I came across an interesting editorial article written by a nutrition researcher, Dr. Neal Barnard, arguing that the bill that Mayor Bloomberg tried to pass, which would limit the foods that people could purchase with their food stamps, would be for the greater good.  He believes that by prohibiting people from using their food stamps to purchase sugary sodas, it will prevent candy and soda from "being dangled in front of [food stamp users'] faces," and therefore benefit them.  He believes we can all use less temptations in our lives, to help us become healthier.

I do agree with Dr. Barnard on some points.  Specifically, I think we all can use healthier options to be more affordable.  I also believe that people of all economic classes and education levels can use MORE education to teach us how to eat healther and make the right choices.  Where Dr. Barnard and I disagree, however, is how this can be achieved.

If you want society to thrive, these unhealthy options should be harder to access by EVERYONE - not just people using food stamps.  Why not just tax the sodas (as was also proposed), just like we taxed cigarettes in NYC.  But beyond that, we really do need to make fresh, healthy foods more affordable.  For everyone.  And we need to educate everyone - just like math or science - how to read and understand a nutrition label (Or, for that matter, come up with a better nutrition label system)!  Targeting people who use food stamps is not just wrong, but it wouldn't be effective anyway, Dr. Barnard.  Try again.

Does anyone else have any thoughts?