LA Times: San Francisco bans Happy Meals

[Califan007 The Constipated]

"We're part of a movement that is moving forward an agenda of food justice," said Supervisor Eric Mar, who sponsored the measure.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Maybe when they ban fast food?

It's the co-marketing with the toy with the unhappy meal that is the issue, not the existence of unhealthy food.

So does that mean McDonalds can no longer use Ronald McDonald as its spokesperson unless its entire menu is deemed "healthy"?

[zoony]

Just replace the unhealthy food with a packet of smokes. There's nothing wrong with marketing unhealthy products to young kids. And replace the parents with ones who can say no.

if they put a dime bag in the happy meal instead of the toy, I think most SF residents would be okay with that.

[#98QBKiller]

Maybe when they ban fast food?

It's the co-marketing with the toy with the unhappy meal that is the issue, not the existence of unhealthy food.

That doesn't make it any less ridiculous.

I'm also on the same page with Thiebear and wondering if the option of fruit over fries in the Happy Meal is a loophole.

[Corcaigh]

So does that mean McDonalds can no longer use Ronald McDonald as its spokesperson unless its entire menu is deemed "healthy"?

Anyone whose coached youth sports would confirm that 98.7% of parents are unfit to take care of kids. I think San Francisco should run a sting operation where anyone buying an unhappy meal will have their kids placed in care. The parents should be sterilized too.

[#98QBKiller]

if they put a dime bag in the happy meal instead of the toy, I think most SF residents would be okay with that.

I'm not sure about that, only crappy weed comes in dimebags.

:paranoid:

[zoony]

Happy Meals = evil

Pot Brownies = wholesome and good

...

[Corcaigh]

if they put a dime bag in the happy meal instead of the toy, I think most SF residents would be okay with that.

I used to "collect" Happy Meal Toys from my kids. Some of those were seriously cool such as the Animaniacs. One had an icecream cone oscillating in and out of a box as it moved. I got aroused every time I pushed it across my desk at work. I got the promotion too.

[Bang]

SO, I'm noticing that you can still go and get a Happy Meal in San Francisco, this measure just says no toys will be offered with it unless it complies to a certain nutritional standard.

No toy is not a ban Happy Meals. Your kid can still go and get his cheeseburger and fries in a fun box. But if the food inside adds up to more than 600 calories (with over 35% being from fat) then no toy. And he can go get a Happy Meal that has raisins or apple slices in it and get the toy.

But hey,, don't let that get in the way of a good cry.

~Bang

[Corcaigh]

That doesn't make it any less ridiculous.

This is 'merica. Who the **** are you to determine what's ridiculous or not.

[Corcaigh]

SO, I'm noticing that you can still go and get a Happy Meal in San Francisco, this measure just says no toys will be offered with it unless it complies to a certain nutritional standard.

No toy is not a ban Happy Meals.

But hey,, don't let that get in the way of a good cry.

~Bang

The right of male adult Redskins fans to collect cheap Jasmine figurines is being infringed. The horror. The outrage.

[NavyDave]

So San Francisco is mandating that there must be fruits at McDonald's.

[Drop]

i'm no liberal hippy, but i like this. and i'm not one for the government getting all up in our **** either. BUT, this relates to the health of a nation whose children have the highest rate of obesity of anywhere in the world. People carelessly feed their kids McDonalds every single day, maybe two or three times a day, and don't see to it that they're eating any fruits, vegetables, or getting the exercise they need.

I have a 3 year old, who has been to McDonald's ONCE. And that was with his grandmother. My wife and i just don't eat there. Now i'll have McDonalds for lunch here and there when i'm at work, but nothing outside of once or twice every couple weeks. And it's not like my son CAN'T have McDonald's here or there....it's just not something i want him eating more than once a week or so. My wife is a helluva cook, he'd be missing out anyway.

Is there really harm in feeding your children fruits and vegetables? i like my red meat and fats as much as anyone...but i eat vegetables or fruits with dinner as well because my wife goes out of her way to make sure we eat delicious, homemade, balanced meals.

Anyone who thinks this is stupid.....think about it again next time you see a news report about how fat everyone is in this country, or the next time you catch yourself gawking at how fat someone's kid is.

Again, i'm not one for government intervention in our everday lives....but if there is one place i can tolerate it, it's here.

[twa]

Anyone whose coached youth sports would confirm that 98.7% of parents are unfit to take care of kids. . The parents should be sterilized too.

I can agree on this portion, but I don't blame Happy Meals

[aREDSKIN]

So San Francisco is mandating that there must be fruits at McDonald's.

Kinda of an odd mandate for San Fransico. :cool:

[#98QBKiller]

SO, I'm noticing that you can still go and get a Happy Meal in San Francisco, this measure just says no toys will be offered with it unless it complies to a certain nutritional standard.

No toy is not a ban Happy Meals. Your kid can still go and get his cheeseburger and fries in a fun box. But if the food inside adds up to more than 600 calories (with over 35% being from fat) then no toy. And he can go get a Happy Meal that has raisins or apple slices in it and get the toy.

But hey,, don't let that get in the way of a good cry.

~Bang

No toy = not really a Happy Meal, every kid knows that. Besides, this whole process seems like a big waste of city resources.

This is 'merica. Who the **** are you to determine what's ridiculous or not.

Which terrorist group do you work for?

[Drop]

SO, I'm noticing that you can still go and get a Happy Meal in San Francisco, this measure just says no toys will be offered with it unless it complies to a certain nutritional standard.

No toy is not a ban Happy Meals. Your kid can still go and get his cheeseburger and fries in a fun box. But if the food inside adds up to more than 600 calories (with over 35% being from fat) then no toy. And he can go get a Happy Meal that has raisins or apple slices in it and get the toy.

But hey,, don't let that get in the way of a good cry.

~Bang

absolutely. spot on Bang.

there's no crime in feeding your kid the right way. if you want the toy, you get the fruits and veggies. if you just really want the toy, pay extra for it if you're not willing to feed your kids some fruits and vegetables. why any moron wouldn't feed their kid decently is beyond me.

imo, those parents who feed their kids fast food nearly every night of the week for dinner, and sometimes twice a day......yeah, they're from the same mold as the idiots who walk around the mall with their kids on leashes because they either have no idea how to, or no desire to control their children in public.....or both.

[Bang]

No toy = not really a Happy Meal, every kid knows that. Besides, this whole process seems like a big waste of city resources.

Other than the council raising their hands to vote on it, how much resources are going to be used up? Maybe one inspector to drive around once every two months to double check?

A happy meal with no toy is not a happy meal to your adult sensibilities that grew up with it the other way.

My experience is tht kids love apples and raisins and grapes, etc. And if you tell them THAT is a Happy Meal with the toy, guess what they'll want?

A hamburger with a box of raisins and a new Buzz Lightyear super scooter! Yay!

~Bang

[Califan007 The Constipated]

SO, I'm noticing that you can still go and get a Happy Meal in San Francisco, this measure just says no toys will be offered with it unless it complies to a certain nutritional standard.

No toy is not a ban Happy Meals. Your kid can still go and get his cheeseburger and fries in a fun box. But if the food inside adds up to more than 600 calories (with over 35% being from fat) then no toy. And he can go get a Happy Meal that has raisins or apple slices in it and get the toy.

But hey,, don't let that get in the way of a good cry.

~Bang

Yes, because we all know that the politicians in SF will be more than content to let the law and its collective power stay at controlling a plastic toy in a Happy Meal.

Well, until they read my other post and realize that allowing McDonalds to use a clown as a mascot to entice kids into begging their parents to get them a Happy Meal, even without the toy, is just as bad...then a law will be passed that says fast food restaurants are not allowed to use imagery geared towards children in advertisements for food they deem unhealthy. If you ban Joe Camel then you sure as **** ban Ronald McDonald, right?...

Of course, those same politicians will realize that school mascots entice children to play in sports, some of which can be dangerous or lead to injuries...so mascots at any sporting event within the city limits of San Francisdo will be banned unless the sporting event has an injury rate less than a certain amount...Still, what to do about those televised sporting events from outside the city confines? Is there a way to pass a law making it illegal to air sporting events before 10:00 pm that include cartoonish mascots at physically challenging sporting events?

And what about those cute, cuddly polar bears that advertise Coke around Christmas time? Or Santa on the side of Coke cans as well? Both should obviously be banned, especially ol' Saint Nick on all of those sugary beverages that do nothing except rot kids' teefuses and make them obese. There shall be a pre-approved list of foods and beverages that can use animals and Santa on their advertisements in San Francisco.

Of course none of this should cause anyone any concern...afterall, parents will still be able to load their kids up on unhealthy junk food, take them to see violent sports events and pour gallons of ice cold Coke and Pepsi down their throats to their hearts' content...so that's good. :thumbsup:

[zoony]

I have a 3 year old, who has been to McDonald's ONCE. And that was with his grandmother. My wife and i just don't eat there. Now i'll have McDonalds for lunch here and there when i'm at work, but nothing outside of once or twice every couple weeks. And it's not like my son CAN'T have McDonald's here or there....it's just not something i want him eating more than once a week or so. My wife is a helluva cook, he'd be missing out anyway.

Except for the "my wife is a hell of a cook part", I'm in the same boat . The only time my son gets it is when he attends a birthday party that is catered with happy meals. I guess I could be the parent that makes him eat an apple, but I'm not that much of a nazi. A little fast food never hurt anyone. My daughter, to my knowledge, has never had any fast food other than Chick Fil A

[mardi gras skin]

Just mandate calories be displayed right next to the price of each item on a menu. Give ME the information I need to make good choices for my kids.

[Bang]

I rarely bought my son junk food as a small kid. He rarely got candy, hardly ever tasted soda. he did have McDonalds, and he had some Happy Meals, I didn't deprive him of those things entirely.

He doesn't dislike McDonalds food, he loves it as much as anyone does. But he also has had his tastes trained to enjoy the healthier things and to him they're just as good.

Now that he's 14 and has much more leeway in making his own choices, I see him make the right dietary choices more often than not.

About two weeks ago his Marching Band had a fund raiser night at the local Roy Rogers. I assumed he'd want to eat there with his friends, but all he wanted was a couple of bucks to get a soda, and he preferred to eat stir fry with usa at home before he left.

This makes me happy. And it proves that kids will make healthy choices so long as you positively reinforce them. And giving the toy with the healthier Happy Meal doesn't seem all that bad to me. It helps encourage healthier choices with a reward.

the funny thing is that the kids will be fine with this. It's the parents who aren't. Demanding the right to feed your kids trash is about as stupidly stubborn as anything I've ever heard.

This isn't a rights issue. It's a matter of trying to get a handle on childhood obesity by demanding these places encourage a healthier choice with their enticing toys. By the way, which in case no one notices beyond their self righteous bull****, childhood obesity is a HUGE problem in America. And whether your kids are fat or not, all those little cholesterol laden kids end up costing you in the long run. So, by saying they're removing your right to choose, realize they're also removing the rights of irresponsible parents to choose to burden you with rising health costs and other things that directly affect you via the problems childhood obesity causes.

So which rights do you want infringed? The right to a toy with your hapy meal, or the right of hundreds of thousands of irresponsible people to contribute to your rising healthcare costs thru their own self negligence?

Seems like a no-brain decision to me.

~Bang

[Drop]

Just mandate calories be displayed right next to the price of each item on a menu. Give ME the information I need to make good choices for my kids.

you can already find that information if you're a responsible parent. putting it on the menu next to the item is pointless. people already have the means and ability to make responsible choices for their children, and they don't do it. if you really think this will lead to parents making more responsible choices....well, that's a foolish line of thought my friend.

[Corcaigh]

Which terrorist group do you work for?

The ones that are winning.

[Corcaigh]

. Demanding the right to feed your kids trash is about as stupidly stubborn as anything I've ever heard.

This isn't a rights issue.

I though this was 'merica.

xfOEMwKO4Vo