This is a bit off the topic but related.
I do not think we, as a country, will ever be able to ban certain foods or food types and I think that is good. However, the re is certainly a cost associated with this.
I think it ties back in to health insurance. I have proposed that health insurance be 1) mandatory for everyone and 2) not health based for standard premiums (it almost has to be this way or the unhelathy among us- whetther through their own actions or not- will never be able to affors it). So basically, two families of 4 start out at the same base rate even though one is fat, smokes and drinks and the other is lean and excercises. However, keeping base rates the same is fine and the base rates will be regulated heavily by the govt- as they are right now but allowing for discoiunts for healthy choices will be available.
IMO, most negative incentives fail over the long haul and really affect no change. However, positive incentives can work and work really well.
In the 2 families above they both start out at $850/month for their premiums. If the fat guy's family can save $100/month if the kids get their weight in check I'll bet that dad will make sure those kids get some veggies and fruit and excercise.