San Francisco is coming close to passing a law forbidding restaurants to offer toys in meals that don't pass certain nutritional requirements. Read more about it here.

Here's a breakdown of what the requirements would be:

Calories: Less than 600
Sodium: Less than 640 milligrams
Fat: Less than 35% of calories from fat, less than 10% from saturated fat
Plus, a fruit or vegetable would have to be introduced with each meal.

I'm no expert but if years of dieting has taught me anything, it's that the standard amount of calories an adult person should consume a day is around 2000-2500. So less than 600 calories for one child's meal seems beyond reasonable to me.

McDonald's is, of course, "extremely disappointed with this decision". Their spokesperson, Danya Proud says, "It's not what our customers want." Well, DUH. By customers, you mean kids, right Danya? Because last time I checked, if a five-year-old asked for a car, it doesn't mean anybody should give it to him.

McDonald's also says, it is "unrealistic" to expect kids to eat meals that meet these health regulations. Bullshit. I say, you stick a borderline healthy meal and a Megamind figure in a Happy Meal box and most kids don't even know the difference. And if they do? That's on you, McDonald's. You've been feeding kids crap for too long. Time to figure it out!

Here's the thing: If McDonald's is feeding our children and MTV is educating our kids about sex, then at a certain point they both have to take responsibility for the epidemics facing our children today. That means, you too, US Weekly! Don't put a Teen Mom on the cover, K? Cause I know that you know that kids want to be on the covers of magazines!

I know educating kids should fall mainly on parents and teachers— but who are we to compete with billion dollar advertising budgets?

What do you think?