2014-2015 Ethics Bowl Case #6

Just when the critics

said we couldn’t get any

more despicable…

The Deep Fried

Twinkie Shake!

Enough said.

Fried in Lard…

Dipped in Cream…

You know you want it!

Questions to Consider

❏ Should Basso continue to operate his business despite

the deaths?

❏ Does Basso have an obligation to close the restaurant

in light of his statement about the obesity epidemic?

Theories of Ethics:

-Virtue Ethics -Utilitarianism

-Deontology -Rights-based Ethics

-Care Ethics

The Heart of the Issue

How responsible are the businesses that

knowingly sell and promote unhealthy products

and eating habits for the health problems and

deaths of those who consume them, or for the

obesity epidemic in general?

The Heart of the Issue

How responsible are the people

who give these businesses money?

Day 2

Ethics Bowl Case #6: Heart Attack Grill

1. As a table, read the article provided.

2. Prepare to summarize and give

some pros and cons of the proposed

ban/restriction in your article.

Article #1

City carry-out business

rapped for trans fat

violation

The Baltimore Sun, 2010

City carry-out business rapped for trans fat violation (2010)

● Baltimore Health Department fined man $100 for using margarine that contained trans fat at his BBQ stand

● Limit is 0.5 grams of trans fat per serving

● In July, he was cited for using margarine with 3 grams of trans fat per serving. He say she discarded the product

and asked his vendor for a lower-fat replacement. In October, health officials found him serving margarine with 2

grams of trans fat per serving. He said he’s “crystal clear” with his vendor now, trying to get “only trans fat-free

margarine.”

● First enforcement action of the law; 1 year grace period

● Of 100 businesses found in violation in the first year, this is the only second violation.

● Repeated violations=closure and license revocation

● He switched to a fat-free margarine after being cited.

● Pros:

○ Aimed at making food healthier

■ High rate of compliance since ban took effect

● Cons:

○ Trans fat-free margarine costs $6 more per box

○ “I’m losing customers. When it’s publicized on a TV news show, people think I’m still using it

[the high-fat margarine]. That’s in people’s minds, even today. Why should I be punished

Article #2

Happy Meal toys no

longer free in San

Francisco

CNN, 2011

Happy Meal toys no longer free in San Francisco (2011)

● New law prevents fast food restaurants from giving away toys in kid’s meals unless their food

meets nutritional requirements

● Pediatricians and parents in low-income neighborhoods “were the main voices of [the]

campaign”

● To meet standards, meals have to be less than 600 calories, contain ½ cup of fruits, ¾ cup of

vegetables, have less than 35% of total calories from fat, less than 640 milligrams of sodium,

and less than 0.5 milligrams of trans fat

● At McDonald’s, parents have to request the toy and pay 10 cents; Donated to Ronald McDonald

house

● Pros:

○ “Geared towards addressing childhood obesity epidemic”

○ Inspires other cities to follow suit/Start a national dialogue

○ Long term goal=”move children’s meals toward lower fat, sodium, and calories”

● Cons:

○ “Legislates health and nutrition”

Article #3

New USDA rules ban

schools’ sales of sports

drinks, sugary snacks

Dallas News, 2013

New USDA rules ban schools’ sales of sports drink,

sugary snacks (2013)

● “Smart Snacks in Schools” standards eliminate sugary drinks and candy replacing

them with healthier alternatives; includes vending machines

● Will not apply to fundraisers, after-school concession stands, class parties, bake

sales, or food brought from home (but schools can make stricter rules)

● Stems from Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 aimed at fighting childhood

obesity; also requires breakfast and lunch offerings to meet higher nutritional

standards including more whole grains, fruits, vegetables, and low-fat milks

● Most food sold in school subject to fat, calorie, sugar, and sodium limits

● Pros:

○ best interest of the students

● Cons:

○ students miss them

■ could significantly impact school budgets (due to lack of

revenue from a la carte items)

Article #4

NYC’s big-soda ban is

dead

New York Post, 2014

NYC’s big-soda ban is dead (2014)

● NYC’s highest court refused the ban on sales of sodas over 16 oz. (Portion Cap Rule) saying health officials

overstepped their boundaries

● Case was decided 4-2

● Ignored the “merits of the ban” insisting the health department engaged in “policy-making”

● Lawmakers around the country have proposed soda taxes; California proposed warning label on sodas

● Haven’t succeeded due to heavy lobbying by the beverage industry

● Coke and Pepsi making smaller cans and bottles thinking people would be more willing to drink soda if they can

control the portion

● Pros of ban:

○ “limit[s] the pernicious effects of aggressive and predatory marketing of sugary drinks”

○ “sugary drinks are a key driver in the obesity epidemic”

○ “sugary beverages are unique in their harmfulness because people don’t realize how much high fructose

corn syrup they’re guzzling”

○ steady decline in U.S. soda sales for more than a decade due to bad publicity

● Cons of ban:

○ “created an uneven playing field for thousands of small businesses in the city and limited

New Yorkers’ freedom of choice”

Article #5

For Your Health, Froot

Loops

The New York Times, 2009

For Your Health, Froot Loops (2009)

● “Smart Choices” green check mark food-labeling campaign backed by nation’s largest food

manufacturers aimed at “help[ing] shoppers easily identify smarter food and beverage choices”; “based

on government dietary guidelines and widely accepted nutritional standards”

● Government is interested in improving nutrition labeling because of nation’s obesity epidemic; “due in

part to diet heavy in processed foods loaded with calories, fats, and sugar”

● Influenced by research on human behavior

○ “Shoppers wanted more information…[but] did not want to hear negative messages or feel their

choices were being dictated to them.”

○ “The checkmark means the food item is a ‘better for you’ product, as opposed to having an x on it

saying ‘Don’t eat this.”

● Pros: helps consumers make smarter food choices, “Froot Loops is better than other things parents

could choose for their children.” (Ex: donut), “small amounts of sugar’ added to nutrient-dense foods

like breakfast cereals can make them taste better...encourag[ing] people to eat more of them.”

● Cons: labels appearing on sugary cereals that are “horrible choices”, labeling criteria is

flawed, “added nutrients could mask the shortcomings in food”, “makes highly processed

foods appear as healthful as unprocessed foods”

Questions to Consider

Do people have the right to eat

whatever food they want, even if it kills

them (or could kill them)?