Is Koolaid a sin?

In the article "Miracle Tax Diet" in today's New York Times, the author writes:

A starting point is to recognize that risky teen behavior these days can involve not just alcohol, drugs or sex but also extra-large Cokes.

Seriously, people.  I'm in public health. I understand that obesity is both a health and economic problem in the US, which is why it becomes a public health problem.  Ordinarily, government wouldn't care if you were fat or skinny.  But when your largesse goes from annoying the person in the airline seat next to you, to becoming a tax burden to everyone who has to pay for your disability compensation, then we begin to care.  

Nevertheless, I'd imagine parents have to pick their battles in trying to sway teen behavior.  For example, I was never taught about the perils of alcohol, drugs or sex.  Extra-large Cokes, Koolaid, and glorious refreshing Root Beer, on the other hand, were highly regulated. Did it work? Well - I'm not obese, and I don't do drugs. You decide. 

I think that we should devise some kind of litmus test for which issues merit public service announcements, billboards or sin taxes.  Let's weigh the options:

The author wants us to put Alcohol, Drugs, Sex and Sugary beverages in the same pot. 

Let's think of the members of that pot (ie: Alcohol, Drugs, Sex and Soft Drinks) as X

1. The AIRLINE SEAT test.  

Imagine you are flying coach from DC to LA, got to the airport late so you have to board in 'group 5' and are consequently stuck in a middle seat between two people. Would you rather be stuck between 2 drunk teenagers, 2 stoned teenagers, 2 teenage mothers or 2 teenagers having Cokes? 

Perhaps I'm not considering the full health consequences of my statement.  Fair enough.

2. The TIME WARP AIRLINE SEAT test

Let's imagine those two teenagers continued their risky behavior of choice (behavior X) for 15 years, and you have the unfortunate luck to sit between them once again.  15 years of alcohol or drugs could result in you sitting between 2 individuals who are not well kept, maybe having some unfortunate odor, perhaps in withdrawal during the 5 hour flight. They would be quiet, want a dark environment, and be skinny, because all of their money has been spent on booze and rocks. The teenage mothers, 15 years later,  - well, they'd be young mothers, maybe sporting some bling, maybe nursing a kid, but I don't think they'd bother you much. Ah, but 15 years of sugary drinks later, you'd be upgraded to business class because your middle seat would be occupied by the expanding laps of your two neighbors. 

I think so far, I've made a case for stopping the public service announcements on sex. But we know that is wrong, since sex doesn't just lead to babies [isn't that right, Sarah Palin?]. 

3. The RATIONAL INCENTIVES test

The sin tax. What a great invention. If you tax a product, it costs more. If it costs more, people will buy less.  It worked for cigarettes, booze costs more in Canada and I'll bet they have fewer alcoholics than we do in the US...

But wait - Alcohol is particularly cheap in Europe (all those stories about how beer costs the same as water in Germany are true!) but they are healthier than we are.  How does that work? Does it have to do with the drinking age, and not the tax? Could it be that teenagers are not rational, and when they are forbidden from something, they seek it out with greater passion?

Drugs - we could tax them, but first we'd have to figure out who sells them. So, I guess that's out.

Sex - hmm... a condom tax. Interesting idea. If you tax it, it costs more. If it costs more, people will use it less. More unprotected sex = bad. So, what if we gave them away for free? Just on the hunch that when being lectured to about the virtues of abstinence in high school, the impressionable young minds are wandering, checking out their neighbors, passing notes, or sleeping, it might not be a bad idea. 

I guess this is how the Gov. of New York has come up with the tax on sugary beverages. Let's call it the Koolaid tax.  Where do we draw the line? Do we tax all sodas? Just the non-diet sodas? What about "juice beverages"  like Hi-C and Fruit Punch (Does Hi-C still exist?). Do you tax those koolaid packets where you have to add your own sugar, or just the ones where you add water? Juice has sugar. Should we tax juice? What about chocolate milk?

I see a really slippery slope here. One where we have to redefine beverage to exclude juice, milk and alcohol. Or engage in an effort to make water more exciting. 

I know. Let's give it bubbles and make it sweet.