Then we just stop medical care for those who abuse prescription drugs.
Look at it realistically, what level of control is necessary to keep people from being overweight? Banning the sale of sugary drinks and transfats doesn't do it. You can't control what people eat or drink just by banning a few sales. The government would have to determine the appropriate caloric intake for each person and find some method of making sure that each individual eats only that amount and is punished if they exceed the mandated amount. But that's only half the battle against fat. There needs to be a mandatory exercise program and some sort of biometric reader to make sure that the person actually does those exercises.
You can simply deny any medical care to the obese because their condition is their own fault. But it cannot stop there. Every person who causes their own condition should also be denied medical care. The skiier who breaks a leg should be left on the mountaintop. The sailor whose boat capsizes at sea. The 15 year old girl who got pregnant. The rape victim or robbery victim who voluntarily walked down that dark alley. Close the drug rehab centers and certainly no treatment for the alcoholic.
In Singapore chewing gum was banned for decades because chewing gum caused tooth decay and when the public pays for dental care, they have to right to ban chewing gum. There is no end to it, not really. That's what the judge told Bloomberg. There is no end to government control if it is exerted in the name of public good.
I don't agree with Bloomberg's approach nor do I agree to stopping medical care for those who are overweight, etc.
I do believe that people who contribute to their own health problems should pay higher health insurance premiums than those who live healthier lifestyles, though.