Tag Archives: food

Fat Police Are Triggering Eating Disorders in Kids

Kids have become obsessed with dieting to the point of nearly starving themselves to death, courtesy of America's crusade against childhood obesity.

Kids have become obsessed with dieting to the point of nearly starving themselves to death, courtesy of America's crusade against childhood obesity.

A new report published in the Journal of American Academy of Pediatrics links a 119-percent rise in hospitalizations for childhood eating disorders over the past decade to anti-obesity crusaders that are making kids too paranoid to eat anymore.

Dr. Tracie Pasold, director of the eating disorder clinic for Children’s Hospital in Little Rock, Ark., said she can confirm the report’s findings that anorexia and bulimia are taking a rising toll on America’s school children ranging from grades K-12: Her clinic sees 8 new patients a week on average.

“It’s becoming an issue for them eight years old, nine years old, ten years old,” Pasold said. “They’ve not been consuming enough calories to compensate for what they’re [sic] body needs based on energy levels and that sort of thing.”

Marketers are cashing-in on parents' paranoia about their kids becoming obese.

Marketers are cashing-in on parents' paranoia about their kids becoming obese.

In her expert opinion, Pasold believes America’s growing army of anti-obesity crusaders, from the White House to the Principal’s Office, are responsible for sparking eating disorders in school children. Kids are taking it upon themselves to excessively diet, avoid certain foods that have been demonized, and over-exercise because they’ve heard that’s what they need to do to be ‘healthy.’

And, what kid wouldn’t want to do whatever it takes to avoid bringing home a letter from school saying he or she is obese? Obesity has been declared a “disease” of “epidemic” proportions by bureaucrats, doctors, and the media, making kids go to extremes to avoid the devastating stigma it now carries.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

School Kids Will Get Burnt by the Obamas’ Bake Sale Ban

Fundraisers like Denver Public Schools' "Bake Sale to Benefit Haiti" could soon be banned by President Obama.

Fundraisers like Denver Public Schools' "Bake Sale to Benefit Haiti" could soon be banned by President Obama.

Public school students that depend on proceeds from bake sales to cover the costs of their extracurricular activities will soon need to find another way to raise money. President Obama is expected to sign his wife’s cupcake-crushing Child Nutrition bill today, but a grassroots coalition is telling concerned citizen’s the war on bake sales isn’t over until the last cookie crumbles:

“Parents and local communities are outraged at the federal government’s usurpation of power,” says Orit Sklar, national spokeswoman of the consumer coalition My Food. My Choice!. “It represents everything the American people have been rejecting from Washington.”

Opponents of the bill cite major concerns with the overreach of government and the unfunded mandates placed on local communities and taxpayers. In protest, parents and students are participating in the inaugural ‘National Bake Sale Month.’

“As long as this is the law of the land, each December we’re going to come together to celebrate ‘National Bake Sale Month’ to highlight the absurdity of the law and share how school fundraisers help to provide the essentials our children need especially during tough economic times.”

Students, parents and teachers are being encouraged to post pictures of their bake sales on the My Food. My Choice! Facebook page or on Twitter by using the handle @MyFoodMyChoice [no harm in adding @NoNannyState] or hashtag #bakesale, and answer the question, “What does your bake sale pay for?”

Don't let the Obamas monopolize bake sales!

Don't let the Obamas monopolize bake sales!

Spread the word about this latest recipe for disaster cooked-up by the Obama Administration. Together with our allies at My Food. My Choice!, let’s show the Obamas how real “change” happens through embracing democracy, not fascism.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Happy Meal ‘Ban’ Wagon Arrives in Wisconsin City

Read the tagline. It's not just a city; it's how nanny state bureaucrats like Greg Mertzig think of themselves.

Read the tagline. It's not just a catchy slogan; it's how bureaucrats like Greg Mertzig think of themselves.

A nanny state bureaucrat in Superior, Wisc. is equating the lure of Happy Meal toys to candy cigarettes, claiming both types of novelty items encourage “lethal habits” that need to be controlled “at a very young age.”

“It was a marketing tactic by the tobacco industry to get kids to think it was cool to smoke at a very young age, develop these lethal habits at a very young age,” says City Councilor Greg Mertzig. “To a lesser extent, these toys in their Happy Meals kind of do the same thing. They reward kids and get them to think that it’s the okay thing to do at a very young age.”

Mertzig, an Iraq and Afghanistan war vet, told Wisconsin Public Radio (WPR) that he’s firing at will upon fast food restaurants that, he says, are making America’s future soldiers too fat to fight. And, he claims his constituents support his efforts to determine how and what parents feed their own children:

“They don’t meet the physical requirements to join the military so there was an argument that it was actually a national security issue. And so through the dialogue with my constituents we decided and I decided that day that we needed to do something.”

Mertzig’s proposed ordinance would “ban free toys in meals with more than 600 calories, 10% fat and can’t have any trans fat. It could also require fruits or vegetables and whole grain foods,” reports WPR’s Mike Simonson.

The Happy Meal toy ban will be offered to the city council on Dec. 7. If Mertzig musters enough support, it will be voted on by the the council members at a later date.

Superior City Attorney Frog Prell told the local FOX News affiliate that Mertzig’s efforts to mimic San Francisco and Santa Clara County, Calif. will pose “an enforcement problem if this ordinance gets any momentum, for sure.”

Contact Councilman Greg Mertzig and tell him to back down in his war against parents and their right to determine what’s best for their own children to consume:

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1065835578
(Click “Send Gregory a Message” below his cute profile picture)

Email: mertzigg@ci.superior.wi.us

Tel: (715) 392-1148

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Vermont AG Proposes Soda Tax; Turns Blind Eye to Maple Syrup

Vermont Public Radio reports the state’s Attorney General Bill Sorrell wants the Legislature to enact a “one cent per ounce excise tax on sugar sweetened beverages.” He blames soda for the state’s rising obesity rates, despite Vermont maple syrup having nearly the same calorie count as sugar and high fructose corn syrup.

Mom always said, "Everything in moderation." Mr. Sorrell, nobody's asking you to be their mother.

Mom always said, "Everything in moderation." Mr. Sorrell, nobody's asking you to be their mother.

How about taxing “the official flavor of Vermont,” Mr. Sorrell? Whether he wants to admit it or not, the sugar found in pure maple syrup is no healthier than white sugar, according to the Cornell Sugar Maple Research & Extension Program:

The sugar in maple syrup is sucrose and invert sugar. White sugar is sucrose, whereas invert sugar is a breakdown product of sucrose. There is no evidence that maple syrup is healthier than white sugar.

In fact, white table sugar contains 49 calories per tablespoon and pure maple syrup contains 52 calories per tablespoon, one calorie less than high fructose corn syrup that is found in most of the sugar sweetened beverages Mr. Sorrell proposes taxing.

Here’s how we see it, Mr. Sorrell: Your state consistently leads the U.S. in the production of maple syrup with 890,000 gallons produced in 2010 alone. That makes Vermont a contributor to the so-called obesity epidemic when millions of consumers nationwide smother steaming hot plates of pancakes with with your state’s pure maple syrup.

In the spirit of fairness, what are your thoughts about asking state legislators nationwide to enact sin taxes on Vermont maple syrup, Mr. Sorrell? All is fair in love and anti-obesity crusades, isn’t that right?

Contact Attorney General Bill Sorrell and ask him why he’s such a huge hypocrite:

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1647753286 (Click “Send Bill a Message” below his profile picture.)
Email: atginfo@atg.state.vt.us
Tel: (802) 828-5507

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Comedian Mocks Nanny State Nonsense on Daily Show

Anyone else think it’s odd that The Huffington Post finds humor in a comedian’s rant against government intrusion in citizens’ lives? In and of itself, that’s funny enough, but watch Lewis Black systematically dismantle the nanny state with his sarcasm and wit if your pants are still dry.

Click image to watch video on ComedyCentral.com

Click image to watch video on ComedyCentral.com

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Kurt Loder Dishes Dirt on the Nanny State

Libertarian and cultural observer Kurt Loder talks with FOX News’ Judge Andrew Napolitano about the rise of nanny state intrusion in Americans’ lives.

Napolitano: How did we get to a nanny state? How did we get to an idea where the land of the free and home of the brave, forgive me for putting it that way, accepts government control over small areas of our lives?

Loder: I think the recent midterm elections reflected alot of things, but I think one of the things it reflected was a pushback against this intrusion of the government in to our lives. I mean, yea, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in New York City to create posters about the dangers of salty soup is astonishing — just astonishing. Cracking down on Happy Meals in San Francisco is astonishing. Why would the government have the right to tell us what children should eat in their Happy Meals?

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Taxpayers Choking on Big Govt’s “Whoppers with Sleaze”

Overlawyered.com’s Walter Olsen hits another one out of the ballpark today with his commentary in The Washington Times spotlighting the “growing aggressiveness of ‘public health’ officialdom in pushing scare campaigns about everyday consumption risks:”

The Puritans held that reminders of mortality had an edifying effect on the living, which is why they sometimes would illustrate even literature for young children with drawings of death’s-heads and skeletons. Something of the same spirit seems to animate our ever-advancing movement for mandatory public health. The Food and Drug Administration has just floated the idea of requiring cigarette packs to carry rotating pictures that would include corpses – yes, actual corpses – as well as close-ups of grotesque medical disorders that can afflict smokers.

New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s superactivist Health Department has begun public ad campaigns about the health risks of everyday foods, including a controversial YouTube video portraying soda drinkers as pouring globs of shimmery yellow fat into their open mouths and – just out – an ad showing an innocent-looking can of chicken-with-rice soup as bursting with dangerous salt. Whether or not you live in New York, you’re likely to be seeing more of this sort of thing because the mayor’s crew tends to set the pace for activist public-health efforts nationwide; the Obama administration, for example, picked Bloomberg lieutenant Thomas R. Frieden to head the influential Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Why should government use our own tax dollars to propagandize and hector us about the risks of salted snacks, chocolate milk or the other temptations of today’s supermarket aisle? The Bloomberg-Obama camp seems to feel that government dietary advice is superior to other sources of information we might draw on because (1) it’s more objective, independent and pure of motive and (2) it can draw on better science …

Read the rest of Olsen’s commentary and share your comments on his blog.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

San Francisco Mayor Vows to Veto Happy Meal Toy Ban

Big Nanny Newsom must enjoy Happy Meals when he gets the munchies.

Big Nanny Newsom must enjoy Happy Meals when he gets the munchies.

While the State-Run Media continues to applaud San Francisco’s self-proclaimed promoters of “food justice,” Mayor Gavin Newsom announced Tuesday that he’s not lovin’ the Happy Meal toy ban and will veto it:

“From encouraging salad bars and exercise in our schools to allowing use of food stamps in farmers markets, no city in America has done more to educate our children and encourage families to make healthier eating choices. We must continue to take steps to combat childhood obesity, a genuine health crisis in America, but this bill takes the wrong approach. Parents, not politicians, should decide what their children eat, especially when it comes to spending their own money. Despite its good intentions, I will veto this unwise and unprecedented governmental intrusion into parental responsibilities and private choices.

After all of the national media coverage the Happy Meal toy ban has enjoyed in recent weeks, it’s rather interesting that as of 11 p.m. EST on Thursday, only 2 media outlets have reported Newsom’s intention to veto the Happy Meal toy ban.

Now, for the bad news: Despite Newsom’s pledge to veto the Happy Meal toy ban, the Board of Supervisors currently has enough votes to override it when it comes up for a final vote within the next two weeks. At that time, the same fascists that voted 8-3 in favor of the ban will vote to sustain or overturn Newsom’s veto.

Contact the Board of Supervisors and take your best shot at knocking some common sense in to them before the Happy Meal toy ban is set in stone.

Express your support to Mayor Newsom for his efforts to veto the ban.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Happy Meal Fascist Wins NSLF’s “Golden Screw” Award

Eric Mar, San Francisco Board of Supervisors (Calif.)

Supervisor Mar led the city’s now infamous assault on children’s beloved Happy Meal toys and has also been busy in recent months trying to regulate citizen’s intake of soft drinks.

“I’m proud that we protect the public’s health,” Mar says. “We’re part of a movement that is moving forward an agenda of food justice,” he proclaimed upon securing a veto-proof vote to ban Happy Meal toys.

Mar gained extra points in our consideration with his crafty use of shoddy data to force his big government agenda down the throats of citizens both young and old.

When Mar’s not telling citizens what they can’t eat and drink, he can be seen pressuring pet stores to quit selling dogs and cats.

Congratulate Eric Mar on this honor on his Facebook page! Since he no longer allows citizens he doesn’t know or trust to look at or post on his Wall, click “Send Eric a Message” below his profile picture to make sure he receives your virtual high-five!

Does trampling on citizens' rights and liberties count as "torture," Eric?

Does trampling on citizens' rights and liberties count as "torture," Eric?

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Happy Meal Czar Targets Citizens’ Freedom to Smoke

Ken Yeager can't resist the urge to keep citizens safe from themselves.

Ken Yeager is on a crusade to prevent citizens from harming themselves.

The originator of the nation’s first Happy Meal toy ban is now targeting smokers in their own apartments, condominiums and townhouses. Santa Clara County Supervisor Ken Yeager declared his intrusive anti-smoking initiative makes this ‘progressive’ California suburb, once again, a “national leader” in keeping citizens safe from themselves:

“The residents of this county deserve strong policies to safeguard their health,” said Board President Ken Yeager, who brought the ordinance to the Board of Supervisors. “These ordinances make Santa Clara County a national leader in blocking tobacco sales to minors and protecting residents from secondhand smoke.”

In addition to an ordinance prohibiting smokers from lighting-up within the confines of their own private residences, Yeager and his nanny state cronies also outlawed smoking at outdoor dining facilities, motels and hotels, reports the San Jose Mercury News.

A new licensing tax that would force tobacco retailers to pony-up “$425 a year for a license, plus a one-time $340 application fee” will be voted on at the board’s Nov. 23 meeting.

Do you support or oppose Ken “Unhappy Meal” Yeager’s continued efforts to dictate to citizens how they should best lead their own lives?

Share your thoughts with Ken Yeager on Facebook (click “Send Ken a Message” below his picture) or contact him the old-fashioned way:

Supervisor Ken Yeager
County Govt. Center, E. Wing
70 W. Hedding St., 10th Fl.
San Jose, Calif. 95110
P: (408) 299-5040
F: (408) 299-2038
Ken.Yeager@bos.sccgov.org

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine