WASHINGTON - A column in yesterday??s Washington Post came out critical of two recent public-health developments that target sugar and cheese as especially harmful to public health.

One report written by experts from the University of California, San Francisco, urges government regulation of sugar. The authors draw comparisons between sugar, alcohol and tobacco, maintaining the health risk among all three is comparable. They propose a type of sugar tax as well as possible age restrictions for sugar-sweetened beverages.

The second report was circulated by the vegan-diet-promoting Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM), and it includes graphic billboards portraying cheese as a major contributor of Americans?? obesity epidemic. According to PCRM founder and president Neal Barnard, the proper amount of cheese in consumers?? diets should be no cheese at all.

The Post columnist laments both reports, predicting, "the world would be a sad place without cheese" and "any effort to restrict access to sugar should be approached with care."

"Reading the report??practically made me want to pour a bag of plain sugar into my open mouth, in sheer defiance of anyone??s telling me what I can and cannot eat."

The columnist lauded the federal government??s MyPlate program, which encourages the consumption of healthful foods (fruits, vegetables, etc.) without instructing consumers to skip snacks altogether." Instead, they gently suggest we cut back on those ingredients. In other words, MyPlate??s not a nag."

"[M]y advice to anyone coming up with ideas for what other people should and shouldn??t put in their mouths: ??If you come off sounding like [a nag], people will surely rebel," the columnist said.