I believe this ban only applies to restaurant beverage cups like you find in a fast food place. Bottled beverages would not be affected. Even Big Gulps would still be legal under the plan. The 500 ml bottle would not be affected. If the plan was implemented as you are envisioning, 2 L bottles would be illegal.
Regardless, it is a nanny-state type of move and is a little overboard. I understand the smoking ban as smoking affects smokers and non-smokers alike but unless I spill my beverage on you, you are not affected by my beverage size choice. Phil On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:16 AM, John M. Steele <[email protected]>wrote: > Well, a slight exaggeration, but Mayor Bloomberg's ban on drinks over 16 > fl oz with more than 25 calories per 8 fl oz serving affects many drinks > bottled in 500 mL/16.9 fl oz sizes. Bottom-line is 16 oz is legal, 500 mL > isn't unless lo-cal, so 500 mL will disappear in NYC, and maybe everywhere > as bottlers move back to 16 oz to "beat the ban." > > Seth Goldman, CEO of Honest T, has an editorial in today's WSJ, on their > 35 calorie per 8 oz tea, much better for you than 100 calorie per 8 oz soft > drinks, but bottled at 500 mL and over the limit, so they will have to > change. > > http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444873204577537303844223474.html?mod=googlenews_wsj > > His supporters (he would no doubt do the opposite of what I say) should > urge him to accomodate rational metric sizes. If he can't bring himself to > say metric words he could raise it to 17 fl oz. I doubt anyone serving 16 > oz would add the extra fill, but it would cover 500 mL servings either in > bottles, or if drink cups were metricated. >
