When one sits down at a restaurant, the first thing the server asks is, “what can I get to drink for you today?” The answer is almost always the same response: a glass of soda or to generalize, some type of sugary drink. Now this is not always the case but to some extent, this is the norm in our society. Many Americans rely solely on the use of sugary drinks as a daily refreshment during their day. Little do they know, this can extenuate major health issues due to the amount they are consuming. With that being said, sugary drinks are an increasing problem in today’s society due to the unwanted side effects that people are experiencing later on in life. As stated by Walter Willet, a professor of epidemiology and nutrition, “soda in large amounts is metabolically toxic” (Gross). This topic has been addressed and talked about throughout the years but unfortunately has fell through each time. Sugary drinks need to be limited in size to reduce the amount of harmful side effects in today’s population. 

Sugary drinks can fall under many different drink varieties in today’s industry. When thinking of sugary drinks, soda usually comes to mind. That in fact though is only the start of these unhealthy drinks. A sugary drink is defined as, “drinks that contain food energy or kilojoules, but with few or no health promoting nutrients, such as vitamins and minerals, and as such are energy dense and nutrient poor” (Miaobing and O’Leary). These drinks as stated above are not healthy and have no nutritional value to the body, so why drink them? To make it clear, some of the drinks that fall under this category include soft drinks, sport and energy drinks, cordials, fruit drinks, and vitamin waters. Each one of these, (12 ounce can) contain about 9-10 teaspoons of sugar and at least 150 calories (Miaobing and O’Leary). That amount of sugar is an excessive amount for the daily intake on one’s body.

In regards to calories, experts say we should have a total of 1750 to 2100 per day. When broken up into gender, women are supposed to have 100 calories of sugar and men with 150. It is important to address that these sugars are supposed to come from nutritious foods, such as fruits. The sugars that are being ingested should not be direct but rather come from a healthy diet. When looking at liquid sugars, a single can/bottle can have 150 calories or more, not to mention it not meeting the standards of “a nutritious sugar” (Bosworth). That already exceeds the recommended daily intake. Drinking these sugary drinks violates the needed daily intake of nutritional substances and is ultimately junk calories.  

The biggest deal breaker with this topic is that is can substantially lower the obesity problem in today’s society. About 33% of the population consume more than 400 calories per day, with some over 1,000 calories per day solely in sugary drinks (Bosworth). The beverage industry makes a point that sweet drinks only take up about 7% of the calories and argues that it is ultimately a small portion of the calories in one’s diet (Grynbaum 20). This statement is in fact false due to the statistics above, making it take up almost 50% of some’s individual diets. This is an extremely high number for the body to ingest. It is said that 7.5% of the American population drink a large soda when at a restaurant; when looking at the age range of 12 to 44, 11% of that population consume a large soda when at a restaurant. If a ban is implemented, it could cut about 100 calories (or more) from the average person’s diet (Koebler). When looking at these statistics, one can already see how effective this law will be in impacting the overweight individuals. Not saying this will completely demolish the obesity epidemic, but it can at least make the average human population a bit healthier and regulated. 

The health implications of obesity have been tested many times. It has been observed and proven that obesity is directly linked to the consumption of sugary drinks. As stated by Oins, 43 million children are overweight or obese throughout the world. It has been found that these sugary drinks are associated with body weight, adiposity, body mass index, waist circumference and the general risk of being overweight. It has been shown that the higher the consumption, the more fatty deposits in the muscles and liver. It has also been proven that there is a greater increase in weight, skin-folds and fat mass. The studies were countered with a control group, of just water or milk, which provided beneficial results (Miaobing and O’Leary). Some reasons to why these two subjects are so closely related were also studied. It is said that one may lack the feeling of fullness due to the low satiety value, in addition to the sugary drinks replacing the food with higher nutritional value (Miaobing and O’Leary). Another reason for this is that sugar gives off large amounts of fructose, which doesn’t lower the hormone ghrelin, which is responsible for hunger, as in comparison to the way glucose does. When talking about fructose, it also causes visceral fat, which leads to metabolic disease. In relation, the glucose consumers had an increase in subcutaneous fat, which is not linked to metabolic disease (Leech). We can see that fructose in these sugary drinks are much more harmful than in the form of glucose. When a person consumes additional calories through a sugary drink, the body does not compensate for those calories by eating foods with less calories later (Teitelbaum and Kennedy). It is ultimately “empty calories” due to your body not compensating for them (Grynbaum 20). These results show how one can be directly impacted on simply what they drink in any given day. 

Sugar is correlated to leptin resistance, which gives another reason as to why these sugary drinks ultimately lead to obesity. Leptin is often called “satiety hormone” or “starvation hormone.” It is commonly known as a hormone “that is produced by the body’s fat cells.” This hormone regulates the energy balance in one’s body, keeping track of the calories that are eaten and burned. Many studies have linked the sugar intake of an individual (specifically fructose) to leptin resistance. This study showed that as the amount of fructose increased, leptin resistance formed, but when the fructose content decreased, leptin resistance was not present (Leech). This makes sense as to why this can have a leading impact in obesity. When taking in a lot of sugary drinks, leptin resistance forms, not taking in the number of calories that were eaten/burned and ultimately developing obesity. 

A topic that stems from obesity is the lack of nutritional value that an individual is obtaining.  Studies have shown that sugary intake is associated with higher amounts of processed meat total fat, lower fiber, carbohydrates, and higher food intake (Miaobing and O’Leary). In correlation with this, the individual is losing the protein, fruits and vegetables, and other healthy parts of the diet that is needed. This is detrimental to one’s health and is a serious epidemic that is almost always never taken into account by the general population. 

Everyone knows that sugar is going to have an impact on one’s teeth. Most likely, if one has too much sugar, a cavity or something worse will eventually develop. The World Health Organization reported that the consumption of sugary drinks resulted in an increased risk of dental problems in young individuals. Tahmassebi stated, that high sugar and acid content of sugary drinks could lead to dental caries, an enamel erosion (Miaobing and O’Leary). This is just an added problem to an individual’s life, which can be very easily avoided. 

When people think of sugary drinks, diseases isn’t the first thing that comes to mind. In fact, many people aren’t even aware that these drinks could lead to such diseases. Some are caused by the obesity that develops and others are directly from the drinks. Some of the diseases that sugary drinks can lead to is hypertension, type 2 diabetes and heart disease. In addition, as stated by Kavey, it has been shown to increase insulin and blood glucose level and contribute to a high dietary glycemic load (Miaobing and O’Leary). The New York Times also makes a statement about the risk of cancer, an effect that many people are unaware of:

One of the diseases that increases in incidence with obesity, diabetes and metabolic syndrome is cancer ... The connection between obesity, diabetes and cancer was first reported in 2004, in large population studies by researchers from the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer. It is not controversial. What it means is that people are more likely to get cancer if they’re obese or diabetic than if you’re not, and more likely to get cancer if you have metabolic syndrome than if you don’t (Bosworth).

As one can see, sugary drinks is only the start of the lasting impacts that it could have on the body. Once a sugary drink is consumed it just leads to one thing after the next; not just obesity. Each of these diseases are not on one’s mind when they are drinking a simple glass of soda and/or another sugary drink, but the public should start being aware of what they are doing to their bodies that will soon cost them later down the road.   

The biggest way that sugary drink consumption can be lowered is to understand the influences and what it is associated with. Socioeconomic status is a big factor in what the population drinks. As stated by Clifton, low income families are at a greater risk for consuming high sugary drinks and developing obesity (Miabing and O’Leary). Many believe that it is linked to the low cost of sugary drinks. This leads into a big argument of whether the ban would disproportionally affect the lower-income people. Although this is a concern, Columbia University has proposed a study that shows this will not be the case at all. It was found that obese people are more likely to order a large soda at a restaurant than the people that are eligible for food stamps. This proves that the ban would affect the overweight, what we are targeting, and have no effect on the poor (Koebler). 

Drinking sugary drinks can start at an early age and may become very difficult to try and wean someone off them. It’s almost like an addiction. The number one source of added sugar in a child’s diet comes from soda and energy drinks. Some of the consequences, in particular to children, involve increase in bone fractures and nutritional deficiencies, leaving children less able to complete their schooling or sports, in addition to a delay in sexual maturity. The average child has at least 56 cups of added sugar through these sugary drinks, with many consuming three to ten times that amount (Teitelbaum and Kennedy). That can be a detrimental habit to get into because it will only increase as one gets older. Stopping children from drinking sugary beverages can be a way to overall lower the intake of these drinks later on in life. 

A proposal to lower the consumption of sugary drinks has been tried numerous times, but has been overturned each time. For instance, New York is trying to ban sodas larger than 16 ounces. This would make it illegal for movie theaters, restaurants, stadiums and sports arenas to sell sugary drinks larger than the desired size of 16 ounces. The New York City’s health department stated that about 5800 New Yorkers die each year from obesity and diabetes, with the death rates even higher in poor neighborhoods (Grynbaum 21). These statistics are very high, when one is just talking about liquid sugars. This proposal was struck down when the supreme court judge said it was putting “arbitrary and capricious” limits on the publics consumption (Koebler). Although that may be a concern, one should consider the fact that sugary drinks aren’t banned as a whole, the portion is just being altered which can be seen as a miniscule change. In addition, there are many health benefits that override this concern of the public. 

In addition to that, another proposal that has been in the making is the soda tax. It has been introduced as a 1 cent per ounce excise tax, which was estimated as a 10% reduction in consumption of sugary drinks.  About 60 health organizations were in favor of this but the state budget passed without the tax (Kansagra , et al.). This proposal keeps getting pushed because there is evidence of the success rates. Mexico passed the same proposal in 2014 and since then, sales of sugary drinks have declined (Kansagra, et al.). Specifically, the consumption of sugary drinks in Mexico has declined by 6%, with the tax being more than half the size of the proposal that is evident now in many places (Shughart). This is evidence that even with the slightest bit of change, it can make a difference. The soda tax could be a solution to this epidemic. 

Some have concerns as to whether the portion cap rule (lower portion sizes) and soda taxes will actually be effective. It is believed by some people that these propositions might fail due to the legislatures not taking into account all the possibilities the vendors could adopt to retain the value pricing (Dobson, Chakraborty, and Seaton). It has been said that the public will be more likely to just buy bundles of soda, therefore having an unforeseen consequence of increasing the consumption rather than lowering it (Wilson, Stolarz-Fantino, and Fantino). Although this may be a concern, that doesn’t give an out on this debate. The portion size restriction only applies to businesses regulated by the Health Department, meaning not grocery stores, drug stores and convenience stores (Gross). In addition, there is no evidence that consumers will go elsewhere to any type of sugary beverage for less (Shughart). If people are used to buying bulk soda then the soda taxes and portion cap rule is not going to stop them. This proposal is strictly related to the certain places regulated by the Health Department, and that is where we are going to see the change. 

“A spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down” (Bosworth). This famous quote from Mary Poppins is one that many will always remember. The thing is, in regards to sugary drink consumption, it’s about 20 or more spoonful’s each day that is harming the human population.  There are many reasons as to why the consumption should be lowered, including the decline in nutritional health, diseases, and the success rates that have already been proven. There’s no need to overconsume on sugar, let alone take in liquid sugar at all. Next time you are tempted to buy that “big gulp” or order a large drink at a restaurant just think, what good are you really doing to your body? 
