Dan DaranciangAs is commonly known, Washington University holds an exclusive contract with Coca-Cola. In such contracts, Coca-Cola provides cash to be the sole provider of soft drinks to a community. Soda contracts exist for many reasons, but perhaps the most insidious reason is that many schools feel they must take on the contracts in order to be financially solvent. An unfortunate reality thus exists for many high school districts: with the government not providing much in the way of operating funds, districts often find corporate backers, necessitating the acceptance of soda contracts. The thinking underlying soft drink contracts can be easily divined: the more children drinking soda, the more life-long brand-affiliated soda drinkers will be created. The question of whether these contracts do a disservice to children has come under much discussion the last few years, as pushes have been made to remove “junk” foods from schools.
A recent CNN.com article (“Scientists in food fight over soda”) chronicles the current effort by anti-soda groups to gather evidence against soft drinks. A “mock trial” held last year listed what those at the conference believed to be evidence that caloric soft drinks are adding to the obesity epidemic, and included lovely information such as this: between 1977 and 1997, soft drink consumption rose more than 60 percent among adults and more than doubled in children, while the prevalence of obesity roughly doubled. Even if this were enough to convince us of the horrors of soft drinks – which it most certainly is not – I believe removing soft drinks would only further mask the true problem Americans have with their diets: a complete lack of self-control. This isn’t about soft drinks. It’s about not wanting and not caring to eat better.
My favorite soda for years was Mountain Dew, with its sickly sweet citrus-like taste and high amount of caffeine. Not halfway through a can, my heart would start to palpitate. I began to wonder why the hell I was drinking something with so much sugar and caffeine that it made my heart cry out in protest. The flutter was not a new sensation; I had been drinking this soda for years. My addiction to caffeine and the way it affected my heart could not have been any clearer. Yet I still drink caffeinated, albeit diet, soft drinks. If an individual cannot learn a simple lesson about caffeine, how can the entire country be expected to learn one about caloric soft drinks when the effects come only years after the fact? Nutrition education is one way that has been shown to work, but you have to instruct children before they become old and beyond help like us college students.
The most effective way to reshape the national waistline would be to implement nutrition programs in every elementary, junior high and high school in the country. By this, I don’t mean the two-week cursory examination given in health class, but rather a time- and labor-intensive set of good nutrition guidelines. The government has yet to require such courses in our schools – and that’s not because of their difficulty or lack of effectiveness, neither of which are concerns. The real reason? The programs are too expensive. Quick results being what politicians want, the benefits of this type of program are too far in the future for it to have gained any political traction. There is an end to the obesity epidemic, but good sense just does not fit in with anyone’s political platform. However much these programs lack political currency, though, their results speak for themselves.
CBC news in Canada reported a 2003 study of fifth-graders from Nova Scotia titled the “Children’s Lifestyle and School Performance Study.” The study compared students in schools with either no nutrition program, a limited general nutrition program or a fully integrated program that not only followed dietary guidelines set out by the American Centers for Disease Control, but also got both the local community and the parents involved. An article about the study notes that the investigators found the students in the intensive program “had obesity rates that were 72 percent lower than those of students who attended schools without a nutrition program,” despite the fact that exercise rates were similar between groups. Where there is a will, it would seem, there is a way. Until America starts to concern itself with its obesity problem, though, just follow through on that promise so many of you made just a few short years ago: move to Canada. Now you actually have a good reason.
Joshua is a senior in Arts & Sciences and a Forum editor. He can be reached via e-mail at [email protected].