Singapore to become first country banning ads on sugary drinks • Hacker News Board

Re: Singapore to become first country banning ads on sugary drinks

#71

Post by cagenut » Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 5:46 PM UTC

jakelazaroff wrote: post #58

Someone1234 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK has a similar "traffic light" system[0] on their foods. I cannot speak to everyone, but for me seeing red salt makes me look again at other options. It is a gentle nudge but helps. By contrast US food labeling is an anti-pattern. "Serving size" seems arbitrary and makes it impossible to compare foods even directly next to one another on the shelf (plus they're intentionally unrealistic, like a single chocolate…

It would be so simple to fix the serving size issue, too: just force labels to list nutrition information for the whole thing as well as per serving!

In 2016 the rules were updated for certain package sizes to require just that. You see it on almost all >1 to https://www.fda.gov/media/99203/download

Re: Singapore to become first country banning ads on sugary drinks

#72

Post by jaclaz » Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 5:48 PM UTC

squarefoot wrote: post #14

mark_l_watson wrote: post #2

Usually I am for freedom to do anything you want as long as it does not impact other people. I am OK though with banning ads for sugary drinks because society pays a high medical cost for damage due to excess sugar addiction/use. This is like forcing motor cycle riders to wear helmets. BTW, I worked in Singapore for a while in 2016. Wonderful place! People just seemed happy there, from business people to laborers. If…

"This is like forcing motor cycle riders to wear helmets." Which is the case in many countries including mine. When they enacted the law I was still a youngster driving his motorcycle, constantly speeding and doing those things people do in their 20s. I hated that law, then a few accidents and fractures later I realized that the "stupid" law probably saved my parents from the horror of outliving me. I'm also for 100%…

Only as anecdata, I got my first motorcycle at 14 and that was several years before any Law made helmets compulsory.

My dad (who also was a motorcyclist) when giving me the bike told me that the helmet and gloves were the keys to start the engine:

"no helmet, no gloves, you cannot start the bike." A lot of friends didn't have the same imprimatur, and since it was not compulsory, rode happily their bikes without protections, and - even if I always wore the helmet according to the recommendation - I thought several times how futile it was, expecially for short rides/in the city until unfortunately a friend, just turned 19, died in a "stupid" accident, at no more than 30 km/h (he forgot the side stand down and pivoted on it, hitting a curb wiith his head).

Re: Singapore to become first country banning ads on sugary drinks

#73

Post by brookside » Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 5:52 PM UTC

Someone1234 wrote: post #51

xhruso00 wrote: post #43

"In addition to an ad ban, the ministry announced that sugary drinks would also be required to display a color-coded, front-of-pack nutrition label to list nutritional quality and sugar content." I like Japanese/Taiwanese approach which list percentage of fruit juice (front-of-pack). And manufacturers can't cheat with substitutes like apple cause it doesn't count. This is way more useful for consumers to decide what…

The UK has a similar "traffic light" system[0] on their foods. I cannot speak to everyone, but for me seeing red salt makes me look again at other options. It is a gentle nudge but helps. By contrast US food labeling is an anti-pattern. "Serving size" seems arbitrary and makes it impossible to compare foods even directly next to one another on the shelf (plus they're intentionally unrealistic, like a single chocolate…

> seeing red salt makes me look again at other options.

Do you have high blood pressure? My understanding is sodium isn't a concern unless high BP is an issue.

Re: Singapore to become first country banning ads on sugary drinks

#74

Post by marcosdumay » Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 5:56 PM UTC

mark_l_watson wrote: post #2

Usually I am for freedom to do anything you want as long as it does not impact other people. I am OK though with banning ads for sugary drinks because society pays a high medical cost for damage due to excess sugar addiction/use. This is like forcing motor cycle riders to wear helmets. BTW, I worked in Singapore for a while in 2016. Wonderful place! People just seemed happy there, from business people to laborers. If…

Ads are by definition something that impacts other people.

They should be heavily regulated, with minimum information, maximum frequency, truth requirements, format restrictions, elimination of confusing language, and anything else that becomes a problem. I'm all for allowing ads and their platforms, but there is no way they can be free.

Re: Singapore to become first country banning ads on sugary drinks

#75

Post by AlchemistCamp » Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 5:57 PM UTC

OrgNet wrote: post #60

Someone1234 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK has a similar "traffic light" system[0] on their foods. I cannot speak to everyone, but for me seeing red salt makes me look again at other options. It is a gentle nudge but helps. By contrast US food labeling is an anti-pattern. "Serving size" seems arbitrary and makes it impossible to compare foods even directly next to one another on the shelf (plus they're intentionally unrealistic, like a single chocolate…

And in the US, they started using 3 "different kinds of sugars" to make sugar appear lower on the list of ingredients that are sorted by quantity... i.e.: sugar, high fructose corn syrup & corn syrup

"They" started that at least 20 years ago, probably 30+ years ago. I saw it myself in 1999.

Re: Singapore to become first country banning ads on sugary drinks

#76

Post by Uhuhreally » Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 6:03 PM UTC

I would like to see a ban on all ads. I am sick of them. I resent with all my heart that wherever I go I'm bombared with propaganda for products. Nobody should have the right to hijack other peoples attention.

Re: Singapore to become first country banning ads on sugary drinks

#77

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 6:03 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #20

smackmybishop wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a point there that I don't think gets enough discussion: As healthcare becomes increasingly socialized, personal unhealthy choices become an attack on society at large. Why wouldn't we ban sugary drinks altogether? Motorcycle riding even with a helmet? Maybe get rid of pasta. It's not clear to me where we should stop, if medical costs to society are a valid justification for reducing personal freedom...

Banning advertising is very different from banning the products themselves. The intent of advertising is to increase consumption so the impact is more widespread than personal choices. It’s in effect a form of meme pollution.

[deleted]

Re: Singapore to become first country banning ads on sugary drinks

#78

Post by Viliam1234 » Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 6:07 PM UTC

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #42

smackmybishop wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a point there that I don't think gets enough discussion: As healthcare becomes increasingly socialized, personal unhealthy choices become an attack on society at large. Why wouldn't we ban sugary drinks altogether? Motorcycle riding even with a helmet? Maybe get rid of pasta. It's not clear to me where we should stop, if medical costs to society are a valid justification for reducing personal freedom...

Personally I believe that this is the end state of socialized health care, and I'm afraid we'll see it implemented on a wide scale within the next 20 years. It'll likely start with a hate tax, which is already in affect in a handful of locations. The only real question to me is which will be banned 'for the good of society' first: sugar, or meat? Meat has the extra argument going around of having an impact on the cli…

> The only real question to me is which will be banned 'for the good of society' first: sugar, or meat?

At this moment, there are more countries that subsidize them than countries that ban them or tax them extra.

So my tax money first goes to allow people eat more meat and sugar, and then to pay their medical expenses caused by excessive meat and sugar consumption.

Re: Singapore to become first country banning ads on sugary drinks

#79

Post by dennisgorelik » Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 6:08 PM UTC

Mirioron wrote: post #62

furyg3 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a ‘slippery slope’ fallacy, and your example even demonstrates its unlikelihood. Cigarettes have been around for a very long time, and the act of smoking them long-term is basically terminal behavior (which we’ve also known about for quite a while). Many countries have banned advertising or limited it, but even in many ‘progressive’ countries (eg Germany) cigarette advertisement is still alive and well. And I…

> This is a ‘slippery slope’ fallacy, and your example even demonstrates its unlikelihood. That's the point. Change happens either through a revolution or a "slippery slope". You can call it a fallacy all you want, but think about how successful political change happens. Almost every instance starts small and keeps pushing the boundaries until the political change has happened. This is how you change people's values,…

> keeps pushing the boundaries until the political change has happened

... so you made a conclusion that political change happened because of small changes? That conclusion is incorrect. The change happened because of underlying need for that change. In case of smoking, because smokers are much more likely to die from cancer.

In case of sugary drinks, the need to change is not as strong. That is why restricting advertising is sufficient. Well, may be they will tax sugary products, but banning sugary products will NOT happen.

In any case, whether we need to do the next step or not -- we will decide based on analysis of previous step. That decision is much more likely to be correct if we do small steps, instead of allowing ourselves only do big changes.

Re: Singapore to become first country banning ads on sugary drinks

#80

Post by Uhuhreally » Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 6:09 PM UTC

mark_l_watson wrote: post #2

Usually I am for freedom to do anything you want as long as it does not impact other people. I am OK though with banning ads for sugary drinks because society pays a high medical cost for damage due to excess sugar addiction/use. This is like forcing motor cycle riders to wear helmets. BTW, I worked in Singapore for a while in 2016. Wonderful place! People just seemed happy there, from business people to laborers. If…

Although motorcycling is very dangerous, I don't think riders should be forced to wear anything. Instead I think the manatory training should go to a much more advanced level before you can go on the road.