On Tuesday, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors will vote on legislation that targets sugar-sweetened beverages in a misguided attempt to improve public health. The proposals would slap warning labels on billboards for sweetened beverages, ban beverage companies from advertising on city spaces, and stop the city from buying sweetened drinks. I invite the supervisors to consider a more comprehensive, balanced approach that will help reach this public health goal.

Everyone agrees that obesity and obesity-related conditions such as diabetes are a problem, and I commend the supervisors for spending time on trying to find a solution. San Franciscans deserve comprehensive public health solutions — ones that encourage them to make more informed and balanced choices in terms of nutrition and exercise — rather than restrictive policies that wrongly single out a product.

Government data affirms that sugar-sweetened beverages are not the driving force behind health conditions such as diabetes and obesity. Over a 10-year period, sugar consumed from sugar-sweetened beverages has dropped by 37 percent. Yet, diabetes rates approximately doubled over the same period, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Blaming sweetened beverages as the primary contributor to the growing prevalence of diabetes fails to identify its real causes. Without education about the true sources of this challenge, how can we find meaningful ways to prevent it?

If the board’s goal is to implement obesity-related solutions, then they must consider the concepts identified in a paper by the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, which states that the overall pattern of one’s diet is the most important focus. All foods and beverages can fit into this pattern if consumed in moderation, with appropriate portion size, and combined with physical activity. In contrast to this total diet approach, classifying specific foods as “good” or “bad” is overly simplistic and can foster eating behaviors that result in negative consequences.

Also missing from the discussion is the reality that the rate of obesity is a result of four to five decades of changes in our daily work and leisure lifestyles.

In 2008, the federal government issued its first-ever Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans. Despite these recommendations, CDC reports show more than 60 percent of adults are not regularly active and 25 percent are not active at all. Moreover, research looked at data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and showed today’s workers are burning an average of 120 to 140 fewer calories per day at their jobs, compared to the 1960s. The same researchers also studied government obesity data, and found the decrease in physical activity at workplaces was to blame for a significant portion of the increase in obesity rates.

In order to see a change in obesity, the supervisors could instead recommend that all local agencies support wellness efforts by allowing access to building stairways and encouraging 15-to-30-minute walk breaks. This simple solution would affect people’s lives more than imposing warnings on certain foods or beverages.

Teaching San Franciscans the value of balancing what they eat and drink with what they do is a good place to start, which is what the beverage industry is doing. That is the only way you can have your Mission burrito and eat it, too.

Lisa D. Katic is a registered dietitian. She is a consultant to the American Beverage Association.