Nutrition and healthy eating

Free

E-Newsletters

Subscribe to receive the latest updates on health topics. About our newsletters

• Housecall
• Alzheimer's caregiving
• Living with cancer

• February 2, 2012 7:01 a.m.

  Oh my gosh! There goes more of our freedom of choice. Great excuse to raise money for our government. Where will this end?

  - Bruce

• January 1, 2012 5:01 p.m.

  NO! Why in the world would anyone want another government program. I DO NOT NEED ANY- ONE FROM THE GOVERNMENT TELLING ME WHAT TO DO. There are way to many busy bodies trying to legislate their agenda. Please leave me alone. What I eat is my business not yours.

  - Kurt

• November 7, 2011 3:30 p.m.

  Tax sugar beverages.No! Why not BAN alcohol beverages instead,,,,,,,but that would mess up the lucrative tax scheme. It sounds good to talk health, but wake up folks it is all about tax money and how to get more of it.

  - David

• October 27, 2011 6:31 a.m.

  I say yes to that Amen

  - nancy

• September 21, 2011 12:54 p.m.

  I know... Let's get a "FAT tax" too!! We could tax butter, whole milk, then get a "High Cholesterol" tax where they get us for buying eggs and cooking oils! how about using your BMI as your tax rate for the year!!! people want lower taxes...then lose weight! (I was being sarcastic at first, but the "BMI tax thing I came up with sounds pretty good!!LOL) MODERATION IS THE KEY!!! I'm fat...but I don't blame anybody but myself! I think the best thing to do is to tax the "DIETARY SUPPLEMENTS" or "weight loss" pills! These things are making people believe they don't need to exercise or eat healthy in order to lose weight. Don't tax everyone for my shortcomings!

  - Mike

• August 10, 2011 8:53 a.m.

  No more taxes. A tax isn't going to change how someone eats or drinks. Cigarettes are bad for you--a fact--are there people who still smoke!!??

  - Nancy

• June 23, 2011 2:12 p.m.

  Soda Tax - bad idea. I for one find that your supposedly healthier sugar substitutes make me ill. They make me sick to my stomach and give me headaches. Let's not even get into the nasty after tastes. So, how can that possibly be a healthier choice? Quit trying to control every aspect of people's lives. What next - mandatory calisthenics every day?

  - Shar

• May 31, 2011 3:03 p.m.

  Soda Tax: Another Bad Idea. Hurts business, takes away freedom and the funds will be misused. NO more taxes or govt regulations. It would be another failed policy by the govt control minded.

  - Mark

• May 16, 2011 4:30 p.m.

  when did we stop being adults and making chose of what we eat. It is none of your business what I consume and none of mine what you consume. Haven't we chased enough business away from our country. Now who is partly to blame for our present job situation. how many more jobs go away.

  - ann

• April 24, 2011 10:33 a.m.

  Give me a break, we already tax just about everything in this country except the air that we breathe. You'd never know that we started this country because of high taxes. Sick to death of people who love big government telling you how to live you life.

  - Dan

• April 21, 2011 2:27 p.m.

  Yes - state and local governments should be applying special sales taxes on sugary, carbonated soft drinks (and perhaps the diest sodas as well) as there is not much any thing more disgusting to witness at a grocery store than some unwashed butterball loading up their shopping cart with soft drinks and donuts.

  - Roberto

• April 4, 2011 9:45 p.m.

  Government has no right to tax my food or soda choices simply because they want to discourage it's usage. It is simply a tax grab. My medical bills are paid only by me. If I was on public assistance, then maybe government could restrict my food and beverage choices. But a tax -- never.

  - Eileen

• March 24, 2011 5:24 p.m.

  no , sugar is not the problem, it gluttony that is the problem ,people should think before they put any food into their body. People need to start taking responsibility for their body. Everyone wants to blame the food, the problem is people think they have to have a soda everyday or two or three.If people would cut back and drink regular water they would be more healthy. The same with all sweets and food.t

  - MARTHA

• February 17, 2011 6:22 p.m.

  Why don't we just give all our money to the government, and let them take care of us the way they see fit. Apparently none of us has the intelligence or personal responsibility to eat properly. What guarantee do we have that they will use this tax to fund health care. Most states have failed to use tobacco settlement funds for tobacco prevention programs. With the current budget shortfalls of most states, this extra money will be used for what ever is convenient. Do not let them fool you, this is just another ploy to get more of your money to shore up other failed programs.

  - Larry

• February 1, 2011 7:23 p.m.

  Why does it even need to be discussed? It is a no-brainer.

  - Satya

• January 20, 2011 9:21 p.m.

  In my opinion the idea of a sweet soda taxation could even go further to a general sugar taxation.Cakes and ice cream would go up in price just like cigarettes did the past months. Then ,if you spend your money wisely at the grocery store you may live a healthier life and you may not have to go to the dentist to fill cavities

  - karsten

• January 8, 2011 10:17 a.m.

  I disagree strongly. I don't believe the government should be able to force me into a certain lifestyle. I have diabetes and MY health is MY concern, not anyone elses. Now, this also means that I should accept the consequences of my actions. I fully intend to pay for all my health concerns without a dime of government money. I believe we would all be better off if this were the norm rather than the exception.

  - russ

• December 16, 2010 12:40 p.m.

  we don't want big brother telling us what to do BUT in this case in ny we already pay taxes on sodas...and if it goes up again, fine...i drink soda occassionally and i have health ins. that i have to pay for, and I am paying for other peoples disease such as diabetes caused directly/indirectly from suagr obesity thru the terrible amount we pay in taxes for medicaid...and i do feel that it is hurting other people...what about the children and family that are left behind????? in the 50s when i was growing up we ate nutritious meals and no sugary C_____...but that is no longer the casewhat, happened to serving size? do we really NEED 32 oz of soda when 10oz would suffice? if you really needed to have it........and sunspur...let the gov tax the company...you'll pay for it anyway in higher cost....and kevin...they've already taken away a lot of our rights they just haven't told us publically yet LOL

  - marilyn

• November 16, 2010 12:09 p.m.

  I really want to see this come about. People should be discouraged from harmful substances and lifestyle choices. When something is outlawed for its harmful effects, the price to acquire it illegally is very high. Why not implement the same deterant effect in a legal way, just as a reminder to make the consumer stop and consider what they are doing to their bodies?

  - Gabe

• September 28, 2010 9:16 p.m.

  No! A government should not have the right to interfere in a person's private life and put pressure on their personal choices, providing those choices don't hurt another individual. It is my right to eat healthily or unhealthily if I wish. It is my right to do drugs if I wish (alcohol, cigarettes, weed, etc). It is up to me who I have sex with and what sexual practises we engage in, providing we are both consenting adults. It is up to me, what I do with my life, what I put into my body, it is after all my body and my life. However, it is not my right to physically harm another individual through my choices, for example: I should not be allowed to smoke in the presence of another person without their permission. In the case of raising a child I should not be allowed to smoke in their presence at all, I must smoke away from them (e.g. in the garden) or wait until they leave. Personal freedoms are extremely important, and should not be given up readily. You may not agree with everyone's personal choices, but that's life and they may not agree with yours; providing they aren't harming anyone you have no say in what they choose. Oh and just for the record, I don't drink alcohol, smoke, or do drugs, but I respect other people's rights to do so, providing they are not hurting anyone else but themselves.

  - Nobody

• September 24, 2010 10:57 a.m.

  As a political conservative, I actually agree with a tax on soda. As we move down the path of a more socialistic healthcare system in this country, I approve of any way to better associate taxation with where, and on whom, the tax money will be spent. Why should I pay higher taxes on income, etc. to cover healthcare costs of people who eat garbage, smoke, don't exercise, etc.?

  - Dave

• September 17, 2010 1:20 p.m.

  I do not think we should have a tax on soda. I don't drink alcohol , smoke , or have a drug problem. But I like my coca cola! But I will get over a soda tax if the government starts giving out discounts on fresh produce. How about that Big Brother? Give us a reward for healthy eating. Of course that won't happen, because it would cost Uncle Sam money!!

  - Kim

• August 17, 2010 2:34 p.m.

  Absolutely positively NOT. The 'government' does NOT have the RIGHT to tax Sugars, based upon what “they” consider healthy living. We live in AMERICA and we have this thing called FREEDOM. Then what next? A water tax or tampon tax.. or condoms and Viagra.. I think there should be a huge tax on Vicodin.. the most abused prescription drug in the US and tax the doctors writing the scripts.. WAKE UP AMERICANS Do not give your Freedoms away.. "VOTE Early and VOTE Often"

  - Grace_AZ

• August 7, 2010 1:13 p.m.

  How dare you try to tax what I drink, whether it contains sugar, high fruitcose ore aspartame. Tax the manufacturer. And by the way, about half of what we eat, drink, or do comes from companies with operations in China operating at very high profit margins with virtually no oversight as to it's safety. Why not tax those companies? But to tax the consumer? Rediculous.

  - sunspur

• August 7, 2010 1:07 p.m.

  why not tax sugar laden drinks. The government already taxes about everything else one does, buys or watches. Yeah. Sugar adds to obesity and indirectly adds to the cost of health care. OOPS. What about SEX? it adds to every aspect of government expenditures. Why not stop giving tax breaks to couples having more than 2 children? I'd be for it, since my wife and I have never been able to have offspring, yet we don't get the "perks" that couples with children get. SO, what I'm saying is this: Don't muck with my beer and softdrinks, and then expect whopping tax breaks for having multiple kids. In other words. keep the government out of my private life including what I eat, drink, and do in the bedroom.

  - Gordon