Starbucks Frappuccino under attack in New York City mayor's anti-sugar crusade

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's proposed ban on jumbo-sized sugary sodas (16 oz. or more) could mean no more larger-sized Starbucks Frappuccinos for New Yorkers.

The website DNAInfo.com reports:

The news had many Frappuccino fans fuming.

“I think that's horrible,” said Eileen Ko, a 20-year-old student from Queens, as she was walking around Astor Place.

"Frappuccinos are what makes the summer the summer. Without them, life would suck."

* Starbucks Frappuccino joins drinks under attack from Bloomberg's sugar ban

Comments

[MT]

If your life is going to suck without Frappucinos, you seriously need to readjust your priorities in life. Bloomberg is a tool in the first degree, but I think this is a well-intentioned move. It will likely fail horribly, but if it gets even a small percentage of the population to rethink their terrible nutrition choices, then it's worth all the inevitable griping we'll hear.
Frappucinos are disgustingly trashy. Starbucks is irresponsible to sell drinks that contain such ridiculous amounts of fat and sugar. I cringe every time I have to serve a child a Venti Double Choclaty Chip abomination or anything with "extra extra caramel." Ugh.

[meowgan]

"The measure would not apply to diet sodas, fruit juices, dairy-based drinks like milkshakes, or alcoholic beverages" from MSNBC

[Higgington Post]

So we going to live in a suga free world now?

[Brent Emery Pieczynski]

The government wants to assume people cannot be responsible for anything. Around four out of five people are either dogs or swine. The swine will live for the pleasure of the moment so they can never be taught about consequences of conduct. One thing to do is allow the swine to kill themselves with all that pleasure seeking then that will lead to reduced population growth. That politician is a dog using the death of swine to gain power.

[Marcus]

No one has to assume anything to know that people are not responsible about their health. And the government already has the responsibility of spending massive amounts of money on healthcare. Whether healthcare is reformed or not, we already spend a tremendous amount of money on it. Therefore, we all have an interest in public health.

I'm not saying I agree with this regulation, though. For one thing, I can't imagine a world where soft drinks are limited but cigarettes are still not regulated (apart from where they can be used). And second, it's way too arbitrary. Nutrition is complicated. Different sugars affect the body in different ways. Lactose, a sugar in milk, causes a disproportionately high insulin response compared to its effect on blood glucose, for example, yet milk products are not included in these regulations. Fruit juice consumption has been linked to an increased risk of diabetes. So why not regulate it, as well? And why in the world would you exclude milkshakes? Some milkshakes have enough calories for a day and a half.

[baristabotK]

I agree with others above; a noble idea but poor execution. No one is going to stop making "bad" health/food choices because of something like this ... we need to change our culture first.

[lostinlodos]

Mayor Bumbler the Dumbler needs to get off his high on crack horse and mind his own business. Any man who gets between me and my favourite foods and drinks is liable to.... Just don't he ever get in my way.
Can we say Impeachment and Recall.

After the smear campaign that removed the greatest Gvnr Illinois has ever had despite not committing a single crime, and much like the Megaupload trial the government refused to release evidence that proved he was innocent....

This is ground for this wad of filth to be removed. Grounds? How about insanity.
Bloomberg obviously is mentally unsound for the office he stole.

And I don't even like Frappuccinos.

[I <3 music]

This is over stepping what government should be doing. That being said there is nothing wrong with being responsible and making healthy decisions.

[frapatte]

STARBUCKS is the irresponsible party in this case, MT? Not the people actually ordering these disgusting drinks, even when they have a bevy of healthier choices even in frappucino form (sugar free, nonfat, light) available to them?

[Di]

No one is forcing you to purchase. As far as the Starbucks partner who cringes making these beverages...why then are you working at Starbucks? The purchase of these beverages keep your paycheck coming. As far as the government in my business...keep out! I pay taxes and if the health care package the the big o is trying to pass I am going to pay for that too out of my own health care.

[guestbuck]

People need to be responsible with their own bodies/lives. You do not HAVE to drink or eat anything that is bad for you or considered to be bad for you unless YOU want to. People need to stop blaming companies for the weight problems in this country. Self control is all it takes and if you don't have it then you have a problem. Common sense as well. I mean if you know that these drinks are high in calories than don't buy them or make sensible choices. If you are going to buy one then buy a tall instead of a venti, change the type of milk (skim has 50 calories less than 2%), don't have them add whip or just light whip, drink one once or twice a month not everyday, etc.

[MT]

You are severely misinformed if you think that self-control is all it takes. There are many people who exercise, eat right and still have difficulty losing weight. There are even more people who lack the resources and capability to have a healthy diet. The human body is wired to desire sugar and fat, and to offer it in such large portions is unnecessary and detrimental to public health. The increase in obesity and its related health issues are important to this country as a whole. This could actually be the first time in history where the next generation's life expectancy actually goes DOWN! We have to do something, and if this gets people thinking about their choices then it is not a complete failure.

[guestbuck]

Self control when buying a frap is not that hard, is it? I was referring to the Starbucks drinks. I know some poeple have problems with losing or controling their weight due to issues with the way their bodies work but if you are going into a Starbucks and want a frap do you HAVE to buy a venti with whole milk, whip, etc.? NO you do not....it is a choice one makes and if a person decides to make the wrong choice well then that is one them. It is ok to indulge every once in awhile but if you are drinking fraps or any type of high sugar drink every single day who's problem is that? Not the company selling the product but the person buying it and abusing it. I also don't think that many poor people are buying Starbucks drinks either if they can not afford to feed themselves or family. Priorities, hello. This article was about people in NYC who want to be able to buy their fraps in large sizes.
Choices, we all have them and make them, so people need to learn to make the right ones. You can take away all the sugar and bad stuff in the world and people will still make bad choices in life.

[Geoamunera]

Good, Fraps are nasty drinks to have and to make.
It's so bad for kids. love when parents get them for there kids at 8pm and wonder why they can't get them to sleep or why the child is fat.