of the food, resulting in overeating. But beyond just being responsible for the added pounds from overeating, high fructose corn syrup has been linked with kidney and liver diseases (Beil 23). The liver is the first place the high fructose corn syrup goes after going through the stomach and small intestine and that is the place where it can be stored and where it becomes excessively stored. This excessive storage can increase the likelihood of high blood pressure and kidney disease (Beil 23). There are also reasonable links between glucose and diabetes, a common disease brought on by obesity. The increased levels of high fructose consumed can lead to insulin resistance as well (Beil 23). All this together does not stack up well for sugar. Being consumed in high quantities, like many people consume sugar, has shown trends that it can be very harmful to people’s health.

For every article explaining the reason for the increase in obesity is the increase in sugar consumption, every article explaining the health impacts of added sugar in foods and drinks, and every article that calls for some kind of cap on sugar, there are the ones that argue that sugar is not the culprit in this obesity problem. Many believe that a definite cause cannot be declared yet. One anti-blame-sugar article brings up the idea that, “the obesity epidemic is due to a substantial step up in caloric intake since the 1970s in populations that have become increasingly sedentary” (Morabia). The increased calorie intake is to blame according to this article. It even states that one example of decreasing empty calorie intake could be from drinking water over a soda with 250 calories (Morabia). In 2012, a feeding study was conducted where scientists found that when the same number of calories are consumed, whether they be from carbohydrates or fructose, the fructose does not behave differently from other carbs (Beil 24). One researcher pointed out that no study has been done that examines how high fructose corn syrup is consumed by people every day, and he calls for one to be done and for those results to be published (Beil 24). The fact that this kind of research has still yet to be done does take away from the argument against so much sugar, as does the fact that, “High fructose corn syrup has been in decline for 14 years now… obesity rates? They continue to climb” (Beil 24). These startling statements do call to question the entire legitimacy of the anti-sugar discussion. But the one thing that the people on this side of the argument do present that everyone agrees with, there needs to be more research done on the topic. Once more conclusive research has been done there can be some kind of solution to the problem formed and put into place.

Now while all of these kind of arguments are going on about whether or not sugar is to blame, there is another separate kind of examination going on, this one being about the sugar industry itself. As with all companies, the goal is always to make a profit whether or not what a company is putting out is detrimental or beneficial to the consumer. Some that are most well-known for not caring about the health of its customers are the alcohol and tobacco industries. For example, when a tobacco product like cigarettes first came out, no one really knew how bad they can be for health. People were living in the blind, and then the truth about how horrible cigarettes are came out. The government stepped in and now there are taxes on tobacco products as to deter people from buying those products. With the alcohol industry again the government had to step in and for a while alcohol was illegal in America, but now there are taxes on it as well to deter people from buying it. There are many cases where the sugar industry is similar to these two. Studies have been done stating that sugar has the potential for being highly addictive. One study found that, “When these nutrients [fats and sugars] are consumed in the form of binges, this can release excessive dopamine, which causes compensatory changes that are comparable to drug use” (Avena 623). This literally means that when large amounts of sugar are consumed, they can have effects on the brain and nervous system that are related to those effects with drug use. That could be abuse, addiction, changes in behavior, and destructive behavior to name a few. If sugar has this kind of potential for destructive behavior, then why is the sugar industry acting like the other industries before it? It begs the kind of questions like whether or not the consumers are being kept in the dark about how bad so much sugar can really be.

So, what can be done? The NYC Soda Ban was the first kind of sugar-sweetened ban introduced in the US. There have been initiatives started like Michelle Obama’s “Let’s Move!” in the goal of teaching kids in school about healthy eating. But tactics like “taxes, distribution controls, age limits… curbing availability” (Lustig 29) have been discussed by some experts and generally agreed upon as the most effective options. But no stark laws have been passed yet, and after the backlash of the Bloomberg’s proposed plan, the odds of some kind of law being passed in the near future is unlikely. But the backlash that came from the proposed ban is contributed to the lack of information on what sugar can do. There still is not enough information to make any kind of definite cause of obesity known and therefore no definite solution to the issue in sight. 

Upon the introduction of the Sugary Drinks Portion Cap in 2012, many people across the United States have begun to look at sugar differently. The growing obesity problem in America is something more people are paying attention to and it has brought more into light the idea of sugar being the cause of the problem. The added sugar in soda and other sweetened beverages, known as high fructose corn syrup, is known for having a different effect on the body than pure sugar. This effect is most commonly known as increasing obesity, as the trend suggests. The processed high fructose corn syrup also has the kind of capabilities to be detrimental to health beyond obesity; excessive amounts have been identified to have the same kind of effects as drug abuse. While processed sugar may not be the main cause of the rise in obesity, there is something to be said about its negative effects to our health. The New York City Soda Ban was an attempt to curb those negative effects, and while it may have failed at keeping consumers from drinking mass amounts of soda at one time, it did get people talking. Since its introduction, more research has been on the subject and the world is closer to knowing the truth about what large amounts of sugar does to the human body, but not close enough. There needs to be more research done and there needs to be some kind of end known. The different viewpoints people have about the problem will continue to get in the way and then nothing beneficial or productive will be able to be done, for example introducing bills, caps or laws like the New York City Soda Ban.
