the language in the label was not “factual and uncontroversial”, and.the warnings were “unduly burdensome” and “chill protected commercial speech” under the First Amendment because they were required to take up 20% of the space on any advertisement.In September 2017, a three-judge panel from San Francisco’s 9th U.S. Industry appealed this decision to the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals. Warning that sugary drinks contribute to tooth decay, obesity and diabetes is also reasonably related to the City’s interest in public health and safety. However, a federal District Judge dismissed industry arguments and concluded that the City’s mandated warning is factual and accurate, and that sugary drinks are a significant source of calories that contribute to health problems. The American Beverage Association immediately sued to block implementation, claiming that, among other things, their products were being unfairly singled out as more dangerous than other high-calorie foods. It requires labels on outdoor advertising. jurisdiction to pass a warning label bill. In 2015 San Francisco became the first U.S. States would place labels on the containers and dispensers themselves, whereas localities would place the labels on ads for sugary drinks, in order to avoid possible conflicts with state or federal law or problems with implementation. While local and state warning label policies share the same goal of educating the public about the dangers of consuming sugary drinks, they employ different approaches. State and local governments across the country have considered policies to require sugary drink warning labels. The more policies we have in place to encourage consumers to shift to healthful beverages, and away from sugary ones, the better! Communities taking action This awareness can be the catalyst to create and support other policies to reduce the availability, affordability, and even the appeal, of sugary drinks. Support varied by race and political affiliation, but a majority of people in all categories supported warning labels.Ĭampaigns to adopt warning label legislation, as well as the presence of labels on cans, bottles, dispensers, promotional ads, or at a point of purchase, help keep the awareness of the harmful effects of consuming sugary drinks in the public’s eye and on decision-makers’ radar. In a 2016 Field poll, 78% of Californians said yes to warning labels. When surveyed, the public was overwhelmingly in favor of warning labels on sugary drinks. Adolescents were also less likely to buy them, and the adults were less likely to buy them for their children. After seeing the warnings, both adolescent and adult study participants were more aware of the health risks associated with drinking them. Preliminary studies, conducted through on-line surveys, suggest that warning labels might change people’s perceptions of the drinks and their interest in purchasing them. Like warning labels on cigarette packages, sugary drink warning labels can alert people to the risks of consuming the beverages, and may even discourage people from buying them. Warnings on tobacco may increase the knowledge of health risks, prevent relapse, deter youth and adults from initiating smoking, deter smokers when they are about to light up, increase the attempts to quit, and reduce the appeal of the pack. The label would have a simple message like the one pictured above.Īdvocates believe a sugary drink warning label will help people reduce consumption of sugary drinks, based on evidence showing that tobacco warning labels have small but positive effects. A low-cost and simple way to do that is to require the companies to apply a warning label to cans, bottles, and dispensers of sugary drinks, and to the ads, both in stores and outdoors, that promote them. Beverage companies spend over a billion dollars every year to convince us, and especially our children, to drink their products.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |