- Flashpoint: Coronavirus behind the wall, COVID-19 relief for small business, Doorstep Deliveries
- Expert warns people to be extra vigilant as scams increase during pandemic
- With schools closed, who’s feeding livestock at Philly’s agricultural school?
- With schools closed, who’s feeding livestock at Philly’s agricultural school?
- Philadelphia mom has advice for parents whose kids are learning virtually for the first time
- NJ recycling company says reducing, reusing on the rise while recycling is down amid pandemic
- Mural Arts commissions decals to aid social distancing in grocery stores
- How one family celebrated their daughter’s bat mitzvah during coronavirus pandemic
- Quarantine may throw your pet out of whack, expert says
- Bored at home? Here are some museums and parks you can visit virtually
- Center City markets dunk shopping carts in cleaning solutions via pulley
- Overbrook's ‘Mr. Crossing Guard’ returns to post after beating cancer
- Watch: Tour KYW Newsradio’s new home at the RADIO.COM World Headquarters
- Young hockey fans with special needs share the ice with Flyers
- 133-year-old florist bulks up for Valentine's Day, fighting low temps
- In South Philadelphia, residents rally against recent uptick in crime
- High school players pause to honor Bryant, a champion of women's hoops
- Philadelphia Zoo welcomes first baby sloth bear in more than 20 years
- Krasner reacts to rising number of shootings and homicides in 2019, talks new approaches
- Self-taught baker from Haverford to appear on Food Network baking show
Dreamstime
Health warning labels vs. the First Amendment
By Amy E. Feldman, Judge Technology Solutions
PHILADELPHIA (KYW Newsradio) — Turns out, eating sugar leads to obesity.
Sugar — yeah, that's exactly the response that the health advocates in San Francisco want to moderate. Officials are trying to require warning labels on sugary drinks that say sugar-sweetened beverages lead to obesity, diabetes and tooth decay.
The beverage industry sued, and the Court of Appeals just agreed that making them put a warning label on soda violates the First Amendment. But then how can the FDA require warnings on cigarette cartons?
The First Amendment protects an individual's right to speak freely and to refrain from speaking, but commercial entities don't have the same rights. The government can force them to have warning labels — it's called compelled commercial speech — so long as the warning is factual and uncontroversial.
And companies don't have to put warnings that imply the existence of dangers that haven't been conclusively proven. Since the court said that the FDA considers sugar safe to consume, it said no to the warning labels.
I'll drink a cup of sugar to that.