JINHUA FOROVER EASY REMEMBERED COMMODITY CO., LIMITED
Quality is our culture
editorial: hamilton making the right moves on healthy drink saleseditorial: hamilton making the right moves on healthy drink saleseditorial: hamilton making the right moves on healthy drink sales
by：ER Bottle
2020-01-14
Baby steps.
This is the staff of the city\'s Health Council this week-
A \"healthy catering action plan\" has been generated, which will result in a significant reduction in sales of sugary beverages and bottled water in urban entertainment facilities.
This does not mean that the plan is a bad thing.
This means that the city can go further.
But there are mitigating circumstances.
This is a better thing than nothing.
There is no doubt that the city hall has a responsibility to reflect positive trends in healthy eating.
Reduce consumption of sugary drinks
Popular, slushies, Gatorade and juiceis just that.
This is not a hard truth.
Assuming that the City Council has approved the health committee proposal it should approve, the change will not be reflected until 2021, when the city\'s contract with cocaCola expires.
A premature end can bring punishment, so it makes sense --grudgingly —
Wait until the contract is over and replace all sweet drinks with healthier alternatives.
Sales of bottled water for city facilities are covered by the same contract, so, unfortunately, the same delay is happening.
However, in 2021, the city will promote the sale of reusable water bottles and provide adequate water dispensers for refilling purposes.
It\'s a little late.
The use of bottled water has been restricted in 80 Canadian cities.
Toronto has imposed a ban on parks, recreational facilities and civic centres.
Hamilton is behind the curve and more so when implemented.
A lot of people call this a nanny. state-ism.
Who is the city who tells us what to drink and what not to drink?
Let parents make decisions.
There are some advantages to this argument, but it is completely wrong in the end. Publicly-
It is the responsibility of the funded institution to do business on behalf of its funders --
In this case, the taxpayer.
Taxpayers have the right to expect their funds and managementby-
Invest in ethical and responsible choices, especially in public health.
Should City facilities be allowed to sell cigarettes?
It is hard to imagine that someone would make this argument.
However, the harmful effects of sugary beverages, especially for children, are extremely serious.
Health experts estimate that the consumption of \"liquid candy\" will result in 63,000 deaths in Canada and will cost nearly $51 billion in 25 years.
Tobacco is probably the worst, but junk food drinks are not that good.
No, in terms of running a city, it should reflect and promote the choice of health.
We can\'t and shouldn\'t legislate for good decisions, but we don\'t have to facilitate bad decisions either. Water bottle-
Manufacturers believe they should not be punished because plastic bottles are recyclable after all.
This ignores this, that is, the bottles of millions of people are not recycled, but are discarded, polluting our water, endangering wildlife, destroying our landscape, and putting the landfill
People should solve this problem first, then we can talk about the ethics of selling products in public facilities.
At the same time, bring the bottle that can be filled.
This is a good public policy.
Too bad, it takes three years to execute. Baby steps.
This is the staff of the city\'s Health Council this week-
A \"healthy catering action plan\" has been generated, which will result in a significant reduction in sales of sugary beverages and bottled water in urban entertainment facilities.
This does not mean that the plan is a bad thing.
This means that the city can go further.
But there are mitigating circumstances.
This is a better thing than nothing.
There is no doubt that the city hall has a responsibility to reflect positive trends in healthy eating.
Reduce consumption of sugary drinks
Popular, slushies, Gatorade and juiceis just that.
This is not a hard truth.
Assuming that the City Council has approved the health committee proposal it should approve, the change will not be reflected until 2021, when the city\'s contract with cocaCola expires.
A premature end can bring punishment, so it makes sense --grudgingly —
Wait until the contract is over and replace all sweet drinks with healthier alternatives.
Sales of bottled water for city facilities are covered by the same contract, so, unfortunately, the same delay is happening.
However, in 2021, the city will promote the sale of reusable water bottles and provide adequate water dispensers for refilling purposes.
It\'s a little late.
The use of bottled water has been restricted in 80 Canadian cities.
Toronto has imposed a ban on parks, recreational facilities and civic centres.
Hamilton is behind the curve and more so when implemented.
A lot of people call this a nanny. state-ism.
Who is the city who tells us what to drink and what not to drink?
Let parents make decisions.
There are some advantages to this argument, but it is completely wrong in the end. Publicly-
It is the responsibility of the funded institution to do business on behalf of its funders --
In this case, the taxpayer.
Taxpayers have the right to expect their funds and managementby-
Invest in ethical and responsible choices, especially in public health.
Should City facilities be allowed to sell cigarettes?
It is hard to imagine that someone would make this argument.
However, the harmful effects of sugary beverages, especially for children, are extremely serious.
Health experts estimate that the consumption of \"liquid candy\" will result in 63,000 deaths in Canada and will cost nearly $51 billion in 25 years.
Tobacco is probably the worst, but junk food drinks are not that good.
No, in terms of running a city, it should reflect and promote the choice of health.
We can\'t and shouldn\'t legislate for good decisions, but we don\'t have to facilitate bad decisions either. Water bottle-
Manufacturers believe they should not be punished because plastic bottles are recyclable after all.
This ignores this, that is, the bottles of millions of people are not recycled, but are discarded, polluting our water, endangering wildlife, destroying our landscape, and putting the landfill
People should solve this problem first, then we can talk about the ethics of selling products in public facilities.
At the same time, bring the bottle that can be filled.
This is a good public policy.
Too bad, it takes three years to execute. Baby steps.
This is the staff of the city\'s Health Council this week-
A \"healthy catering action plan\" has been generated, which will result in a significant reduction in sales of sugary beverages and bottled water in urban entertainment facilities.
This does not mean that the plan is a bad thing.
This means that the city can go further.
But there are mitigating circumstances.
This is a better thing than nothing.
There is no doubt that the city hall has a responsibility to reflect positive trends in healthy eating.
Reduce consumption of sugary drinks
Popular, slushies, Gatorade and juiceis just that.
This is not a hard truth.
Assuming that the City Council has approved the health committee proposal it should approve, the change will not be reflected until 2021, when the city\'s contract with cocaCola expires.
A premature end can bring punishment, so it makes sense --grudgingly —
Wait until the contract is over and replace all sweet drinks with healthier alternatives.
Sales of bottled water for city facilities are covered by the same contract, so, unfortunately, the same delay is happening.
However, in 2021, the city will promote the sale of reusable water bottles and provide adequate water dispensers for refilling purposes.
It\'s a little late.
The use of bottled water has been restricted in 80 Canadian cities.
Toronto has imposed a ban on parks, recreational facilities and civic centres.
Hamilton is behind the curve and more so when implemented.
A lot of people call this a nanny. state-ism.
Who is the city who tells us what to drink and what not to drink?
Let parents make decisions.
There are some advantages to this argument, but it is completely wrong in the end. Publicly-
It is the responsibility of the funded institution to do business on behalf of its funders --
In this case, the taxpayer.
Taxpayers have the right to expect their funds and managementby-
Invest in ethical and responsible choices, especially in public health.
Should City facilities be allowed to sell cigarettes?
It is hard to imagine that someone would make this argument.
However, the harmful effects of sugary beverages, especially for children, are extremely serious.
Health experts estimate that the consumption of \"liquid candy\" will result in 63,000 deaths in Canada and will cost nearly $51 billion in 25 years.
Tobacco is probably the worst, but junk food drinks are not that good.
No, in terms of running a city, it should reflect and promote the choice of health.
We can\'t and shouldn\'t legislate for good decisions, but we don\'t have to facilitate bad decisions either. Water bottle-
Manufacturers believe they should not be punished because plastic bottles are recyclable after all.
This ignores this, that is, the bottles of millions of people are not recycled, but are discarded, polluting our water, endangering wildlife, destroying our landscape, and putting the landfill
People should solve this problem first, then we can talk about the ethics of selling products in public facilities.
At the same time, bring the bottle that can be filled.
This is a good public policy.
Too bad, it takes three years to execute.
This is the staff of the city\'s Health Council this week-
A \"healthy catering action plan\" has been generated, which will result in a significant reduction in sales of sugary beverages and bottled water in urban entertainment facilities.
This does not mean that the plan is a bad thing.
This means that the city can go further.
But there are mitigating circumstances.
This is a better thing than nothing.
There is no doubt that the city hall has a responsibility to reflect positive trends in healthy eating.
Reduce consumption of sugary drinks
Popular, slushies, Gatorade and juiceis just that.
This is not a hard truth.
Assuming that the City Council has approved the health committee proposal it should approve, the change will not be reflected until 2021, when the city\'s contract with cocaCola expires.
A premature end can bring punishment, so it makes sense --grudgingly —
Wait until the contract is over and replace all sweet drinks with healthier alternatives.
Sales of bottled water for city facilities are covered by the same contract, so, unfortunately, the same delay is happening.
However, in 2021, the city will promote the sale of reusable water bottles and provide adequate water dispensers for refilling purposes.
It\'s a little late.
The use of bottled water has been restricted in 80 Canadian cities.
Toronto has imposed a ban on parks, recreational facilities and civic centres.
Hamilton is behind the curve and more so when implemented.
A lot of people call this a nanny. state-ism.
Who is the city who tells us what to drink and what not to drink?
Let parents make decisions.
There are some advantages to this argument, but it is completely wrong in the end. Publicly-
It is the responsibility of the funded institution to do business on behalf of its funders --
In this case, the taxpayer.
Taxpayers have the right to expect their funds and managementby-
Invest in ethical and responsible choices, especially in public health.
Should City facilities be allowed to sell cigarettes?
It is hard to imagine that someone would make this argument.
However, the harmful effects of sugary beverages, especially for children, are extremely serious.
Health experts estimate that the consumption of \"liquid candy\" will result in 63,000 deaths in Canada and will cost nearly $51 billion in 25 years.
Tobacco is probably the worst, but junk food drinks are not that good.
No, in terms of running a city, it should reflect and promote the choice of health.
We can\'t and shouldn\'t legislate for good decisions, but we don\'t have to facilitate bad decisions either. Water bottle-
Manufacturers believe they should not be punished because plastic bottles are recyclable after all.
This ignores this, that is, the bottles of millions of people are not recycled, but are discarded, polluting our water, endangering wildlife, destroying our landscape, and putting the landfill
People should solve this problem first, then we can talk about the ethics of selling products in public facilities.
At the same time, bring the bottle that can be filled.
This is a good public policy.
Too bad, it takes three years to execute. Baby steps.
This is the staff of the city\'s Health Council this week-
A \"healthy catering action plan\" has been generated, which will result in a significant reduction in sales of sugary beverages and bottled water in urban entertainment facilities.
This does not mean that the plan is a bad thing.
This means that the city can go further.
But there are mitigating circumstances.
This is a better thing than nothing.
There is no doubt that the city hall has a responsibility to reflect positive trends in healthy eating.
Reduce consumption of sugary drinks
Popular, slushies, Gatorade and juiceis just that.
This is not a hard truth.
Assuming that the City Council has approved the health committee proposal it should approve, the change will not be reflected until 2021, when the city\'s contract with cocaCola expires.
A premature end can bring punishment, so it makes sense --grudgingly —
Wait until the contract is over and replace all sweet drinks with healthier alternatives.
Sales of bottled water for city facilities are covered by the same contract, so, unfortunately, the same delay is happening.
However, in 2021, the city will promote the sale of reusable water bottles and provide adequate water dispensers for refilling purposes.
It\'s a little late.
The use of bottled water has been restricted in 80 Canadian cities.
Toronto has imposed a ban on parks, recreational facilities and civic centres.
Hamilton is behind the curve and more so when implemented.
A lot of people call this a nanny. state-ism.
Who is the city who tells us what to drink and what not to drink?
Let parents make decisions.
There are some advantages to this argument, but it is completely wrong in the end. Publicly-
It is the responsibility of the funded institution to do business on behalf of its funders --
In this case, the taxpayer.
Taxpayers have the right to expect their funds and managementby-
Invest in ethical and responsible choices, especially in public health.
Should City facilities be allowed to sell cigarettes?
It is hard to imagine that someone would make this argument.
However, the harmful effects of sugary beverages, especially for children, are extremely serious.
Health experts estimate that the consumption of \"liquid candy\" will result in 63,000 deaths in Canada and will cost nearly $51 billion in 25 years.
Tobacco is probably the worst, but junk food drinks are not that good.
No, in terms of running a city, it should reflect and promote the choice of health.
We can\'t and shouldn\'t legislate for good decisions, but we don\'t have to facilitate bad decisions either. Water bottle-
Manufacturers believe they should not be punished because plastic bottles are recyclable after all.
This ignores this, that is, the bottles of millions of people are not recycled, but are discarded, polluting our water, endangering wildlife, destroying our landscape, and putting the landfill
People should solve this problem first, then we can talk about the ethics of selling products in public facilities.
At the same time, bring the bottle that can be filled.
This is a good public policy.
Too bad, it takes three years to execute. Baby steps.
This is the staff of the city\'s Health Council this week-
A \"healthy catering action plan\" has been generated, which will result in a significant reduction in sales of sugary beverages and bottled water in urban entertainment facilities.
This does not mean that the plan is a bad thing.
This means that the city can go further.
But there are mitigating circumstances.
This is a better thing than nothing.
There is no doubt that the city hall has a responsibility to reflect positive trends in healthy eating.
Reduce consumption of sugary drinks
Popular, slushies, Gatorade and juiceis just that.
This is not a hard truth.
Assuming that the City Council has approved the health committee proposal it should approve, the change will not be reflected until 2021, when the city\'s contract with cocaCola expires.
A premature end can bring punishment, so it makes sense --grudgingly —
Wait until the contract is over and replace all sweet drinks with healthier alternatives.
Sales of bottled water for city facilities are covered by the same contract, so, unfortunately, the same delay is happening.
However, in 2021, the city will promote the sale of reusable water bottles and provide adequate water dispensers for refilling purposes.
It\'s a little late.
The use of bottled water has been restricted in 80 Canadian cities.
Toronto has imposed a ban on parks, recreational facilities and civic centres.
Hamilton is behind the curve and more so when implemented.
A lot of people call this a nanny. state-ism.
Who is the city who tells us what to drink and what not to drink?
Let parents make decisions.
There are some advantages to this argument, but it is completely wrong in the end. Publicly-
It is the responsibility of the funded institution to do business on behalf of its funders --
In this case, the taxpayer.
Taxpayers have the right to expect their funds and managementby-
Invest in ethical and responsible choices, especially in public health.
Should City facilities be allowed to sell cigarettes?
It is hard to imagine that someone would make this argument.
However, the harmful effects of sugary beverages, especially for children, are extremely serious.
Health experts estimate that the consumption of \"liquid candy\" will result in 63,000 deaths in Canada and will cost nearly $51 billion in 25 years.
Tobacco is probably the worst, but junk food drinks are not that good.
No, in terms of running a city, it should reflect and promote the choice of health.
We can\'t and shouldn\'t legislate for good decisions, but we don\'t have to facilitate bad decisions either. Water bottle-
Manufacturers believe they should not be punished because plastic bottles are recyclable after all.
This ignores this, that is, the bottles of millions of people are not recycled, but are discarded, polluting our water, endangering wildlife, destroying our landscape, and putting the landfill
People should solve this problem first, then we can talk about the ethics of selling products in public facilities.
At the same time, bring the bottle that can be filled.
This is a good public policy.
Too bad, it takes three years to execute.
Custom message
