San Francisco passes law banning toys in Happy Meals

• Spartaaaaa wrote on 2010-11-04 20:21

  (NaturalNews) San Francisco has become the first U.S. city to crack down on the dubious practice of fast food companies luring children into eating unhealthy meals by giving away gimmicky toys. "Our children are sick. Rates of obesity in San Francisco are disturbingly high, especially among children of color," said San Francisco Supervisor Eric Mar, the sponsor of the measure, in a press conference.
  
  The new law, which goes into effect December, 2011, would only allow toys to be given away with "healthy" children's meals. That's defined as a meal under 600 calories that includes fruits and vegetables but not a beverage with excess sugar (such as a soda). McDonald's Happy Meals obviously do not fit this definition of a healthy meal.
  
  Big bucks to dangle toys in front of children
  According to a Reuters report, McDonald's spent over half a billion dollars advertising and giving away toys in 2006. This is obviously money spent with a purpose -- and the purpose is to keep children begging for more Happy Meals so they can get their hands on more toys. Across the industry, promotional spending on children's toys to promote junk food tops $1.6 billion a year, reports Reuters.
  
  That's $1.6 billion spent in trying to persuade children to eat factory-fabricated animal products and nutritionally-depleted fast foods. Can you imagine what this must be contributing to childhood obesity? What about diabetes and heart disease later in life?
  
  San Francisco understands that feeding junk food to your children is not a smart way to have a healthy city (or state, or nation for that matter). I actually admire the city's willingness to start clamping down on these toy enticements. There's a point at which local communities and cities need to send a message to corporate America: "You will NOT be allowed to harm our children any longer!"
  
  I just wish more cities had the courage to stand up to the powerful fast food chains and say enough is enough. Yes, you can sell food. Or you can sell toys. But you can't use toys to trick children into asking for food that we now know is strongly contributing to an epidemic of obesity and disease.
  
  In a perfect society, of course, it would be parents who would say no to their children and stop buying Happy Meals with toys in them in the first place. But health-oriented parenting is another article altogether.

  
  
  Link to article: San Francisco passes law banning toys in Happy Meals
  
  What do you guys think of this? On the one hand, I believe that fast food is a serious threat to the health of children. On the other hand though, I do not believe that government should have this much power over any corporation.
• Phunkie wrote on 2010-11-04 20:22
  This sucks! Happy Meals were all about the toys!!
  
  Power Rangers, Transformers, Shrek, Harry Potter...
  
  :T_T:
• RicochetOrange wrote on 2010-11-04 20:29
  Should just ban happy meals with the chicken nuggets. And happy meal toys stopped being cool.
  
  :1
• Yogurticecream wrote on 2010-11-04 20:33
  This is pretty brilliant.
  Brilliant in the sense that it allows the corporations will find a loophole in the law.
  
  

  That's defined as a meal under 600 calories that includes fruits and vegetables but not a beverage with excess sugar (such as a soda).

  
  
  Meaning that the purpose of the law really isn't to stop corporations from selling happy meals, they are just sending a message to change them into healthy meals.
  
  Take out the soda, replace with apple juice or milk, and add fruits and vegetables and you'll still get a kind of happy meal that's legal and with a toy.
• Chockeh wrote on 2010-11-04 20:39
  Will it be real fruits and vegetables?
• Cucurbita wrote on 2010-11-04 20:47
  lol this is nonsense.
  
  As much as fast food is a problem for addicted Americans, I just don't see how BANNING the damn thing is necessary.
  
  There are other ways.
• Ampersand wrote on 2010-11-04 21:01

  There's a point at which local communities and cities need to send a message to corporate America: "You will NOT be allowed to harm our children any longer!"

  
  More like "Make it so we don't have to be good parents!".
• Justified wrote on 2010-11-04 21:13

  Quote from Yogurticecream;204027:

  Meaning that the purpose of the law really isn't to stop corporations from selling happy meals, they are just sending a message to change them into healthy meals.
  
  Take out the soda, replace with apple juice or milk, and add fruits and vegetables and you'll still get a kind of happy meal that's legal and with a toy.

  
  
  All of those are already options at places including McDonalds. Parents, however, are still choosing to buy the less healthy (and more delicious) option that is fried foods.
  
  Heck, almost half of McDonalds menu is green now (symbolizing healthier options), and it disgusts me.
• Spartaaaaa wrote on 2010-11-04 21:26

  Quote from YoungChockeh;204032:

  Will it be real fruits and vegetables?

  
  
  Chances are... no.
• Zid wrote on 2010-11-05 17:02
  Or, you know, if they acknowledge it's not healthy, the parents don't have to buy Happy Meals for their kids. They could buy elsewhere. If the problem was price, try a food store. If the problem is time, try a healthier restaurant. If the problem is both, well there was a problem to begin with trying to go in these restaurants in the first place.
  
  Then again, if a child needs a toy to eat, that's a problem to begin with anyway.
• Athde wrote on 2010-11-05 17:12
  Simple. Great plan. How it works:
  1. Kid want Happy Meals for the toys
  2. Parents make kids eat before they get toy
  3. Kid eats food and while getting addicted to it also gets rewarded
  4. It keeps looping as the kid constantly wants to go back for another toy.
  
  Now its:
  
  1. Kids dont want to go because there is no toy and its healthy
  2. Kids dont want to go parents cant go
  3. Both groups dont get fat off of McDonald's
• Cucurbita wrote on 2010-11-05 19:08

  Quote from Zid;205343:

  Or, you know, if they acknowledge it's not healthy, the parents don't have to buy Happy Meals for their kids. They could buy elsewhere. If the problem was price, try a food store. If the problem is time, try a healthier restaurant. If the problem is both, well there was a problem to begin with trying to go in these restaurants in the first place.
  
  Then again, if a child needs a toy to eat, that's a problem to begin with anyway.

  
  
  Nonsense.
  
  I for one will tell you right now that the biggest appeal behind fast food is that its convenient beyond any other option of getting food.
• abc33kr wrote on 2010-11-05 19:11
  owo I didn't know this was such a big issue. My AP gov class talked about this today.
• Hiccup wrote on 2010-11-05 21:52
  I WANT MY DAMNED HAPPY TOYS D;<
• Taycat wrote on 2010-11-05 23:14
  To be honest, the parents could buy a bad happy meal and then a good one while they throw away the good food.