More McIdiots Banning Happy Meals

I’ve come up with an idea to solve the nation’s obesity issue: outlaw all newspapers and magazines, including their online versions.

As the experts behind Michelle Obama’s “Let’s Move!” campaign have informed us, too many Americans are fat because they spend too much time just sitting around — and let’s face it, reading newspapers and magazines is a sedentary pursuit. Those greedy publishers, thinking of nothing but their own profits, are encouraging people to sit on their fat butts when they should be outside taking a walk or playing with their kids.

Predictably, the publishers will condemn my plan and insist that I haven’t produced any proof whatsoever that taking away newspapers and magazines will solve the obesity problem. That may be true, but any measure that incentivizes consumers to spend less time reading and more time moving can only help.

I came up with my plan while reading an online article from TIME magazine explaining how some nanny-state politicians in New York City plan to follow the lead of nanny-state politicians in San Francisco by banning Happy Meal toys. (I was, of course, jogging in place while reading the article, but I know better than most magazine readers.)

Well actually, they’re not banning all Happy Meal toys — only toys accompanying Happy Meals that don’t meet with the nanny-state politicians’ approval:

New York City Council member Leroy G. Comrie Jr. of Queens is leading the charge to ban kid-friendly toys from any fast-food meal that doesn’t meet certain nutritional standards, arguing that the plastic playthings serve to reward children for making poor food choices and undermine parents’ attempts to steer kids toward healthful options.

Mr. Comrie’s bill, which he is to introduce in the City Council on Wednesday, would restrict toys to meals that contain fewer than 500 calories and 600 milligrams of sodium, and in which less than 35 percent of the calories come from fat (making exceptions for nuts, seeds, peanut butter or other nut-based butters). In addition, the meal would have to contain a half a cup of fruit or vegetables or one serving of whole-grain products.

Awesome. Fabulous. Terrific. Let’s use the coercive power of government to remove more brain-building saturated fat from Happy Meals and replace them with more gluten and lectins — and of course, some vegetables the kids can enjoy throwing in the garbage.

As a parent, I still haven’t figured out how including a toy with a Happy Meal undermines my attempts to steer my kids toward healthful options. When my girls whine for a treat I don’t think they should have, I employ a technique passed down from my grandparents, to my parents, to me: I say no. I thought that’s what most parents do. But apparently I was wrong about that:

“I think it’s important to find a way to make a healthy lifestyle palatable and exciting,” Comrie told the New York Times’ City Room blog, acknowledging that he was motivated to write the bill out of guilt for “grabbing Happy Meals” for his own kids.

Ah, I see. Mr. Comrie wasn’t intelligent or disciplined enough to make smart choices for his own kids, so naturally this qualifies him to make decisions for mine. Clearly the best way to prevent McDonald’s from undermining my parental authority is to have the government beat them to it. Please, Mr. Comrie, stop me before I engage in another voluntary exchange.

The proposed law is a tribute to the idiocy of nanny-state politicians, but the article itself is also a tribute to the idiocy of the rah-rah journalists who cheer them on. As evidence, I present these closing sentences:

Predictably, McDonald’s condemned the proposed measure. An executive for the company’s New York region said: “Taking away toys from kids’ meals won’t solve childhood obesity.”

That may be true, but any measure that incentivizes food makers to offer healthier options for consumers can only help.

Got that? Taking away toys may not solve childhood obesity, but it can only help. That’s all you have to say to convince a rah-rah journalist that restricting freedom in a supposedly free country is a good idea: By gosh, it might just help … even if it probably won’t.

Outlawing newspapers and magazines may not make people leaner, that’s true … but anything that incentivizes them to be more active can only help. Let’s get ‘er done!

While reading the article (and trying very hard not to bang my head on my desk), I followed a link to another article about a new report that ranks the nation’s counties in terms of health. Here are some choice paragraphs:

A comprehensive survey of overall health county-by-county in the U.S. confirms a few things we already know to be true: being poor is bad for your health. So is having low education, not having a job and having less access to grocery stores and farmer’s markets for fresh food.

The County Health Rankings report, available online, ranks the health of more than 3,000 counties based on a wide variety of social, physical and environmental measures including but not limited to: adult smoking and obesity, premature death, numbers of uninsured, violent crime, car accident deaths, single parenthood, mammography screening rate, sexually transmitted disease, air pollution, numbers of low-birthweight babies born, income and education.

“It’s hard to lead a healthy life if you don’t live in a healthy community,” Risa Lavizzo-Mourey, president and CEO of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF), which collaborated with the University of Wisconsin’s Population Health Institute on the report, said in a statement. “We hope that policymakers, businesses, educators, public health departments and community residents will use the Rankings to develop solutions to help people live healthier lives.”

Oh, I see … people engage in unhealthy behaviors because they live in unhealthy communities. Glad we got the cause and effect straightened out. Now the policymakers and public-health departments can jump in there and develop solutions to help people live healthier lives. Maybe they’ll start by outlawing Happy Meal toys.

Out of curiosity, I followed the links to the county-by-county rankings in California and Tennessee. In California, we lived in Los Angeles County, which is ranked number 26 out of 56 in the state. Well, that explains a lot … I still have painful memories of my mediocre health back then. Fortunately, we now live in Williamson County, which is ranked number 1 out of 95 counties in Tennessee. Man, has my health ever improved. As soon as we moved here, I started adopting the healthy habits of my new neighbors.

Strangely, though, there’s no shortage of McDonald’s restaurants around here that sell Happy Meals. We’d better do something about that. I’d hate to lose our number 1 ranking.

If you enjoy my posts, please consider a small donation to the Fat Head Kids GoFundMe campaign.

68 thoughts on “More McIdiots Banning Happy Meals”

Peggy Cihocki April 10, 2011 at 2:21 pm

This is not apropos of any one post, but just a huge thank you for making the movie, the Fig Fat Fiasco Speech, and providing all your very helpful links on this site. I just enjoyed my version of “bacon slab” from one of the LC recipe sites linked (I made it with onions, garlic, jalapenos, and cheddar and pepper jack cheese, rather than bacon and spinach, but will try the original version one of these days. I just happen to like the Mexican flavors and adapted a quiche I used to make to the recipe for bacon slab.) I’ve been on board–theoretically, anyway–with the idea that mainstream nutritional guidelines (and the lipid hypothesis) are wrong for at least 6 years, since I first read the books by Sally Fallon and Mary Enig, Gary Taubes, Uffe Ravnskov, and many others, but found it hard to implement in my own life and family. Your site helps and I thank you for the time and effort you put into keeping it up. I’m a newbie to your site and am still exploring and going through the archives, but find it all very informative and helpful. Thank you.

Thank you for reading.

Dave, RN April 10, 2011 at 5:17 pm

I can see it now. You’ll have to show an ID to buy a happy meal.

I had planned once to write a little parody in which people have to step on a scale before being allowed to high-calorie meals, but then some legislators proposed pretty much the idea. That’s the trouble with trying to use comic exaggeration to poke fun at nanny-state types: no matter how ridiculous you make your parody, they eventually catch up.

Dave June 5, 2019 at 9:07 am

I think all of you are missing a terrific idea…ready?

Have McD’s make TOY SHAPED VEGGIES! Have them slice carrots into 1/4″ strips, and then use a cookie-cutter to make it look like Ronald! Take paring knife to 1/2 of an apple and make it look like a Hamburger!

Broccoli…aah, can’t think of much that can be done with that (The brains of CSPI? No, that would be empty in both nutritional value and physical space).

The heads of the food police will explode, because banning “healthy toys” will be too much for them to handle! 😉

Oh, and I agree 100% that a trip to McD’s is a waste of food…they’d much rather play, and then they’re too tired to eat their cold food. Four kids (2 boys, 2 girls) gives me some good statistical results.

Brilliant ideas. Add my two girls to your statistical results. Two bites, off to the playland.

Nick S June 5, 2019 at 9:07 am

I know it’s probably not much fun to argue with naysayers in your comment section, but don’t be too discouraged – those discussions are often the most interesting information I find here. Keep responding with evidence. 🙂

I don’t mind naysayers if they remember they’re guests on my blog and behave accordingly.

Lori June 5, 2019 at 9:07 am

“Atkins is hard to stick with in the long run. The problem is that people who do it for a long time really start craving carbs, and [Atkins] doesn’t encourage a balanced kind of eating.”

Ugh, yes. The clear sinuses, clear skin, energy, pain-free joints, white teeth, no acid reflux, quick and easy meals, and having my 18-year-old figure back…I don’t know how much longer I can keep this up.

But … but … if you were willing to give all that up, you could eat cake!

dlm June 5, 2019 at 9:07 am

Getting the government involved when you can’t parent:
At a condo building, the strata president told me to bug off when I complained about his 30s son (still living on aging parents) smoking on his balcony directly above the lobby door, rather than using his other balcony on the side of the building. But he also said he wished the government would ban smoking so he could stop his son.
ps lack of tallow is why McDonald’s fries don’t have any flavour anymore.

Oh my goodness. That’s a dad who needs to give junior the boot.

Dave April 11, 2011 at 7:53 am