Wednesday, November 3, 2010

Happy Meals Banned in San Francisco . . .

"McGuilty" by J Salvador

. . . and while most healthy eating advocates are rejoicing at
this news (which actually won't go into effect until December 2011 -- barring any litigation or appeal,) I personally am feeling a bit more mixed. And not out of nostalgia of Happy Meals in my younger days (though I know better than to eat a McNugget now.)

I'm all for eating more healthy and less processed foods with a half-year shelf life, but I just don't think enacting citywide bans are the best way to change eating habits, and prefer the carrot rather than the stick approach (no pun intended) as far as public health policy goes.

Instead of banning certain foods, why not further incentivize healthy eating? Engage the kids in farmers markets and kitchens, have them meet the people who are raising, growing and preparing healthy foods,
educate them about the ills of junk food.

Besides, I can see all sorts of loopholes and ways this ordinance can backfire . . . toys may be sold separately (further lining fast food companies' coffers) or parents may be buying adult-sized portions for their children since the kids meals are off the menu.


gourmetpigs said...

I agree, banning happy meals won't stop parents from buying fast food for their children.

Banning cheap calories also won't help people in poverty buy healthy food.

1000 DAYS 1000 HIKES said...

My good friend just graduated culinary school. Your dishes look good and if you’re looking to get yourself out there, maybe you guys can combine efforts. Hey, why not join me on a hike.. My blog is at I’m hiking every day, every single day, really!!!

Kinesiology Tape said...

"Happy Meals Banned in San Francisco” it is very shocking news for me it is not good way to change the habit.