Enjoy the fatty greasiness and sugary sweetness of all your favorite foods now because by 2016 they will only provide a “meaningful contribution to a healthful diet.”
After President Obama signed a bill in March calling for a study of whether the government should set standards for which foods are healthy enough to market to children and teens, Congress directed the Federal Trade Commission, the Food and Drug Administration, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Center for Disease Control to draft a set of nutritional guidelines for food companies. The companies are urged to comply with the rules by 2016.
Nutrition Principle A proposes foods make a meaningful contribution to a healthful diet. In other words, they must either contain 50 percent by weight of at least one of the food groups deemed healthy by the federal agencies or contain specific minimum amounts of all of such food groups.
Nutrition Principle B suggests such foods contain “minimal quantities of nutrients that could have a negative impact on health and weight.” This principle refers to sodium, saturated fat, trans fat and added sugars.
These principles govern foods like breakfast cereals, snack foods, candy, dairy products, baked goods, carbonated and un-carbonated drinks, fruit juices,
prepared foods, frozen desserts and restaurant food.
Most importantly, the guidelines instruct which foods are appropriate for food companies to market to children.
Proponents of the guidelines insist they are only suggestions, not requirements. The situation is comparable to Congress raising the drinking age to 21. If states want to receive federal money for highways, they must keep the legal age at 21. One U.S. representative suggested that the government would pressure food companies into complying with the guidelines in a manner similar to the drinking age regulation.
The pressure has already begun from the White House. Having recently launched her campaign on healthy eating, first lady Michelle Obama praised the new guidelines and urged food companies to comply.
The guidelines highlight the fundamental tenet of liberal ideology: Government is the answer to our problems.
The fact that we should all eat healthy foods is undisputed. But refraining from stuffing our faces with greasy pizza and fatty pies is our responsibility and the responsibility of parents.
Right now, I can buy fat-filled ice cream or ice cream with a third of the fat. Whether I buy the healthier version is my choice and my responsibility. But if I crave the fatty one, I can still indulge. Even Obama indulges, as we can see from the videos of her buying fries and deep-fried fat cakes in Botswana last Friday.
By 2016, the regulations will remove the choice and responsibility because boring, reduced fat ice creams will be the only ones available.
Not only do regulations limit our personal liberties, but they are also designed to destroy food companies.
Whenever the government imposes regulations on businesses, the result is almost always less business. Many children refuse to eat sandwiches unless they’re made with white bread. If they can’t eat white bread, then not only will those companies suffer, but cheese, lunch meat, jelly, peanut butter, mustard, mayonnaise and other manufacturers of sandwich products will suffer as well.
The federal government needs to get off our backs, let us make our own personal decisions and cut business regulations. If they can’t even abide by the guidelines themselves, why do they expect us to follow them?
Austin Casey is a 19-year-old medical physics junior from Mandeville. Follow him on Twitter @TDR_Austincasey.
——
Contact Austin Casey at [email protected]