Wrappers and Clowns: The Insane Regulator Posse

Here we go again, like clockwork, another study from the Noshit Sherlock Institute: Researchers "discovered" that when presented with the same types of food in different wrappers - one plain, the other a McDonald's wrapper - kids are more attracted to the food in the McDonald's wrapper and even think it tastes better. Cue the alarmist quote in the CNN article:

Dr. Victor Strasburger, an author of an American Academy of Pediatrics policy urging limits on marketing to children, said the study shows too little is being done.

"It's an amazing study and it's very sad," Strasburger said. "Advertisers have tried to do exactly what this study is talking about -- to brand younger and younger children, to instill in them an almost obsessional desire for a particular brand-name product," he said.

The same observation, without the anti-capitalist hype: Children like shiny objects and brightly colored wrappers. Clowns and anthropomorphic tigers make food more appealing. If there's a picture of a butterfly at the bottom of the oatmeal bowl they are more likely to eat. And if you make a buzzy airplane sound when feeding the baby smooshed carrots she giggles and opens her mouth.

And this is the part of the blog post where the tedious disclaimers are necessary, as a hedge against the bleating of humorless, pro-government scolds: Parents should not be feeding their kids fast food on a regular basis. Nutrition matters more than convenience, and the consumption of food like they sell at McDonald's should really never occur, if you can help it. But once a week maybe, or on road trips - the kids can still survive and be healthy, if most of their routine involves exercise and a minimum of sugary, fat-laden foods.

Parents need to make this decision. Consumers need to drive past the golden arches, learn how to chop vegetables, and once in a blue moon take a walk, a bike ride, or otherwise avail themselves of a mode of travel that involves their legs. Parents need to change their habits of their own volition, for the benefit of setting a good example for children, not because government-sponsored regulators and researchers have decided on their behalf.

Because that's always the bottom line with these health-scare stories. They offer another entry point for arm-flappers who claim to act in our best interest. The Center for Science and Public Policy starts making phone calls to sympathetic legislators, activist lawyers start sniffing around for fat kids, and the race is on to make this a federal case. There it is in the last line of the CNN article: Robinson argued that because young children are unaware of the persuasive intent of marketing, “it is an unfair playing field.”

God save us from these people. Mr. Robinson, if we start legislating on the basis of things about which children are unaware, just about everything you can think if is "unfair". Aside from being a ludicrous proposition, it's the siren song of anti-liberty collectivism, and the antithesis of true responsibility.

Tags: McDonalds, Stanford University, Nutrition, Public Policy