More handpicked essays just for you.
Why is healthy eating important essay
Why is healthy eating important essay
Why is healthy eating important essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In the article, “A Food Manifesto for the Future”, Mark Bittman makes his claim on how our American diet is unhealthy and unsafe towards our bodies and the environment as well. Within his piece, he includes multiple suggestions that could be implemented towards the foundation of a healthier, and safer diet. Within all these recommendations, Bittman states that, “When people cook their own food, they make better choices.” I decided to argue for this proposal, after personal experiences that I have had recently where I was able to see the difference between cooking at home, and eating out. Within Bittman’s piece, he states that we should, “encourage and subsidize home cooking”, which at first I did not understand how exactly our nation could subsidize home …show more content…
Forty-eight percent of individuals who cooked dinner six to seven times a week consumed 2,164 calories, 81 grams of fat and 119 grams of sugar daily. They were also able to conclude that those who consumed home-cooked meals depend less on frozen foods and are less likely to choose fast foods. However, as explained in, “Tasting food, tasting freedom: excursions into eating, culture, and the past” Sidney Mintz explains in chapter eight that the majority of Americans often choose to eat out at fast food joints because of the convenience of these meals. Mintz states that these meals are usually diets, “high in animal protein, salts, fats, and processed sugars, low in fresh fruits and vegetables, drinking more soda than tap water.” This is where cultural, and social aspects create conflict when attempting to switch to this healthier lifestyle (although it is feasible). Depending on an individual’s schedule, it will either be an easier switch to make home-cooked meals, or just another difficult task to accomplish throughout the
In “Bad Food” – What’s the Best Food? Tax it, and Subsidize Vegetables”, Mark Bittman suggests that the people of America should stop eating unhealthy foods so often. In the article, Bittman tells his audience that people with “heart disease, diabetes and cancer are all in large part caused by the standard American Diet” (page 35). He also states that eating healthy can result in a better health care system, saving millions of lives. The big issue is Americans eating unhealthy every day, but proposing a plan to help stop it from happening.
There has been withstanding controversy about whether fast food is easier on the pocket than eating home-cooked meals. Take McDonald’s for instance, they’re notorious for their convenient and affordable dollar and value menus. Since you can get a burger for just $1.19, feeding a family of four should be inexpensive right? Mark Bittman, author of “Is Junk Food Really Cheaper?” argues otherwise. He claims that fast food is not at all cheaper than buying a few groceries and cooking at home. He expresses the different myths about fast food like how it is supposedly cheaper than real food when measured by the calorie, the mentality of people that if it isn’t fast food, it has to be costly organic food, and that there just isn’t enough time to cook at home. These myths followed by genuine factors such as addictions and a cultural impact, help Bittman prove his argument’s validity across to his audience. I have to say that Bittman proved his argument’s effectiveness, for he clearly stated his thesis and provided various reliable
The argument talked about how the American diet should be changed since it is unhealthy and can cause numerous problems such as heart disease, diabetes, and cancer. In light of this issue, Bittman proposed the idea of taxing unhealthy food and drinks while promoting vegetables. This plan could potentially kill six birds with one stone. The benefits would include less unhealthy food consumption, the decrease of diseases, and the decrease of public health costs. They would also include in making healthy food more available to the masses, the environment would improve, and it would save billions of dollars annually that could be raised for other places and activities. Americans should implement ideas from countries like Japan and Denmark to help with this problem.
... Nestle’s quote, Bittman makes his editorial plea to ethos, by proposing proof that a woman of reliable mental power of this issue come to an agreement with Bittman's thesis statement. Bittman also develops pathos in this article because he grabs a widely held matter that to many individuals is elaborate with: "...giving them the gift of appreciating the pleasures of nourishing one another and enjoying that nourishment together.” (Mark Bittman) Bittman gives the reader the actions to think about the last time they had a family dinner and further imposes how these family dinners are altogether important for family time. Therefore, Bittman did a magnificent job in pointing into the morals of his targeted audience and developing a critical point of view about fast food to his intended audience leaving them with a thought on less fast food and more home prepared meals.
The invention of the television (TV) dinner has led to lifestyle changes in American society. Created in 1953 by C.A. Swanson & Sons, frozen suppers allowed mothers to take breaks from cooking and sit down with their families (Pendergast). These meals quickly boomed with popularity and revolutionized the way that Americans viewed food. Today, many families still purchase these meals, but do not realize that they have several limitations. Although TV dinners seem like convenient and inexpensive food choices, in reality, the “TV dinner culture” has serious implications for the environment, health, and agriculture. The problems posed by TV dinners, such as food miles, inadequate nutrition, and untrue costs, alienate people from their food, families, and environment, and would be lessened if Americans purchased foods from farmers’ markets.
[It] is not surprising considering the current structure of food prices is such that sweet and high-fat foods provide dietary energy at a low cost, whereas the energy cost of lean meats, fish, vegetables and fruit are likely to be higher" (Inglis, 2008). Another suggestion Pollan brings up is the idea that people should spend more money on nutritional foods in order to better their health (Pollan, 2007). As I previously mentioned, this suggestion disregards low-income households because money can be a barrier as to why they are not buying nutritional foods but unhealthy foods. What makes matters worse is the fact that Pollan states, "not everyone can afford to eat well in America, which is shameful, but most of us can….and those of us who can afford to eat, well should" (Pollan,
On the extreme side of having a healthier lifestyle there is a locavore system. This system means that you confine your food to a 100 mile radius (Pelletier703). In “The Locavore’s Dilemma” by Christophe Pelletier, he disagrees with movement, but believes that the distance is not more important rather than the carbon footprint. Pelletier also recognizes the struggle of busy tight budgeted families when deciding their food decisions. Therefore, the support of this movement is more of the wealthier population. People who are able to spend considerable amounts on only local. But eating only locally produced is not necessary to live a healthy lifestyle. The difference between Bittman and Pelletier regarding this is that buying for real food versus buying food locally grown, which of course is the healthier option but not needed. Like Pelletier, I agree that eating only locally grown food is not needed and not realistic (Pelletier703). There should be the healthy medium of eating real home cooked meals rather than eating highly processed foods and between eating only food that is in 100 mile radius. Americans shouldn’t go for the extravagant and costly diets or fads when going toward their health. Simply cooking healthy meals at home rather than eating out will increase their
In this book, Pollan focuses a lot on the culture that surrounds the eating habits of today’s society in America. He talks about how we come from a culture that was primarily dependent on the hunting and gathering of our food. Pollan explains that through the years, Americans have turned away from providing for themselves in exchange for quicker and more convenient meals. I believe that America has evolved into a fast paced way of living. This has inhibited today’s society from having optimal time to prepare and even sit down to enjoy their meals. These cultural changes have led to a higher consumption rate of processed and fast foods. Almost anywhere you go, you can find a find a fast food restaurant or chain. With all of these arising opportunities, today’s culture has created a very unhealthy nation filled with sickness and disease. Pollan states that three out of every five Americans are overweight and one out of every five is obese. When compared to American culture before processed and fast food were ever an option, issues and diseases related to weight were almost non-existent. The people that lived before our modernized culture had to expend a greater amount of energy on hunting and tracking their prey, sometimes even ending up empty handed. However, when compared to today’s culture a surplus of food is available to people in exchange for much smaller energy expenditures.
Should people be held accountable for what they eat? Many believe that it is a matter of public health, but some think that it is the matter of personal responsibility. In the article “What You Eat Is Your Business,” Radley Balko argues that the government spending more money on anti-obesity measures is the wrong way to fix the obesity epidemic. He claims that people should be more responsible for their personal health. I am of two minds about this author’s claim that eating and lifestyle are matters of personal choice. On the one hand, I agree with his claim because of the unfair insurance policies, people should be more responsible for their own health, and people should take the time to be responsible for their kid’s health instead of blaming someone or something irrelevant. On the other hand, the government should do their best to dispose of “food deserts,” provide more opportunities to live a healthy life style, and give tax breaks to people selling healthy foods.
44 percent of Americans eat fast food at least once per week (“Fast food statistics”, 2014) and kids between the ages of 6 and 14 eat fast food 157 million times every month (Ransohoff Julia, 2013). Just in the past 3 decades the obesity rates in children have more than tripled (Kalaidis Jen, 2013). Needless to say, whether once a year or 3 times a week, fast food is a definitely part of most Americans nutrition. Acco...
Nutrition and health have become more popular in today 's society. Our generation is becoming more and more indebted to the idea of being healthy and eating nutritious meals. However, in “The American Paradox,” by Michael Pollan he argues that our unhealthy population is preoccupied with nutrition and the idea of eating healthy than their actual health. He also mentions the food industry, nutrition science and how culture affects the way we eat and make food choices. While Pollan is right about all these factor that affect our eating habits, there is more to it than that. Convenience, affordability and social influence also affects our food choices making them inadequate.
Eating is extremely important, it is also important to eat healthy. Most Americans eat without any concerns; they are not questioning or researching what they are feeding themselves or their family. A lot of that has to do with their financial stability, not having the time to prepare a meal due to their time-consuming work schedule, also lack of knowledge and education on what they are consuming. In this bibliography, I will go over all three articles and explain what they are about.
Avid supporters of the locavore movement are generally a group of like-minded people with “similar backgrounds, values, and proclivities” and have the wealth necessary to participate in the local food movement (Alkon, Agyemon, 2011). The benefits of the locavore movement are more substantial when the wealth and resources are available, especially considering that farmer’s markets tend to be located within fairly affluent areas (Guthman, 2008). As a result, it is more difficult for low-income families to have access local foods. Furthermore, the cost associated with the consumption of locally grown foods is a limiting factor in the attempt to reduce food insecurity in the United States. For some, it is simply too expensive and time-consuming to purchase and then prepare fresh, local foods, and prepackaged food is more convenient and economically sound. In order for the locavore movement to dramatically impact food insecurity in the United States, it must become more accessible for all of the population, regardless of income level or geographic
Nutritionism and Today’s Diet Nutritionism is the ideology that the nutritional value of a food is the sum of all its individual nutrients, vitamins, and other components. In the book, “In Defense of Food” by Michael Pollan, he critiques scientists and government recommendations about their nutritional advice. Pollan presents a strong case pointing out the many flaws and problems that have risen over the years of following scientific studies and government related warnings on the proper amount of nutrients needed for a healthy diet. Pollan’s main point is introducing science into our food system has had more of a negative impact than a positive one, we should go back to eating more of a traditional diet. I believe food science has given us
American culture is changing dramatically. In some areas it’s a good thing, but in other areas, like our food culture, it can have negative affects. It is almost as if our eating habits are devolving, from a moral and traditional point of view. The great America, the land of the free and brave. The land of great things and being successful, “living the good life.” These attributes highlight some irony, especially in our food culture. Is the American food culture successful? Does it coincide with “good living”? What about fast and processed foods? These industries are flourishing today, making record sales all over the globe. People keep going back for more, time after time. Why? The answer is interestingly simple. Time, or in other words, efficiency. As people are so caught up in their jobs, schooling, sports, or whatever it may be, the fast/processed food industries are rapidly taking over the American food culture, giving people the choice of hot