<html><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><div>New York city banned trans fats in restaurant meals. They also required posting of calories in fast food meals:<br> <br><h1 style="font-style: italic;" id="Head">Fed court upholds New York City's calorie-posting rule</h1>
<h3 style="font-style: italic;" id="Abstract">City officials and physicians promoted the regulation
as an important step in fighting obesity. Other states and localities
have since followed suit. (2009)<br></h3><div style="font-style: italic;" id="Btext1">In a victory for public health, a federal appeals court
upheld a New York City ordinance requiring certain fast-food restaurant
chains to post calorie counts on their menus and menu boards.</div>
<div style="font-style: italic;">A panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Feb. 17
unanimously rejected protests from the restaurant industry that the city
rule -- believed to be the first of its kind -- was pre-empted by
federal regulations set by the Food and Drug Administration. Although
restaurant food is exempt from federal nutritional labeling
requirements, New York City, with its calorie-posting rule, "merely
stepped into a sphere ... left open to state and local governments" to
regulate public health and safety, Judge Rosemary S. Pooler wrote.</div><span style="font-style: italic;">
</span><div style="font-style: italic;">Judges also disagreed with the argument that the ordinance violated
restaurants' free-speech rights, saying "the law in question mandates a
simple factual disclosure of caloric information and is reasonably
related to New York City's goals of combating obesity."</div><div><br></div><div>San Francisco didn't ban Happy Meals, they just said that restaurants couldn't include a toy with a meal that didn't meet minimum nutritional standards. The clever people have already found a way around the law:</div><div><br></div><br><div style="font-style: italic;">On Thursday, San Francisco's controversial Healthy Food Incentive
Ordinance takes affect, banning toy giveaways with children's meals at
fast-food restaurants unless the meal meets San Francisco's strict
nutritional standards. And McDonald's has already figured out a way to
sidestep the ban almost entirely. </div>
<div style="font-style: italic;">The ban targets Happy Meal-style toys, claiming that the inclusion of
an incentive item unfairly targets marketing at children who are unable
to make healthy decisions for themselves. Though <a href="http://www.sfweekly.com/2011-01-19/news/san-francisco-bans-happy-meal-liberties-progressive/" target="_hplink">it was slammed by critics who claimed the ban enforced "nanny state" politics</a>,
the ordinance was easily passed by the Board of Supervisors in an 8-3
vote. Supervisor Eric Mar, who has a young daughter, introduced the ban,
arguing that the "pester power" of a young child seduced by the toys
can be enough to persuade parents to buy the unhealthy meals. </div>
<div style="font-style: italic;">But instead of changing the content of Happy Meals or eliminating the
toys, McDonald's is complying by charging a meager ten cents for the
addition of a toy -- with the proceeds benefiting the Ronald McDonald
House Charity. Well played. </div>
<div style="font-style: italic;">And if Mar's "pester power" is enough to drag parents to McDonald's
in the first place, there is little doubt it will be enough to make them
cough up an extra dime. </div>
<div style="font-style: italic;">"Instead of doing the right thing, McDonald's is avoiding limiting
its marketing to kids or improving the nutritional quality of their
unhealthy food by selling toys "separately" for an additional ten cents
-- while still requiring purchase of a Happy Meal to get the toy," said
Sara Deon, the Value [the] Meal Campaign Director at <a href="http://www.stopcorporateabuse.org/" target="_hplink">Corporate Accountability International</a>,
to The Huffington Post. "Though McDonald's has taken this cynical
approach to sidestep the new policy, the law has already had a
tremendous impact." </div>
<div style="font-style: italic;">The impact of the ordinance -- and legislation like it -- has indeed been palpable: <a href="http://www.stopcorporateabuse.org/node/1500" target="_hplink">McDonald's started offering options like milk and apple slices with its Happy Meals in July</a>, and <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43483446/ns/business-retail/t/jack-box-stop-offering-toys-kids-meals/#.TtZ6YHNW758" target="_hplink">Jack in the Box dropped toys from children's meals all together</a>.
But with a toy still available with the French fry-soda-fried
chicken-laden calorie bomb Happy Meal for a measly ten cents, we have a
feeling it will be business as usual at the world's largest fast food
chain. </div>
<div style="font-style: italic;">While advocates of the ordinance are disheartened by the
announcement, supporters insist that San Francisco is still taking a
large step in the right direction.</div>
<div style="font-style: italic;">"This law is an important achievement not only for the health of San
Francisco's children, but for children nationwide," said Mar. "We are
ensuring that parents and children have real choices when they eat out -- especially in communities saturated with McDonald's-style junk food." </div></div> <div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif; font-size: 12pt;"> <div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif; font-size: 12pt;"> <font face="Arial" size="2"> <hr size="1"> <b><span style="font-weight:bold;">From:</span></b> lfalen <lfalen@turbonet.com><br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> Tom Hansen <thansen@moscow.com> <br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Cc:</span></b> "Vision2020@moscow.com" <Vision2020@moscow.com> <br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Wednesday, November 30, 2011 11:35 AM<br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b> Re: [Vision2020] Should Legislation Protect the Obese?<br> </font> <br>
Read the news. San Francisco has banned Happy Meals and New York City has also placed restrictions on what restaurants can serve. I do not recall of hand what they were.<br>Roger<br>-<br> </div> </div> </div></body></html>