For some time, the consumption of too much sugar has been widely recognized as a major cause of such adverse health outcomes as obesity, prediabetes, dental cavities, and even long-term cardiovascular risk. A principal contributor to these conditions are sugary drinks, or SSBs, as they are known to dieticians. Among the top consumers of these SSBs In Monterey County are children from ages 2 to 17 who have at least one of these drinks per day. Such drinks add as much as 45 percent of additional, unneeded calories and significantly contribute to the national public health problem of obesity in children.
Why are parents allowing their children to consume these drinks? According to Niaomi Hrepich, Health Program Coordinator for the Monterey County Health Department and a registered dietician, “People are bombarded by messages from the companies that make these drinks and parents don’t realize how detrimental they are. They don’t know the facts about how much sugar is in them. They see everyone giving their kids soda so they think it’s okay, and they are unaware that children should have only six teaspoons of sugar per day. Even in drinks with natural sugar, like 100 percent orange juice, the recommendation is that children take in only 4-6 oz per day. More than that is considered added sugar.”
The obesity rate in children from ages 12-17 in Monterey County is 31 percent, compared with the California rate of 34 percent. While that looks favorable for the County, a survey of adolescents on the Central Coast found that teens consume more SSBs in every category than other age groups. Twenty-three percent of adolescents (nearly 1 in 4) reported consuming no plain water drinks within the previous 24 hours, even though they describe them such drinks as satisfyingly thirst-quenching. This is precisely the age group that SSB marketeers most aggressively target.
Even more concerning is the high consumption of SSBs among the youngest population, 1-10-year-olds. According to a comprehensive study by The Nutrition and Fitness Collaborative of the Central Coast, 72 percent of this population consumed at least one soda within a 24-hour timeframe, 64 percent consumed a sweetened tea or fruit-flavored beverage, 44 percent had at least one sports drink, and 56 percent had at least one blended drink. The study authors go on to say, “What was most surprising and concerning, however, was the high level of consumption of coffee beverages which often contain large amounts of sugar by these young children — 35 percent consumed at least one serving of a coffee beverage in the previous 24 hours.”
A state-wide initiative, “Rethink Your Drink” may be the best offense against the SSB industry’s marketing offensive. This and other educational programs available throughout the county strive to educate parents on the importance of creating healthy dietary habits that include eliminating the unnecessary added sugars that make items like SSBs so appealing. The University of California, San Francisco, having documented the health impact of a soda sales ban on its employees, has banned such drinks from its campus and substituted bottled water or zero-calorie beverages instead. The reward has been a reduction in waist sizes and belly fat, and more important, improvements in insulin resistance, a risk factor for Type 2 diabetes. These facts, according to Elissa Epel, an author of the study that documented them, “…show that an environmental change can help people, particularly those who are consuming large amounts of sugary beverages.” Other campuses have followed UCSF’s lead.
In addition to public education initiatives, state Senator Bill Monning, a long-time advocate of reducing the consumption of SSBs, has introduced multiple pieces of legislation to limit them. Monning has introduced a new bill that would require warning labels on drinks that have added calories above a certain level, depending on the quantity of fluid ounces in those drinks. This bill is widely supported by leading medical organizations among others but is unsurprisingly opposed by manufacturers and their allies. Warning labels have been shown to be an effective deterrent to the excessive use of tobacco and alcohol and could bring about a similar reduction in SSB consumption. Since obesity and diabetes are two major contributors to healthcare costs in the United States, every measure to reduce them, whether through public education or warning labels, can yield long-term economic benefits. Senator Monning’s bill should, therefore, have strong public support.
Parents struggle daily against the demands of sugar-loving children who are surrounded by peers downing SSBs on a daily basis, often multiple times. The most effective bulwarks against this destructive trend is education, supplemented by warning labels. Niaomi Hrepich believes one more element that could propel County children into an even better place is the participation of our local hospitals and clinics. “They play such a huge role in children’s health that their embrace of our educational campaign would be a significant compounding factor in advancing our goals.”
Susan Meister is a journalist, columnist, and community activist living in Pebble Beach.
Leave a Reply