U.S. appeals court blocks San Francisco ordinance on soda health warnings

[Eugene]

Source: Reuters

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court sided with the beverage industry on Tuesday, granting its request to block a San Francisco ordinance mandating health warnings for soda and other sugary drinks.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that San Francisco’s ordinance unfairly targeted one group of products. The plaintiffs, including the American Beverage Association and the California Retailers Association, were likely to succeed with their claim that the ordinance was unjustified and violated commercial speech under the First Amendment, the court ruled.

The San Francisco ordinance is part of a growing national movement seeking to curb consumption of soft drinks and other high-calorie beverages that medical experts say are largely to blame for an epidemic of childhood obesity. Many localities also have moved to tax sugary beverages.

John Cote, a spokesman for San Francisco’s city attorney office, said the city is disappointed and evaluating all options.

-snip-

#HEALTH NEWS SEPTEMBER 19, 2017 / 11:43 AM / UPDATED 3 HOURS AGO
Dan Levine
3 MIN READ


Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-california-soda-ruling/u-s-appeals-court-blocks-san-francisco-ordinance-on-soda-health-warnings-idUSKCN1BU24U

[Doreen]

1. How many of you who like soda would quit drinking

it if it had a warning label? Most of us who drink it whether occasionally or a lot already know its downfalls.

[FreeState]

2. Enough that the industry was worried enough to sue

I say label everything that is hazardous.

[Doreen]

3. Good point.

For me and others though we know what is in that crap and still drink it. I do agree with you on labeling everything ( including for pet and livestock ) as there are people who would never go out of their way to see what they are eating is made of or with.

If this GOP healthcare or lack there of goes through, knowing what we are eating may be our last line of defense to stay somewhat healthier.

[broadcaster90210]

5. I think it would have an affect.

Calorie listings on menus has changed what I eat when I eat out.

[Crash2Parties]

4. Makes me wonder if tobacco will try to use the same argument?

"ruled that San Francisco’s ordinance unfairly targeted one group of products. "

The Free $peech of Corporate Persons mustn't be restricted, you know...

[WinkyDink]

6. Soda doesn't cause a disease; tobacco does. (People tend to EAT with their sodas, so there's that.)

[Crash2Parties]

7. PubMed begs to differ

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26114357
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1829363/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3210834/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25030783
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2862465/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2880768/

+ dozens more. everything from cardiovascular disease to diabetes to fatty liver disease.