San Francisco One Step Closer To Ruining Happy Meals For Little Kids

Yesterday, the proposed legislation that would remove toys from kids meals in San Francisco unless they met specific health requirement got one step closer to reality, as a board of supervisors committee recommended that the law go before the full board for a vote.

Writes the San Francisco Chronicle:

[Board member] Mar has proposed banning toys in McDonalds’ Happy Meals and other meals targeted at kids unless their sugar, sodium and fat totals are limited and they include a half-cup apiece of fruit and vegetables. Mar maintains “the modest effort” will help curb the burgeoning levels of obesity in children.

The proposal will now go before the full board on Oct. 19. San Francisco’s Mayor Gavin Newsom has already declared his intent to veto the bill, but the board can still override that veto with enough votes.

Happy Meals toy ban moves forward [SFGate.com]

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. lawnmowerdeth says:

    I’m so glad this scourge on our society is closer to meeting its end!

  2. VOIDMunashii says:

    Bastards!

    This really is a bit too much; why can’t parents just learn to tell their kids “no!” ?

    • Oranges w/ Cheese says:

      Because they know the toy will shut them up better?

    • womynist says:

      Because it’s simpler to buy the cheap, fast food rather than to encourage healthy eating habits. That’s why 2/3 of Americans are obese.

    • The Marionette says:

      They don’t learn, so that’s why it has to be done the hard way. Working at a fast food restaurant before I can say that I’ve seen quite a few parents get meals for kids and the child was beyond overweight. Seeing as those same kids want the toys in the meals it would be good to take them out in the mean time until mcdonald’s makes their kid meals healthier.

      • VOIDMunashii says:

        So that means the rest of us should be deprived of the toys? I do understand of the concept of the few ruining it for the many, but really, this is silly.

        Why is there not a chain offering inexpensive healthy food? I thought the free market is supposed to fill voids like this.

        • Me - now with more humidity says:

          Cost, I would imagine. McDonald and the like are able to keep priced low because of standardization. The healthy places here are in the $7 to $10 range for a sandwich, which makes it hard to feed a vanload of kids without breaking the bank. Healthier food requires fresher ingredients, which require different logistics.

      • zegron says:

        Because you might damage their precious self-esteem if you tell little Johnny no.

  3. dragonfire81 says:

    The government tries and tries and tries, but sometimes you just can’t save people from their own stupidity.

  4. JayPhat says:

    And the city of SF has nothing, NOTHING else more important than this right now to deal with? And besides, what’s it any of their damn business what I choose to feed my kid? So long as it is not strict POISON, get out of my business, seriously.

    • StuffThingsObjects says:

      Because they can only focus on one thing at a time ever. You make so much sense.

      • dolemite says:

        “Ok, ok ENOUGH with the debates on healthcare, the budget crisis, immigration, crime, unemployment and legalizing marijuana. We are getting nowhere people. Now…onto important matters. My kid keeps bugging me for the damn Blue Power Ranger in the McDonald’s happy meal. Every time I turn around: “Dad, can we see if they have a Blue Ranger yet?” Sheesh, this kid! So…who votes on making toys in products illegal?

        • CoachTabe says:

          You DO realize this is actually part of the health care debate, right? Promoting health among children IS a part of health care. How hard is that to understand?

          • Me - now with more humidity says:

            Promoting health should be a parenting job.

            “Mom, can I eat this bag of Cheez-Its?”

            “No, eat some carrots.”

            There… problem solved. Works at my house.

    • apd09 says:

      because rising health costs are then transitioned onto all other people. Though even if it is a domino effect and the whole country gets on board it is not going to have any impact on bringing down the cost of health care in the short term but it will at least make effort to increase overall health in the long term.

      And if the food is unhealthy you should not be marketing it to kids. They did this with cereal years ago and started limiting the amount of ads shown during cartoons. If kids don’t see what toy they are missing they will be less likely to want to go to McDonalds, then it is up to the parent to take them as opposed to the kid demanding it.

      • JayPhat says:

        Then we need to outlaw everything but fruits and vegetables and the correct portions of meat to everyone in the country at all times.

        Come on, this nanny state mentality that my eating habits affect you is absurd. If I eat unhealthy and become a big fat bastard, charge me more for healthcare. But this is America damn it and I will eat what I want to eat.

        • apd09 says:

          You’re right it is a nanny state, and I have expressed my opinions regarding the size and reach of the government in a recent poll I took part in http://people-press.org/report/658/. I completely agree with Jefferson in that the government that governs least governs best.

          The US is the most wasteful country in the world when it comes to food. The portion sizes are way too big, but it is what people want. The effect of the portion sizes and poor diets leads to poor health. There is a reason why McDonalds got rid of the Super Size after the movie Super Size Me. Fast food is very unhealthy but fine in moderation. I am all for moderation of it, but you should not be marketing it to children because of the long reaching effects it can have not only them but on everyone.

          I will make a deal with you, when your health insurance company will charge you more for your diet choices, I will stop providing info on why the government is doing things like this.

          Just so we are clear, I never said I was in favor of it, I was simply giving some info as to why it was happening. Don’t shoot the messenger.

          • JayPhat says:

            Ya know, when I was younger, I remember commercials for happy meals on the TV all the time. I don’t see those anymore. Just a sign on the menu board.

      • pot_roast says:

        Really, we should ban cigarettes. Cigarette smoking contributes to more illnesses and health care costs than anything else. #2 cause of COPD, and COPD is the 4th leading cause of death.

        We could probably save billions of dollars per year if nobody smoked. There are absolutely no health benefits to smoking, so why is it legal? Ahh.. personal rights, etc. Hrm.

        • apd09 says:

          I 100% agree with you about banning cigarettes and I smoke occasionally.

          but the difference is that McDonalds, Burger King, etc… are not pumping billions of dollars into the government the way taxes on cigarettes and lobbyists for tobacco are.

          They had a major step forward with banning flavored cigarettes a year or so ago, but why did they not ban menthol? Oh that’s right because a large portion of voters smoke menthol cigarettes, not just African Americans as opposed to people who smoke Cloves or vanilla flavored ones.

      • IThinkThereforeIAm says:

        Where can I get into the action where taxpayers/public pay for my health problems? So far I’ve been paying (either directly or through my private health insurance) for every darn time the doc had to even look at me….

      • ChuckECheese says:

        In reality, the U.S.’s heavily paywalled medical system run by insurance and physicians means that the only costs passed on are the ones they want to accrue to themselves. Being overweight or unhealthy has nothing to do with it.

  5. fsnuffer says:

    This will do nothing to curb obesity. All it will do is increase the amount of un-eaten food in the landfill

  6. bball123h says:

    Happy Meals: Originally $2.99
    Now: $2.49! Toys available for $.50!

    • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

      Dang, that never occured to me.

    • WhoLikesPie? says:

      With coupon found on back of bag/box!

    • Applekid ┬──┬ ノ( ã‚œ-゜ノ) says:

      I like the cut of your Evil-Businessman jib. Might I suggest raising the price to $2.75, with toys available for $1.00 with proof of purchase? >:D

    • sparc says:

      I fixed this for you….hehe

      Happy Meals: Originally $2.99
      Now: Still $2.99 + pay an extra $1 for the Toy which you can get free after sending in the rebate

  7. El_Fez says:

    I really am of two minds on this. Yeah, I hate Mother Dearest telling me what I can eat, what I could feed my (hypothetical) kids, and so on. On the other hand, McDonalds is utter shit, nobody under any circumstances should be eating there and anything that can be done to make the food even just the slightest bit healthy should be exploited as widely as possible.

    So I hate the idea, but I approve in the long run.

    • JayPhat says:

      I eat there every day I work. Chicken sandwich (plain), large sweet tea. I’m 29, 6’4″ and weigh 149lbs. Now don’t tell me the food is utter garbage because I personally like it. And I’m not turning into a gigantic lard-ass.

      • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

        You don’t have to be fat to get heart disease. Or diabetes. My ex roommate got Type II Diabetes, and he was very fit and worked out. He also didn’t go nuts on food, although by no means a strictly healthy eater.

        Just because you’re not fat doesn’t mean McDonald’s food isn’t doing harm to your body.

      • myCatCracksMeUp says:

        I hope you’re getting whole grains, vegetables, and fruit in your breakfast and dinner. Being thin or ‘normal’ weight does not equate healthy.

        • JayPhat says:

          Yeah, my wife ensures I eat the “right stuff” when I get home. I tell her I’ll eat the right stuff at work when we either A) put in a full kitchen at work or B) packed food doesn’t taste like slop you would feed a pig.

      • teke367 says:

        6’4 and 149 lbs? Perhaps you should mix in a McDouble every so often, that sounds awfully thin.

      • apd09 says:

        I am 6’6″, 230lbs, and have high cholesterol from eating lots of fried foods. I played college football for 4 years and I played semi pro football for 6 years. Just because you are physically in shape does not mean your heart is in perfect health. So now I have had to adjust my diet at the age of 33 because I have to get my cholesterol under control now before it becomes a problem

      • Eli the Ice Man says:

        Your “weight” on this comparison has little to do with your overall health. Sure, you’re incredibly light for someone who’s 6’4″, but that doesn’t mean your internals are all getting screwed up by eating food that doesn’t decompose. You might be an ectomorph, but your arteries are not immune from clogging. If you’re eating McDonald’s everyday for lunch, you have a heart attack to look forward to far before that should be an issue.

    • JustLurking says:

      So, while you aren’t a big fan of the guv’ment telling you what not to eat, you are a big fan of YOU telling people what not to eat?

      Just trying to clear that up.

      • El_Fez says:

        No, I just think that McDonalds should be run out of town (or forced to serve food that wont kill you, give you diabetes, make you fat, or is otherwise laden with 3 days worth of sodium). Pretty simple, actually.

    • Master Medic: Now with more Haldol says:

      Good thing they are going after McDonalds. I”m sure they are the only fast food place that uses toys to rope kids into eating their food.

  8. AllanG54 says:

    What would really curb obesity in kids is if parents stopped buying X boxes and Play Stations and got their chublets out and playing. The ones running around in soccer and little leagues don’t seem to have this problem at all.

    • womynist says:

      +1

    • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

      Categorically false, as I am the posterchild (now adult) for that argument. I played soccer many years, and little league, and marching band. Yet I am now very overweight. Why? Because my parents, although had me do things outside, did not impose healthy eating habits. I ate at McDonald’s, I ate fatty foods elsewhere, I didn’t exercise good portion control. I didn’t eat enough fiber-rich and whole grain foods.

      Your food habits are just as important to your overall healthy as the level of physical activity you get.

    • Outrun1986 says:

      I really love it when people try to blame the obesity problem on one thing. Kids in Japan play twice or 3 times as many video games as American children, yet their kids do not have the obesity problem that american kids have en masse. Video games do not contribute to obesity. If you take away the video games they will just sit and watch TV (which is worse for the brain than games). If you take away the TV they will sit and read a book, which is still sitting.

      Video games are not something new or weird or anything, they have been around for 30 years, you would think that is enough time for society to figure out that like any other activity, video games can become a problem if used in excess, the same as reading a book, watching TV, or sitting outside with a fishing pole.

      • RandomHookup says:

        30 years ago, you pretty much had 3 levels of Pong to beat. If you spent all day playing, you had some serious issues.

      • Kryndar says:

        Thank you. Also what I would add is that paranoia and lack of green space are doing more to reduce kids’ exersize than video games. Video games, like anything else should be done in moderation, like you said, if a parent is going to let their kid do nothing but play video games all day I somehow doubt they would not allow their kid to do the same with television.

        As a comment to AllanG54, when I was a kid I played a lot of soccer but I was still a big kid, in height, overall build and belly, I stopped playing partially because some of the kids thinking of me as a nothing more than a “chublet”. Mean kids did far more to drive me away from exersize than my video games ever did.

        • Conformist138 says:

          This. I starting hating exercise or sports of any kind when it became unbearable because of teasing. I hit puberty early and am short, so nearly overnight I went from a tiny little thing to, as my mother so nicely put it, ” ‘busting’ out all over the place”. Kids can be cruel, and girls are particularly vicious. Even now, I still don’t like working out within view of other people, despite not being a total whale anymore. Some wounds leave lasting scars.

          Bad eating habits go with this, as the depression about my appearance sent me straight toward junk food when I got older (funny how we so naturally go for such perfect self-sabotage). Toys had nothing to do with it since I was far too old for them by that point. Junk food tasted better, I got the rush that is so easily mistaken for “happiness” when eating it, and I hated my body by then anyway.

          Really, this law isn’t going to do jack or squat.

  9. leprechaunshawn says:

    How does the toy in a McDonald’s Happy Meal contribute to childhood obesity? They aren’t even edible.

    • redskull says:

      Exactly! There aren’t any toys in the giant bag of chips or cookies that kids shove into their maws by the fistful when they’re lying on the couch at home.

  10. Bernardo says:

    This is crazy. if you dont want your kids eating that stuff dont take them there. Whats next birthday cake? Like seriously be parents and do the work yourselves. And as far as the peopel who dont even eat there who dont want the people who eat there to be eating so badly, please stop.

  11. crashfrog says:

    Well, look. Nutrition matters and kids make crappy decisions because they’re dumb. Bribing a child to eat unhealthy food with toys really should be against the law, just like bribing a child to smoke cigarettes with cartoon characters is against the law.

    If your business model was one where you specifically targeted the mentally handicapped, nobody would think you were anything but a monster, trying to defraud people known to have a cognitive impairment that prevented them from rationally considering your claims. Well, children have a cognitive impairment as well, it’s called “being children”, and it’s reasonable to protect them from corporations who want to exploit their diminished facilities to make money and feed them products that are detrimental to their health.

    • gnoswal says:

      You’re really missing the point here.

      Children don’t make these decisions…to buy McDonalds or smoke for that matter. Parents buy the food for them. You have to be eighteen to buy cigarettes.

      It all comes down to parental control. Now I know there are some parents out there who are cognitively impaired as well. But you can’t legislate stupid or lazy without stepping on the toes of everyone else. So don’t tell me what I can or can’t do because of the stupidity of someone else. Control your own life or don’t. I don’t care. But stay out of mine.

  12. Lollerface says:

    All of the commenters hate parents.

  13. ceez says:

    education starts at home…parents have to stop buying this stuff everyday for breakast, lunch and dinner and start acting like real parents. cook a meal at home and learn when to say no to your fat little children.

    dont need to have some loons control if a toy goes or doesnt go with a happy meal, that IS a happy meal…the toy…..I dont get a toy with my ‘grown up’ value meal, they might as well just change it to a “Value meal in a box”.

  14. HalOfBorg says:

    Leave toy in, change name to “Toy Meal”, no longer market it to kids, just list it with the rest of the meals.

  15. Outrun1986 says:

    Kids will still eat it if there is no toy. Parents have to feed their kids, and if the kids are spoiled on McD’s and the parent doesn’t know how to cook then they will still go there to eat, its not going to change. People will still go to McDonalds, its just the kid won’t be getting a toy.

    Kids have also been eating happy meals since way before this whole obesity epidemic started, and I didn’t see those kids having a problem with it and the meals back then didn’t have apple dippers as a choice.

  16. Macgyver says:

    Parents can give their own kids what they. If the government don’t like it, so what, their ain’t your kids, why should they care what people feed they kids. The government shouldn’t be getting involved in this. Parents can just so no if they want to.
    There’s other things to spend the tax payers money, the this crap.

  17. ARP says:

    Banning? No.

    Saying this Happy Meal has 125% of a child’s RDA for sodium, 50% of the RDA for fat, and 65% of the RDA for calories, etc [made up numbers]. Yes. Often, that information is only in mg’s and not in % of RDA. If they get that information in an easy to understand form, then its up to them to make the choice.

  18. Xerloq says:

    We go to McDonalds on the rare occasion – maybe 4 times a year. Once my 4 year old was whining for a toy. I asked him if he wanted food or a toy, because he could only have one. He chose the toy and missed lunch.

    When he said he was hungry I told him to eat the toy. I explained that McD’s is a “food” store (such as it is) not a toy store, and on the off time we do go it’s for food and not toys.

    He never asked for a toy again.

    The above aside, SF shouldn’t ban the toys.

  19. ospreyguy says:

    Sigh… Prior to parenthood I would have joined in with the, DON’T TAKE THEM THERE STUPID!, crowd. Now when it’s 6:30, pushing 7:00 my kids are screaming and we still have to go grocery shopping, it hits that they haven’t eaten dinner (my food consumption is of no concern anymore) and the thought of pushing them through Publix without dinner makes my sick to my stomach. So we pull through somewhere. Unfortunately I haven’t found a fast food drive through that offers really healthy foods that a kid will eat. Perhaps the apple slices? Oh wait last time they hit me in the back of the head… A salad, for a 3 year, nope. Then the chicken chants start. Dammit, F-ing nickelodeon commercials.

    • smo0 says:

      I just cannot feel bad for you. If I could imagine myself ending up like that post-parenthood… I would not have kids. So.. I have.. and guess what.. I’ve decided I don’t want children.
      It sounds like it’s a burden you were and still are not ready for.

      My mother told me no.. and no meant no. There was no “getting away” with smacking someone or chanting til I got my way… it sounds like you need some effective parenting classes.

      Hey, some people were just NOT cut out for the job.

      I have a commanding presence, I’ve been told I’d make a great parent or grade school teacher… that’s probably true, I just can’t stand kids – they are sticky and loud and miniature version of the people I’ve come to detest in this world.

      Until people are accountable and take responsibility for their actions and behavior… and until people are more mannerful, respectful and recognize common sense… they are pretty much shit.

      • scoccaro says:

        +1

      • womynist says:

        Smo0, I couldn’t have said it better myself!

        I think we are the same person =)

      • RadarOReally has got the Post-Vacation Blues says:

        +100000000

        If I’d thrown food at my mother, it would have been the last time I was allowed to eat in the car. Or go with her. She threatened, and she meant it. Even if it meant she had to go without. Even if it meant she had to pay for a sitter the next time she went out. So she didn’t have the hassle.

        Your kids won’t explode if you tell them no.

        • Dallas_shopper says:

          +1000000000000000000

          If I had thrown ANYTHING at my mother EVER, I’d have been spanked until I couldn’t sit. Then dad would repeat the spanking when he got home. And I’d have deserved it.

          We got told “no” all the time. We got over it. I had weight problems as an adult but not as a kid. The excess weight was due to my own bad decisions. My parents didn’t raise me fat.

      • Me - now with more humidity says:

        Judgmental much? You have no kids and yet you KNOW the poster is an unfit, unprepared parent and needs parenting classes?

        We chose to have kids. But they don’t come with manuals. Sometimes, a Happy Meal makes everyone’s life easier. And they’re pretty tasty.

        Thank you for sharing your parenting wisdom with us. Not sure how i got my child to age 9 without it.

      • Me - now with more humidity says:

        Judgmental much? You have no kids and yet you KNOW the poster is an unfit, unprepared parent and needs parenting classes?

        We chose to have kids. But they don’t come with manuals. Sometimes, a Happy Meal makes everyone’s life easier. And they’re pretty tasty.

        Thank you for sharing your parenting wisdom with us. Not sure how i got my child to age 9 without it.

      • Jasen says:

        I have a commanding presence,

        That’s code for “I’m an overbearing asshole, now listen to my judgmental opinion on your skills.”
        It’s obvious you have no experience dealing with children, as you readily admit.
        It’ll take more than your “commanding presence” to be a good dad.

    • Outrun1986 says:

      Subway, they don’t have a drive through, but they offer a healthy kids meal. Subway is EVERYWHERE here. Just don’t get the chocolate milk as its loaded with fat, sugar and calories. You would also be better off with a bean burrito from taco bell which contains bean, cheese and tomatoes and maybe something else, its not fried, and they have a drive through. Both subway and taco bell also offer meals with toys.

    • Outrun1986 says:

      Also, you can whip up soup and sandwich in no time and its healthy. Can of soup and a sandwich on wheat bread, easy and healthy. You can do lunchmeat if you have it, tuna fish, egg salad (just boil eggs, chop up and mix with light mayo) or even peanut butter and jelly. Another good suggestion is wraps. I make tuna fish wraps a lot and it requires nothing more than opening a can of tuna, a wheat taco shell and some light mayo. It fills me up too. This is what I do when there is nothing in the house for dinner. If you are completely running out of food then you need to stock up more when you have the time, I understand its hard to get to the grocery when you work but there has to be time somewhere. All of the foods I mentioned above can be stored for quite some time except for the lunchmeat, which you can usually keep for at least a few days up to a week in some cases. Eggs you can keep for a little while too.

    • lettucefactory says:

      I was with you until you dismissed the apple slices. My kids get McDonald’s sometimes, because we do have crazy days, and a drive thru is quick and easy. I didn’t go to McDonald’s for about a decade before giving birth. Thought I would never take my kids there – we were all going to be too good and pure for that. But life throws your hubris back in your face sometimes.

      That said, my kids get the apples. That item is not open for negotiation. And if they don’t like it, they don’t need to go back to McDonald’s. It’s not like asking them to eat raw broccoli…apples are sweet and tasty…

  20. Xeos says:

    nanny-state bullshit. pure and simple

    • fsnuffer says:

      Once ObamaCare comes into full force and the government is the supplier of health care regulating your lifestyle will be more about controlling the budget and not what is right for you.

      • Me - now with more humidity says:

        Or not. The government did not take over health care. The are not the providers of care covered under insurance. They forced insurance companies to act like they have a conscience.

        • Me - now with more humidity says:

          Sorry about the double posts. I didn’t hit “submit” twice so I’m not sure why it’s happening.

      • Me - now with more humidity says:

        Or not. The government did not take over health care. The are not the providers of care covered under insurance. They forced insurance companies to act like they have a conscience.

  21. Rocket says:

    The Brain: Pinky, are you pondering what I’m pondering?
    Pinky: I think so, Brain, but if they called them “sad meals” no one would buy them.

  22. smartmuffin says:

    The land of the free (unless it might harm you in some way, then the government will have to step in for your own good)

  23. Razor512 says:

    Why is this crap even being considered. it is a private company, they are selling food. if kids want high fat foods they will get it. changing the happy mean wont change that, it will just be more annoying to the parents who buy them because their kids will expect to get a toy. Also kids are not used to regular eating schedules (meaning it is boring to have your parent take you to a fast food place (especially since they cant leave you home by your self). Many kids can accept the boredom because they know that they will be getting a toy, if they don’t get a toy any more they will be much more annoying to deal with because the time a parent goes to buy food may not be when the kid wants to eat. And that can be just as annoying as taking them to the doctor.

    Overall it will hurt the company and the families. Also requiring fruits and vegetables to be included will kill sales. If you have kids that don’t like the fruits and vegetables, then they wont eat them, even if you include them. Serving portions for children is small in terms of weight in grams, a half cup of food will be a large portion of the meal, if the kid doesn’t want it, then that means that most of the meal goes in the garbage and the kid will still be hungry because most of the meal could not be eaten.

    • RadarOReally has got the Post-Vacation Blues says:

      It’s being considered because we have a generation of parents who can’t or won’t parent. The government can’t legislate that yet, or hasn’t figure out how. They’re trying to act in the public’s interests, but getting it wrong.

      On the other hand, a law that says you have to actually make the effort to do what’s best to your kids would be nice, if impossible.

    • Outrun1986 says:

      This is exactly what will happen.

      Then the parents will just buy them more garbage food if they don’t want the fruits and vegetables because the kid will still be hungry, that or the parents will patronize another restaurant or drive to a McD’s outside of SanFrancisco. McD’s isn’t the only fast food place in town, and all of it is equally bad for you or worse than McD’s. In a way its unfair to single out McD’s because there are many other chains who do what they do. The fast food meal contains a small portion of high calorie food that is designed to make you want more.

      Parents will get angry at the cashiers because the kid wants their fries and the meal requires vegetables so now parents are paying $2.99 for a happy meal where most of it will be thrown out and they are ordering fries and a shake separate. This will make life very miserable for McD’s employees, not that it isn’t miserable enough already. That and it will become a huge waste of food.

      In a way it might even make the kids eat more bad food, because instead of eating just the fries, soda and burger that is contained to the single box with the toy they are now eating the burger and asking for other things off the menu to go with it since they won’t eat the vegetables.

  24. valthun says:

    What the hell does fat and sugar have to do with give kids a little toy in your meal? This also punishes adults that like to collect some kids meal toys.

    • RadarOReally has got the Post-Vacation Blues says:

      Do you really not get the connection? The meal is bad for kids. Kids should probably be eating something better. But the toy is an enticement to buy the meal, resulting in more meals sold than would be sold without the toy, resulting in more kids eating food that’s not healthy for them than would have been doing so without the toy.

      Not saying I agree with the legislation, but the connection is pretty obvious.

  25. common_sense84 says:

    Big deal. The toys will become a separate item that will let you buy them for 50 cents with any purchase.

  26. LordXar says:

    Does any rational person think this will curb childhood obesity in any way?

    Normally when I go to McDonalds with my kids it’s because I don’t have time to go anywhere else. For those people who go enough that it’s a central part of their kids diet do you think a lack of toy will make a difference?

  27. Me - now with more humidity says:

    My kid loves his Happy meals, but only with apple dippers instead of fries (his choice). Get a grip, San Francisco.

  28. Mcshonky says:

    commie pinko lib scum……..
    the only exercise my fat, husky, chubby, plump kid gets is wheeling that pos toy around my home office and bugging the……. well you know, out of me.

  29. NYGuy1976 says:

    What exactly has mcdonalds done in the last 5 or so years that they get blamed for obesiety. Have they not been around since the 50′s. Their menu doesnt seem much different from when I was little in the early 80′s. I think they are just an easy taget like walmart to blame for all problems in society.

  30. Happy Tinfoil Cat says:

    Of course, most of us need to eat healthier. That’s a personal responsibility not something that needs to be mandated. (jeez “Man-dated” what a horrible word for a homophobe like me) Anyway, Constitution and freedom and pursuit of happinesss (and Happy Meals) and all that.

    People complaining about marketing to children … who makes the buying decisions in your family? The 3-year old? Just learn to say “No”. I’m no right-winger by any means, but this is clearly ‘nanny state’ BS. SF has one of the worst police departments in the country, perhaps they should ban doughnuts.

    People complaining about healthcare costs should watch “Sicko” and start to be enlightened. You may find that the US populace is being methodically milked by Pharma and Insurance. Milked! Until I’m on a single-payer health care system, my fat ass is not impacting your premiums because there is no relationship between the two. Premiums are set at the threshold of pain, regardless.

  31. shadowhh says:

    I hope they don’t pickup this crap in PA.

    I like taking my kinds to MCDonalds once in a while. We are usually there for close to an hour. They run around the play area and get a toy. Usually they do not even finsh there meal.

    My one son gets the Chicken nuggets meal. Usually with Milk and fries. The nuggets and milk are always gone, and the fries are usually barely touched, maybee he eats 4 or 5 of them.

    My Other son gets the Cheeseburger meal. He gets the Apples and usually a sprite.

    Nothing wrong with it. Ever goto a diner and see what they give you. The portions are bigger at diners, plus they usually dont have a place for kids to run around in for an hour during the meal.

  32. dobgold says:

    Mickey D’s is a nationwide company . I thought only the Federal government could regulate interstate commerce.

  33. Andy says:

    Government to Parents… You suck as parents, were gonna do it for you.

    Screw you Capital Hill, if parents want their kids to get fat and lazy (and happy), let em do it. McD’s has done the MOST to help parents (all the packaging has nutritional guides right there!), if parents still want to mess up their kids they must be OK with it. Not all families that eat out once in a while are criminals.

    • sparc says:

      it’s targeting one tiny tiny behavior at pretty much one restaurant. Most restaurants in this country are designed for eating unhealthy food in insane portions whether they are sit down or fast food.

      The only solution to do it right is to make all restaurants in SF run by the government and they set all food standards to eat healthy. Of course they will have ignored all the bad food you can get at home, grocery store, schools, etc where the behavior originated. Oh wait, maybe they can start banning 3/4 of the food in Grocery Stores too and placing limits on the amounts that can be purchased?

  34. sparc says:

    banning happy meal toys is going to cure obesity? The behavior isn’t going to change as the parents will still eat at the restaurant anyways. It’s not about the toys, it’s about lazy American parents don’t want to go out of their way to eat healthy.

    This SF Board should watch Jamie Oliver’s Food Revolution to get a REAL idea of what to do to help kids in america. There are more far food problems at home and at the schools than what could be addressed by beating up on restaurants.

  35. pegasi says:

    This is as bad as the local school district saying that you have to buy your child’s cake/cupcakes from the school cafeteria if you want them to be able to celebrate their birthday in class. Used to be it just had to be store bought. Not anymore. Now the school’s so revenue crazy that you have to pay the cafeteria to supply the cupcakes for 20 kids for over 10 bucks, with no choice in flavors, decorations etc.

    The government legislating what restaurants sell like this is just as bad. McDs provides choices for their happy meals now, parents can choose apple slices, milk etc, so why is this necessary?

  36. icewall says:

    It’s douchery like this that makes me cringe. Why does the government of SF think they are suddenly in the business of parenting? It sounds more like they think they have the votes to railroad it down everyone’s craw because there will not be enough concerned parents in SF to put a stop to such nonsense.

    Punitively targeting one business is not going to end childhood obesity. You are giving the Republicans free ammo for their ‘liberalism=bad’ campaign.

  37. Eli the Ice Man says:

    Ok folks, I’m all about personal responsibility and small government and all that jazz, but there is such a thing as a “happy medium”. A lot of people come on and complain about the government not safeguarding their tax dollars, but don’t seem to recognize that health care expendatures (and therefore government waste) goes up because people are either incapable of selecting healthy alternatives, or because the healthy alternatives don’t exist. Quite frankly, the American food supply is tainted, and it’s killing you. There are products that I can buy in the United States that Canada will never allow on the shelves because Health Canada deemed it to be unsafe for human consumption. Does that mean there is more government involvement? Yes, but I’m not getting heavy metal intoxication from a vitamin pill, so I don’t care. Same goes for unnecessary amounts of trans-fats, sodium, etc that’s been thrown at consumers everywhere they eat.

    This is a great first step towards forcing a healthier society, and lowering costs for everyone. Heck, even airlines are raising prices because they need to carry more fuel in their aircraft since everyone is so overweight. Wake up folks, and stop towing the party line when the correct decision can be made!