More handpicked essays just for you.
Importance of eating healthy food essay
The Importance of Healthy Eating and Physical Activity
The importance of healthy eating and exercise
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Importance of eating healthy food essay
Policymakers forget to actually offer solutions, something that we should be working on. Many experts recommend decreasing the amounts of the foods we eat. Food and beverage companies have introduced thousands of healthier alternatives. Consumers need to learn more about healthy diets. A helpful task would allow the government to implement a tax on food that is considered unhealthy. The financially disadvantaged would be less inclined to indulge in fast food dinning. According to the article “Mexico’s Soda Tax is working. The US Should Learn from It” Berkeley, California, became the first city in the United States to pass a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages. In 2013, Mexico’s congress passed a one-peso-per-liter tax on sugary beverages that
Everyday Americans die from the diseases they carry from obesity. Many Americans over eat because their social problems or because they are hereditary. Many plans have been discussed but finding the solution is the problem. Junk foods and unhealthy beverages have corrupted children’s minds all over the nation and putting a stop on it could lead to other benefits. Unhealthy foods and drinks should be taxed and healthy foods should be advertised more to help prevent American obesity.
“This Article constructively critiques the two arguments that public health advocates have made in support of anti-obesity soda taxes or junk food taxes. Part II discusses and critiques the first argument, an economic externalities argument that government should tax soda or junk food to internalize the disproportionately high health care costs of obesity. Part III discusses and critiques the second argument made by public health advocates, that government should adopt anti-obesity measures to improve population-wide health. Consider possible unintended consequences of anti-obesity proposals. Obesity policy debates present a conflict of fundamental values, such as health, fairness, efficiency, and autonomy. Part TV attempts to reconcile these values and responds to the "personal responsibility" objection to soda taxes and food taxes. Part V considers various factors that would affect behavioral responses to proposed soda taxes and food taxes and addresses concerns that such taxes would be regressive and thus unfair to low-income consumers. Part VI suggests the way forward for public health advocates, including a proposal to enact a tax on nutritionally poor foods and drinks, paired with a salient benefit. This Part also recommends enactment of a federal system of food classification, based on nutrient-profiling methods, along with a federal system of front-of-package nutritional labeling.” (Pratt)
The article,“ Battle lines drawn over soda tax,” by Associated Press , the Press explains how there is an ongoing “national fight about taxing sugary drinks.” According to Associated Press, “ Health experts say the beverages contribute to health issues such as diabetes, obesity, and tooth decay.” This quote demonstrates that sugary drinks can lead to health issues. Since sugary drinks leads to health issues, people are considering soda tax. This is because thirteen percent of adult minorities are diagnosed with diseases such as diabetes.
Have you ever thought if there was a way to improve our health. This article “Soda Showdown” by “Rebecca Zissou”, discusses whether we should tax all sugary drinks or whether we should not tax sugary drinks. There is two point of views in this article. One of the point of views say that we should tax sugary drinks, while the other side says we should not tax sugary drinks.
Harold Goldstein and Jennifer Richard, California’s Soda Tax: Helping Cash Strapped Communities Protect Children’s Health, A Publication of the California Center for Public Health Advocacy, www.publichealthadvocacy.org. April 2011
In the past couple years people all around the nation, whether it's in New York City or an 8th Grade classroom in Michigan, people have been pressed with the question, whether the New York Soda Ban, is a good thing, improving health, or if there is a larger issue. Is this decision showing evidence of the Government interfering with our basic civil liberties?
For years, the United States government has been trying to find a way to lower the obesity in the country. However, the approach it is using, i.e. taxing unhealthy food, is not the most effective one. People are going to purchase whatever products they wish, whether the price is increased a few cents or not. Junk food options are already set at a more reasonable price than healthy foods, enticing people to buy these less expensive goods. Even though putting a tax on other products, such as tobacco, has served the intended purpose, food is a necessity humans must have for survival. Society is used to consuming foods they want, and will continue to do so. Putting a tax on unhealthy food will not necessarily lower the obesity rate because there are other factors that contribute to this problem. Moreover, taxing measures are usually intended for the collective benefit of society rather than the individual. They are usually perceived as another way the government uses to take money out of the citizens’ pockets. Ultimately, thinking that higher taxes on unhealthy foods will help curb down the obesity rate in the country would be similar to say that cost is the sole contributing factor to this public health problem. Imposing taxes will not help lower the consumption level because these foods will still have lower prices than healthier choices. Taxes do not impact the nutritional value of foods, and their only predictable effect is to help in generating additional revenue for the government.
The obesity epidemic is one of the most pressing issues at this point in both American society and U.S. public policy initiatives. According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention 35.9% of U.S. adults over the age of twenty are obese (CDC, 2013). The CDC further notes that 69.2% of U.S. adults twenty years of age and over are overweight (this percentage includes those who are obese). The obesity problem is not exclusive to the adults in the U.S. The CDC notes that 18.4% of adolescents between the ages of 12 and 19 are currently obese (CDC, 2013). These statistics illustrate the severity of the obesity epidemic in this country, but what can be done to address or even correct this problem? Many people have proposed solutions, but few are as radical as the proposal from Michael Bloomberg (the New York City Mayor) in 2012.
It is sad. People from all races and backgrounds are obese. In a recent survey done at Henry Ford College, 43 percent of students were overweight. Whether it is because they do not follow a healthy diet or they inherited it from their parents. Being overweight is correlated with lacking exercise or physical activity and not watching what is on the plate. Obesity can cause many illnesses, including diabetes, which is very common. As the debate whether soda tax should take effect arises, critics say that the tax will help those with obesity-related illnesses. What about exercising and maintaining a healthy lifestyle? These two factors cannot be forgotten knowing they are the most important. Americans have consumed 12 percent of soda and become less active since 1970. A soda tax aims to stop consumers from buying soda to help those who are obese. This will not be effective. Therefore a soda tax will not be good public policy.
Ranging from heart disease to diabetes the consequences of unhealthy eating are well known across the population, yet not much is being done to stop this. According to the World Health Organization, it is projected that by 2030, Diabetes will become the 7th leading cause of death in the world. Why let things spiral out of control and continue postponing a sugar tax? If there is anything that the US government can do is impose this tax. Even if the change is small in comparison to the entire population of the US, these are potential lives being saved. Just like the worst case scenario of smoking is lung cancer, the worst case scenario of obesity is diabetes. Excess sugar should be considered as big of a threat as any other potentially addictive chemical, and should therefore be taxed like one for the safety of the
As a market failure, the obesity epidemic in America is costing the federal government billions of dollars annually. While most obesity prevention programs aim toward changing the rate of children who become obese, many fail, causing an inefficient allocation of government resources. Much of what 's already been done has proven to barely be a speed bump in the progression that is the obesity epidemic. Several solutions which can be explored to effective halt this progression. The taxation of certain unhealthy foods, government benefits and subsidies for organic produce farmers, and passing new legislation to regulate the amount of calories a fast food restaurant is allowed to serve you, just to name a few. These solutions, however, are only effective if they affect the lives of the majority of the population, therefore preventing obesity, whilst correctly allocating valuable government resources efficiently. ...
The Porter’s model of competitive advantage of nations is based on four key elements including factor endowments, demand conditions, related and supporting industries and firm strategy, structure and rivalry. This makes it suitable in understanding the competition existing in the soft drinks industry in the Asian markets. The factor conditions identify the natural resources, climate, location, and demographics. Coca cola and Pepsi enjoy the growing population in the Asian markets (Yoffie, 2002). A higher population guarantees the two companies adequate revenues. Other factors include communication infrastructure and availability of skilled workers. Most of the Asian countries are embracing new technologies that grow much knowledge of the diverse beverage drinks. Secondly, the demand conditions play a significant role in enhancing competitiveness for the firms. Both Coca cola and Pepsi are an
This article is talking about a mayor banning beverages larger than 16 oz. at restaurants, sports arenas and movie theaters. The reason this mayor wants to ban large sodas is because he is afraid for all of New York’s health. That’s a good thing because a lot of us don’t know what we drink and eat most of the time. We just eat our food we don’t even bother to look what’s really in side such as calories, fats and oils in our food. This Mayor is doing New York a huge favor by banning large sodas. He’s helping everyone in New York about their health but people of New York doesn’t see that. There are people who are trying to not let him pass this law because some of them probably drink 16 oz. every day of once a week or twice a week or even more.
Policies implemented by the government have the potential to greatly impact the issues faced by Americans because of their food. One of the most serious epidemics to face Americans is obesity; a direct result of a lack of access to healthy, whole produce. The government has several options in solving this problem including food taxes, public education programs, and mandatory physical education in schools. A food tax on items high in process ingredients and low in nutrients should have a higher tax than whole foods. Much like the Cigarette Tax, a Processed Food Tax will persuade consumers to shy away from these nutrient-void foods and incorporate more healthy foods into their diet. Another solution to combating obesity is a series of public educational programs. By educating the public and even kids in school on the difference between processed and whole foods, individuals will be better able to distinguish between beneficial and non-beneficial foods. And finally, the most attention grabbing policy the United States government should be enacting is mandatory physical education. Including, but not limited to Michelle Obama’s “Let’s Move” campaign, the government should require mandatory physical education classes in schools because they found increased PE time raised the amount of time students were exercising or "engaged in strength-building activities" but lowered the amount of time spent in
Manitoba, a place knew for adoring new and high taxes, refused to add junk food taxes because they knew that it was going to be a waste of time and there would not be any positive results (5). The many studies of junk food taxes have soon other countries that it is not going to work. People will find other alternative to get the sugary high they need. A study in a small city showed that soda intake decreased for a small amount of time and then it increased again, as well as the sales on beer increased (Luciani P.