Santa Clara County (California): Supervisors ban toys with fast-food meals

Source: San Jose Mercury News

By a 3-2 vote, Santa Clara County supervisors today approved the nation's first childhood obesity ordinance targeting toy giveaways with fast-food meals.

The ordinance would prohibit restaurants from giving away toys with kids' meals that are high in fat, sugar and calories.

The ban's reach will be very limited. It will only affect restaurants in the unincorporated areas of Santa Clara County such as San Martin.

Read more: http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_14968786

---

So while this may be a national milestone, it's pretty toothless because it won't affect cities like San Jose (my hometown) or the more populated areas like Milpitas or Saratoga or Santa Clara or Cupertino. I guess there'd be a riot if this ban were county-wide.

Still I have a word: PARENTING!

Some of us actually do feed their children nutritious food on a regular basis, so a Happy Meal can be a treat with a toy for a parent on a limited income. I can't count how many times I've seen just fathers out with their young child on visitation and a Happy Meal w/their child. When they take away the toy those people will just drive elsewhere.

If you don't want kids eating junk food then

1) ensure that the SCHOOLS are feeding children health food

2) make good nutrition education easier to access for all parents and caretakers

3) make nutritious food easier to access for all parents and caretakers (inner city, especially)

Taking away the toy is NOT going to solve the problem of childhood obesity.

So are we. I was ecstatic when they came out with the Wizard of Oz toys!

In fact, I never actually bought the Happy Meal to get the toy; I had asked the manager at my local Mickey D's if I could just buy the toy, and not only did he sell me the toy, he rounded up the whole collection (some of them being at stores across town) and called me when he had the complete set for me.

As far as removing the toys from Happy Meals; come on, we have much bigger things to worry about than giving kids a little treat every once in a while. IMO.

yes, i have a ton of them, too.

Please layout clothes for my children to wear tomorrow. I'm not qualified to raise them.

Who pays the bills if your kid gets morbidly obese? How much does that cost the rest of us? Seems to me a lot of folks aren't qualified to raise their kids, and this is thanks in large part to corporate amerika. What we really need, imho is an outright ban on high fructose corn sweetner.

I'm all about letting consumers decide. However, the deck is kind of stacked against healthy choices because too often the crap is less expensive and more convenient. If you don't believe me, just go down the juice aisle and compare the cost of 100% fruit juice against the sugary syrup in water. That's just one example. By slapping a tax on HFCS it sort of evens things out and let's the market work. The tax on HFCS could then help fund health care. It is true that when people get sick (chronic illness, heart disease, etc) it affects more than just them and the people close to them. The real cost of junk food is not reflected in the price we pay.

It at least allows a parent to choose rather than take away that choice.

The parents should pay for their own little pigs! Move more or eat less! I smoke and eat ice cream every night, eat at McDonald's or Wendy's at least 4 times a week, yet I'm not fat. Maybe its my dna or could it be that I get off the couch and do something.

causing that problem. I think it's government doing this nanny crap all over the place. Banning trans fats. Talk in New York of banning salt in restaurants. Looks like the movie Demolition Man is being prophetic.
The question I want to ask is: Is this still a free country?

maybe they should stop worrying about the toys and start worrying about the food in our schools - have you taken a good look at that lately?

for once again demonstrating how little most people know about the psychology behind junk food addiction.

Hopefully, this and future actions in down the line will raise awareness of the insidious nature of the issue.

Lower price of happy meal by 1 penny... charge 1 penny if the customer want it.

Now you're messing with our Happy Meals.

Now there's gonna be a revolution.

to their children rather than having the government legislate it.

cracker jacks.

Kids don't get fat on the toys.

With all the problems in our society, these stupid bills should be banned. How about letting parents make the decisions?

disgusting

That said, until the system gets changed we've got an obligation as parents to equip our kids to resist Happy Meals and that sort of bullshit, instead of rolling over and buying the kids every bit of crap that's advertised on TV.

n/t

crap like this.

just more cheap Chinese plastic junk that pollutes the air (and lungs and bloodstream of child sweatshop workers) while being manufactured, is "played with" for 5 minutes, then adds to the already overflowing mountains of discarded plastic crap filling our landfills.

As a flea market seller in Florida for several years, I had overflowing boxes of that crap I sold for 25 cents per item--I got them at yard sales for practically nothing. In the end, when I went out of that business, I had a giant plastic tote box full of the cheezy things that I ended up giving away to a neighborhood kid.

oh dear, what's the world coming to, the poor widdle children will have to eat without getting a toy :cry:

I guess a few more gallons of gas can be burned driving to some other fast "food" place so junior can get his fill of empty calories of saturated fat, sugar, and salt, and another toy to throw in the trash.

> those toys are an ecological disaster
> just more cheap Chinese plastic junk that pollutes the air (and lungs
> and bloodstream of child sweatshop workers) while being manufactured,
> is "played with" for 5 minutes, then adds to the already overflowing
> mountains of discarded plastic crap filling our landfills.

Not just the landfills but the oceans too.

All those people whinging about "Nanny State" upthread should try thinking
a little about the impact of such pointless pieces of crap ... (and I'm
talking about the toys rather than the meals here before anyone starts!)

since people are apparently too stupid to do that without being told to.

"nanny state" is a stock libertarian phrase that means "don't limit my irresponsibility to the environment or to other human beings--I should be free to be as bad a world citizen as I want to be." If the poor widdle "nanny staters" don't want "the state" making rules and trying to protect the environment and people's health (and the public expenditures for such things), Somalia is a good place to go.

:thumbsup:

is a phrase that means "I hate the government treating me like I'm some stupid child that has to be lead by the hand and told what to do."
And people that are in favor of the Nanny State have no respect for other people's ability to make decisions for themselves. It reeks of arrogance. "I know how to run your life better than you do"
Leave me the hell alone and go improve your own life.
98% of my kids' diets are fresh fruits and veggies from the farmer's market that we visit every week. Once a month we go to McDonald's because my son loves the chicken nuggets. The toy is just the icing on the cake.

Edited to add:
Besides... The choice is not total government control or Somalia. There are gray areas between those two extremes. I'm just on the side wanting freedom, and you seem to be less of the freedom side. Anything that pisses you off should be illegal. Everything that is not totally necessary should be either taxed to death or banned outright. Want to close down that water park because it wastes water? Want to tax sodas out of existence? Want to stop people from smoking in any where but their homes? You will never be able to control everything, and laws like this are just going to piss people off and turn them away. I know when I see crap like this and people support it, I roll my eyes. I guess everything wrong in Santa Clara from potholes to crime have been taken care of.
I think Santa Clara should vote these people out pronto.

*scratching head*

*donning garlic bulb necklace*

What is the purpose of banning the toys in Happy Meals? Do they honestly think that this is going to actually cut back on people buying their kids fast food at Mickie D's and other such places? Parents don't take their kids to burger joints for the toys, they take them there to feed them. But now instead of getting their kids the relatively normal serving sizes of a Happy Meal, I can see them getting much bigger portions off the dollar menus and such.

Instead of idiot feel good laws that are ineffective at best, why not put an emphasis on education and parenting instead.

And banning the psychological manipulation of kids is not "Nanny State", banning selling fast food to kids would be "nanny state".

What about the toy/prize in the box of cereal and cracker jacks. Is that psychological manipulation?
What about dessert or treats? Find me one parent who never used a treat or dessert to get their kid to do or not do something.
How about banning Halloween and Easter, since kids really only see those as holidays where they get candy.
And while we're at it, I think Christmas is a horrible influence on kids...expecting presents...

I could eat at McDonald's every day, find healthy food, and not get fat. I could eat in a "non-fast food" place, get my sandwiches or pizza slice or whatever just as fast, eat too much and get fat. Horrible....

McDonald's is clearly unhealthy, but nowhere near as bad as cigarettes. They don't create addiction either.

You could have addressed my point instead of completely ignoring the content of my post.

Happy Meals with toys is a marketing gimmick aimed at children, who then pressure Mommy and Daddy to buy them that grease-laden crap, establishing unhealthy eating habits from an early age. Look at how many obese children there are now, and how many swilling down saturated fat, salt, and calories with completely nutritionless sugar water (hey, why not just give the kid 10 teaspoons of sugar right out of the sugar bowl? that's how many are in a can of soda, never mind one of those fast-food cups). But it's all cool because they get a cool toy on top of the artery-choking gunk that passes for "food."

but if parents want to feed that crap to their children as well as ignore the ramifications of yet more plastic junk in their fake "green" lives, well I guess that's their "right" (personally, I consider the deadening "food" a form of child abuse)--but it comes back years later in the form of heart disease, diabetes, and obesity--public health problems. But it sure makes the pharmaceutical mfrs happy--where would they be without most of the public clutching their chests, "dieting," and popping pills for everything from high blood pressure to hardened arteries to heartburn and diabetes?

And since when do they have to "bribe" their children to eat that crap by adding a toy--I don't understand your point about getting kids to do or not do something by offering a treat, except that you're making my point--the junk food mfrs are manipulating children with that stuff.

Joe Camel was a marketing gimmick aimed at youth, to make smoking "cool." Excessive saturated fat, salt, and sugar are now considered as dangerous as smoking to people's health, and children are brainwashed into thinking that somehow eating that way is "normal" and desirable and even "cool."

My point was that that characterization was extreme. If you want to demonize all advertising as manipulative, so be it. It's mommy and daddy's job to not give in to the pressure their kids aim at them. It's their job to establish good eating habits to avoid the health problems you mention. If I want to go to McDonald's three or four times a year with my four year old, I am hardly feeding crap to my kid. Childhood obesity? Not McDonald's fault. It's "all cool because they get a cool toy on top of the artery-choking gunk". You sound like the liberal version of O'Reilly.

For your information, this "grease-laden crap" consists of 4 chicken nuggets with a total of 2 grams of saturated fat, apple slices with 0 grams sat fat, and apple juice with 0 grams sat fat. McDonald's has plenty of healthy options, just like any supermarket. Mandating marketing gimmicks or the lack thereof will not have any bearing on what I choose to buy or put in the stomach of my children.

I agree that both the toy and the camel are marketing gimmicks, but that's not really what I was addressing. Who cares about a fu--ing 2 inch toy. Cancel Christmas if you're so concerned about plastic and materialism and parental pressure and fake "green" lives. Your rants about artery-choking gunk and obesity and heart disease and the pharmaceutical industry and the advertising industry are all well and good, but kind of off topic.

I disagree in that McDonald's is no longer inherently unhealthy and certainly not addictive, while cigarettes are both.

McD's, whether you like them or not, has made huge changes in its food prep and menu selections in response to increased public awareness of nutritional issues. Cigarette companies largely ignored the public for decades and augmented the addictive effect of their product by addictive still more dangerous chemicals.

Eating at McD's does not cause heart disease, obesity, diabetes, etc. Eating excessively and unhealthily does. Smoking does cause cardiovascular disease, COPD, and cancer, even for second-handers.

is, in fact, a marketing strategy designed by the manufacturers to attract children to their product. The goal over the years, has always been to sell an increasing number of boxes (now bags) of Cracker Jacks. Their strategy has clearly worked. Acknowledging this is not a value judgment, but a statement of fact.

In my opinion, corporations should not be allowed to market to young children. Parents have it hard enough raising their children in this day and age. Their problems are compounded by advertisers hawking crap to children that is rarely good for them, and in many cases, detrimental to their long term health, such as the 'food' served at McDonald's.

How about parents just not take their kids to McDonald's?

Dicks. Everywhere.

My kids rarely get happy meals, but once in a while, what is the big deal? the toys are cute..ppl need a life.

Precisely the association the child psychologists behind the billion dollar junk food marketing campaigns are looking for....