Sodas and other sugar-sweetened drinks sold in California may soon carry warning labels for obesity, diabetes and tooth decay, Reuters reported.

The first-of-its-kind legislation introduced in Sacramento on Thursday by Democratic Sen. William Monning would put the state, which banned sodas and junk food from public schools in 2005, back at the forefront of a "growing national movement to curb the consumption of high-caloric beverages that medical experts say are largely to blame for an epidemic of childhood obesity," Reuters reported.

Monning said there is a lot of research out linking sugary drinks to diabetes, obesity and tooth decay.  The bill has the backing of the California Medical Association and the California Center for Public Health Advocacy.

"The goal of the warning quite simply is to give consumers the right to know what are well-established medical impacts from consuming these beverages," Monning told the Associated Press. "We're talking about a public health epidemic that will take more lives than gun violence."

More than a third of adults in the United States and nearly 17 percent of children between the ages of two and 19 are obese, Reuters reported citing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The legislation is also sponsored by the Latino Coalition for a Healthy California and the California Black Health Network, citing the heavy consumption of sugary drinks and associated health problems among minorities, The AP reported.

Monning's efforts to curbs the consumption of sugary drinks has met some resistance from the U.S. food and beverage industry which decried the California labeling bill on Thursday.

"We agree that obesity is a serious and complex issue," CalBev, the California arm of the American Beverage Association, said in a statement on Thursday." [But] it is misleading to suggest that soft drink consumption is uniquely responsible for weight gain. In fact, only 4.0 percent of calories in the average American diet are derived directly from soda."

Monning dismissed suggestions that the labeling would be another example of a nanny government and equated the warning labels to similar efforts to control alcohol and tobacco.

"It is not the responsibility of industry to protect the public health. It is the responsibility of government," he said. "We believe it's an appropriate role for government to play."