St. Luke’s to end sales of sugar-sweetened beverages at its properties
October 9, 2012 at 7:00 pm in Duluth News Tribune
St. Luke’s hospital is eliminating the sale of sugar-sweetened beverages from all of its properties, its hospitality director said.
Continue Reading
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
46 
75
Why do you have to oppose everything that helps people?
Hot debate. What do you think?
30 
35
I don’t oppose this. I couldn’t possibly support it more.
Hot debate. What do you think?
11 
20
Merv, I am assuming you would then also be in favor of the State putting strict guidelines on what food stamp, welfare, and SSDI recipients can use their entitlement money for to purchase food? Possibly a ban on cigarettes, booze, and things like ice cream? Same concept, right? Just curious…
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
23 
6
Actually yes, yes I would. And for the exact same reason. Coca-cola, ding dongs, and ho ho’s are not food. In fact, the vast majority of “food” out there is processed genetically-modified garbage. Do I think this is a monumental problem? Not really. But I would definitely be all for changing it. In fact, I would support a mandatory cooking class to teach people how to actually cook good veggie centered meals, and limit food stamps to specific foods, like the WIC program.
Cash benefits, same thing. I know the idea is that you can’t buy diapers (or a whole slew of other things) with food stamps, but I agree that we could draw the line at cigarettes and booze. The only issue is, you have to ask yourself: Is this a budget issue, or a moral issue? Because if it’s a budget issue, it might be more costly in the long run to enforce that all the shopkeepers aren’t selling smokes and booze to EBT card holders. There’s no magic button that you can just push and it makes it impossible to buy/sell certain things.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
21 
5
Which is why I’ve always wondered why the food stamp program can’t be run more like the “WIC” program. WIC tells you exactly what nutritionally valuable food you CAN buy…..while food stamps tells you what you CAN’T buy, which turns into a big convoluted and complex mess of rules as to what you can buy….and what not.
If the purpose of the foodstamp program is to feed those who can’t afford to feed them selves nutritionally valuable food to sustain their bodies in a healthy way, we should be directing them towards good healthy food which doesn’t include a large amount of the items you can currently buy with food stamps.
It’s just common sense really…..if you can’t afford to feed youself or your family, why in the world should we who are paying the bills (taxpayers) allow you to feed yourself and your familiy chips, dip, pop and all the other myriad of items currently allowable under the program that aren’t necessary and contribute virtually nothing towards a healthy diet. It certainly doesn’t accomplish the core goal of the food stamp program I woudn’t think.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
17 
2
Get a grip. This isn’t a witchhunt.
The hospital is simply choosing to stop selling unhealthy products. It’s a logical decision, not a conspiracy.
Hot debate. What do you think?
33 
22
Gee, that sounds familiar. Where have I heard that before?
Hot debate. What do you think?
19 
14
Maybe on the radio. Get a Grip is the 11th studio album by the rock band Aerosmith. It was released on April 20, 1993 and remains their best studio album. I hope this helps jog your memory.
Like or Dislike:
9 
6
Thank you very much, but “Rocks” was clearly their best album.
Like or Dislike:
5 
4
This is another reason why I go to St. Luke’s instead of hospital formerly known as St. Mary’s. These products provide no nutritional value and are grossly overpriced. They don’t belong in health care facilities.
Hot debate. What do you think?
37 
43
Just for clarification this change is at St. Lukes not St. Mary’s.
Like or Dislike:
16 
10
They are cheaper than bottled water and Snapple…
Like or Dislike:
6 
6
There is no such thing as a “sugary beverage”. For 150 years, since the stuff was invented we have called it pop, or soda, or soda pop. There is no reason on God’s green Earth to invent a new word for it.,
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
42 
26
Sweetened non-carbonated drinks are not soda/pop. Snapple isn’t a soda. Anyways, it seems they are trying to force everyone to either drink water or the toxic artificial sweeteners they put in diet beverages.
Aspartame just doesn’t feel safe to me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspartame_controversy
Hot debate. What do you think?
32 
20
The picture accompanying the article shows pop. So your nitpicking is plain wrong.
Hot debate. What do you think?
23 
29
My comment was there before a picture was added to the story. The whole reason I even mentioned it because in the story it said “All-natural, no-sugar-added juices, Diet Snapple and flavored seltzer waters are being added to the mix, he said.” I just assumed they were going to remove standard Snapple.
Like or Dislike:
11 
13
So what are the going to do to all the obese health care workers? Put all hospital employees on a diet?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
37 
10
And why Snapple? sounds like kick backs for someone
Hot debate. What do you think?
19 
13
The food police will take care of the fatties by back room mandatory lipo suctioning.
Like or Dislike:
12 
15
Well, the idea is that if the drinks are not available at their place of work, they will be less likely to drink them on a regular basis and as a result be less likely to be obese.
This move is more for their image and the health of their employees than it is for the health of their patients.
Like or Dislike:
13 
3
Hope you like black coffee.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
29 
4
Considering that drinking too much pop puts people in the hospital, this makes complete sense. Kidney stones? Diabetes? Perhaps the people who oppose this think we should also sell booze in the detox center. Or maybe cigarettes in the cancer ward.
Hot debate. What do you think?
28 
22
I’d say your analogy is flawed. People in detox have proven that they can’t handle booze and smoking indoors has a lot of studies saying it contributes to cancer. Getting rid of ‘sugary beverages’ for visitors (employees will bring in their own if they want them) has no reasonable hope of changing behavior.
Like or Dislike:
19 
10
Baby steps.
We remove them from schools and hospitals, and it will gradually work its way toward the ultimate goal, which is limited intake of these substances.
Hey, it worked for Cigarettes.
Like or Dislike:
14 
9
Well… in that case, many people in the hospital have proven that they can’t handle burgers and sodapop. I don’t see a major difference.
Like or Dislike:
10 
5
It is called choice, and/or personal decision. Look it up Merv. And since people can’t seem to make the right choices or decisions, they have to make for us. Great society we live in.
Hot debate. What do you think?
34 
20
The food police are inside of my head, the food police come to me in my bed, the food police are coming to arrest me, Oh No!
Hot debate. What do you think?
20 
11
This won’t stop people from carrying it in.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
21 
3
Absolutely ridiculous. If a family member is waiting for someone in the hospital, let’s get rid of stuff they may actually want but will have no impact on health. All a lot of these bans will do is inconvenience people when they’re already dealing with stuff. If you want to improve health, fire ‘hospitality directors’ and reduce costs so more people can afford routine checkups!
I used to work across the street from a hospital (not in Duluth) that banned smoking on their ‘campus’. All the night shift employees did was walk (or drive) to our parking lot to light up on their lunch break.
Side note: Why does every hospital now claim to be a ‘campus’? Unless you’re a research hospital with ties to a university it seems delusional.
Like or Dislike:
20 
9
From Merriam-Webster.com:
Definition of CAMPUS
1: the grounds and buildings of a university, college, or school
2: a university, college, or school viewed as an academic, social, or spiritual entity
3: grounds that resemble a campus
Part of it is due to the tendency for hospitals to occupy several buildings in close proximity. Since not many people would know what you meant if you said you work in “The Polinsky Building” saying “I work on the Essentia Campus” is more universally understandable.
Like or Dislike:
7 
8
That is some weird formatting there…
Like or Dislike:
8 
3
Fixed it. I agree, that was weird.
Like or Dislike:
2 
5
The ISF needs to spend more time improving their website before getting ‘preachy’ in public. It also looks like a self-promoting 1 man band.
Like or Dislike:
6 
5
Jeez I hate whimpy excuses like this one:
“We are not saying we are trying to affect your choice of what to drink. We’re choosing not to sell it.”
That’s just pure BS.
If you don’t think people are smart enough to make choices for themselves and you see yourself as the one to make better choices for them….just freakin’ say so.
What’s wrong with having both sweetened and non-sweetened drinks available and letting people choose for themselves?
I’m not planning any trips to a hospital in Duluth anyway but, if I do, I’ll definitely be going to St Mary’s.
I’m old and ornery and I hate people telling me they’re only doing what’s best for me. I’ll go to a nursing home when I want people to make my choices for me.
Hot debate. What do you think?
16 
16
But it’s about the choice you’re given in the first place, Katydid. Hospitals don’t sell lots of things. Had St. Lukes been selling cigarettes for the past 50 years, and suddenly pulled out due to health concerns, would you feel the same way?
Like or Dislike:
10 
8
Yes, absolutely. If the hospital were removing cigarette machines today, we’d be hearing the same arguments for & against it.
Like or Dislike:
4 
3
I’d rather drink something with sugar rather than aspartame or saccarin, which I do not believe are healthy alternatives (read the studies). Secondly, using their logic they should outlaw spoons as well. Dont those make people fat too?
Like or Dislike:
16 
10
I agree with you on Aspartame, but that is only because we already have plenty of what it metabolizes into in your system.
But Saccarin is actually rather safe. The studies people most often refer to in regards to saccarin is the one that required the US to be warning labels on all the cans.
Basically, that study gave test rats excessive amounts of the compound and had observed an increase in bladder cancer rates for the subjects. Here is some information collected by the U of M.
http://enhs.umn.edu/current/saccharin/toxstudies.html
Like or Dislike:
6 
4
Thanks for the link, but still remain skeptical.
Like or Dislike:
2 
6
I don’t blame you.
The idea that a lab-produced chemical can substitute something such as sugar and not have any negative side effects is tough to wrap your head around. Regardless of the tests they perform, there is still something in the back of your head telling you “That can’t be right”.
Like or Dislike:
7 
1
Must be the mayor’s fault
Like or Dislike:
11 
9
Maybe they will bring back Tab cola and sell it in the machines – I absolutely love Tab .
Like or Dislike:
5 
4
I think this whole debate brings up an entirely different problem: entitled capitalists. St. Lukes is a private organization, they can sell whatever they want. It’s their choice. I’ve walked through St. Mary’s before, craving a Red Bull, but St. Mary’s doesn’t sell Red Bulls. That’s their choice. So I dealt with it and moved on. Not a big deal. So why does everybody feel so entitled to having Coca-Cola or Mt. Dew at every corner? If Walmart decided to take out their automotives division, who gives a rip? Can anybody explain how this is any different?
Like or Dislike:
16 
7
That might be the worst argument I have ever heard. The government isn’t tell the masses that air fresheners, tie-downs, or wipers are bad for your health, unlike the war on sugar that is being pushed by government.
Like or Dislike:
7 
6
The worst argument you’ve ever heard is that a private agency has the right to sell whatever it chooses to sell? Wow, if that’s the case, then you’d better reevaluate your political stance. Furthermore, I see no mention of the government anywhere in this article.
Like or Dislike:
8 
7
This is not even news worthy. Any private business can operate within the laws. No law broken here.
Am I going or not going to St Lukes because of sugar content, I think not.
Like or Dislike:
7 
3