Soda ban is 'sodapressing'

By now I’m sure most of us have heard about New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s proposed soda ban.

It’s not as scary as it sounds.

This won’t be the second prohibition and New Yorkers won’t have to sneak into mafia-run speakeasies to get their daily Mountain Dew. The ban would just make it illegal for restaurants and other public venues to sell supersized sodas. It would still be perfectly legal to buy Coke at the grocery store.

When I first heard about this proposal, I just happened to be drinking a Sprite, and I was outraged.

What’s next? It’ll be illegal to sell venti-sized coffee? I’d like to see Bloomberg pick a war with Starbucks and see who wins.

Then I started thinking further into it, and I was like, “Hey, why not? He’s trying to make people healthier.”

Obesity is now considered a disease and America is at the top of the scale. We need changes like this. We need to put down the Pepsi and order water or some iced tea. But then I actually tried it.

Sometimes an iced tea with a wedge of lemon just doesn’t cut it.

My problem lies somewhat with the coffee comparison. If Bloomberg is banning all large sugary drinks, why doesn’t that include coffee and alcohol? My tall white chocolate mocha Frappuccino at Starbucks has 320 calories. Twelve ounces of Bud Light has 110 calories. Eight ounces of Mountain Dew has 110.

Coffee, soda and alcohol are three of America’s biggest and most unhealthy addictions. When it comes to how they figure in our health, they’re on about the same playing field. They’re all bad when we go overboard.

Taking away one isn’t going to make a big difference, aside from making some of us very angry. And you can’t take away all three because then we would have the second prohibition. And in case you didn’t hear about the first one — it didn’t work.

In March, the Manhattan Supreme Court turned down the ban. But thanks to some city officials, it has recently been appealed to be reinstated.

I think it will be interesting to watch how it goes, but in the end I hope it comes to the first conclusion.

Bloomberg’s concerns are in the right place, but this ban just isn’t practical.

­— lnbanks@indiana.edu