In today’s society, people have started to grow accustomed to not taking the responsibility for their actions. One big controversy that ties with this problem is the idea that obesity is because of the vast amount of unhealthy foods and the food providers not clearly labeling the nutrition facts. People who believe this also has been trying to get the government more involved in the regulation of food; however, this would be a terrible idea. In Radley Balko’s article, “What You Eat Is Your Business”, the author expresses his passionate belief that the government should play less of a role in the choice of what people eat. Balko describes himself to be a libertarian who believes that the government should not play a big role in the day to day …show more content…
life of the average American. One of his biggest beliefs about government is that they should not be involved with the food industry. He believes that the civil liberty and freedom for the American people to choose to eat what they want, either healthy or unhealthy, is totally up to them. Balko argues that if the government wants to improve the lives of unhealthy Americans they should not mandating unhealthy foods and restaurants, encourage personal accountability, and remove obesity from the realm of public health. Free will, civil liberties, and limited government.
These are all thing the Balko believes makes America great. However, these freedoms would be in jeopardy if the government has more and more to do with the daily life of the average American. This all starts with the government wanting to regulate the type of food we eat. In the beginning of the article, he describes several government programs like anti-obesity measures put in place by President Bush and the “fat tax” that are put in place to make Americans healthier (Balko 467). These items are being put into placed to limit the accessibility of higher calorie foods to the consumer. This also is intended to put the blame on restaurants and companies that make and distribute the food for America’s health problems for not labeling the nutritional facts correctly. When in truth, if you are eating something call a double-decker, triple fudge, chocolate explosion honey bun, the correct calorie count should not be important. the idea of making certain foods is just unconstitutional and wrong. Why should the companies that produce tasteful snacks and flavorful sodas be taxed higher because the government would rather blame them for the actions of those who abuse these products? Instead of placing the blame on the producer, maybe we should start approaching the obesity problem in a more realistic …show more content…
way. One simple solution to the obesity crisis is to stop blaming others for own actions. by instating an overall sense of personal accountability for our actions is far more effective than blaming the hand that feeds us (Balko 467). The government, on the other hand, is doing quite the opposite. For example, our healthcare system. Balko states, “America’s health care system has been migrating towards socialism.” (Balko 467). This means instead of people having to hold themselves accountable for their lifestyle chooses they have the government to ease the repercussions. Under most health care plans, people had to pay for other people’s medical needs. Since this is the idea, what incentive is there for people to forfeit doing something they enjoy, that is bad for them, if there are not any punishments for their actions? Like Balko says, “if the government is paying for my anti-cholesterol medication, what incentive is there for me to put down the cheeseburger?” (Balko 467). This is an extremely compelling argument that Balko makes because it ties right into his belief of self-accountability. If the government would just allow people to pay for their actions, then there would be more of an incentive for them to eat better foods and to live a healthier lifestyle. If the government truly wants to help with the obesity outbreak, then they should drop it from public health altogether and not be involved.
By removing obesity from the domain of public health it would remove the disaster full incentives that come with being unhealthy. Meaning that the government would not be in charge of something they have no right to be in charge of in the first place. Balko argues, “It only becomes a public matter when we force the public to pay for the consequences of those choices.” (Balko 468). What people decide to eat is none of the governments business and therefore they have no right to force others that are healthy to be responsible for those who are not. Instead of this, there should be incentives for living a healthier lifestyle such as lower premiums for those who are healthier and allowing insurance companies to reward healthy lifestyles (Balko 468). Overall America would be in a much more healthier position if we took the personal choice of an unhealthy lifestyle out of public
health Balko’s theory of why there is an obesity problem in America is extremely useful because it sheds light on a difficult problem of people not wanting to take responsibility for their lifestyle choices. Instead, the government fostering the idea within the American people that they are the victims of restaurants and food companies for bad advertising. This only leads to several more problems such as people believing that they are not at fault for their own condition. What the government should stop doing is trying to regulate companies and what the American people want to eat. Doing the opposite would start a path to a more socialist type of government. We should also start installing a sense of personal accountability. People need to realize that the reason they may be obese is of their own demise and if they want to change then it will be up to them. Finally, the best thing the government can do for its people is to remove obesity from public health in general. There is no need for the government to be involved with one of our civil liberties such as eating what we want. The type of food we eat is our own business and not the governments.
I think that government’s only role in the matter is to provide people with the information they need to make their health decisions. Although Balko is against federal funding for food labels, I think that it is necessary for people to know exactly what they are eating, such as how many calories, fat, protein, etc. Once people are aware of what are good and bad, the rest is up to the consumer. There is no need for prohibiting junk food because the individual knows what their actions will result in, and what someone choses to eat is no one else’s
Regulating what the government should control and what they should not was one of the main arguments our founding fathers had to deal with when creating our nation, and to this day this regulation is one of the biggest issues in society. Yet, I doubt our founding fathers thought about the idea that the food industry could one day somewhat control our government, which is what we are now facing. Marion Nestles’ arguments in the book Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health deal with how large food companies and government intertwine with one another. She uses many logical appeals and credible sources to make the audience understand the problem with this intermingling. In The Politics of Food author Geoffrey Cannon further discusses this fault but with more emotional appeals, by use of personal narratives. Together these writers make it dramatically understandable why this combination of the food industry and politics is such a lethal ordeal. However, in The Food Lobbyists, Harold D. Guither makes a different viewpoint on the food industry/government argument. In his text Guither speaks from a median unbiased standpoint, which allows the reader to determine his or her own opinions of the food industries impact on government, and vise versa.
Throughout the article, Balko uses unpleasant manners to convey a message to readers that what the government tries to do is wrong and the government should adjust to improve its system. Even though so many students find this article is untrue because they believe that decreasing the obesity rate is government’s job, but I believe that this paper is somewhat true because we have to cooperate with the government to make it work, otherwise, only government or only ourselves is not enough. Not only that, this article somehow evokes my sympathy with the writer, even though there are some points that I disagree
Ever since the creation of the golden arches, America has been suffering with one single problem, obesity. Obesity in America is getting worse, for nearly two-thirds of adult Americans are overweight. This obesity epidemic has become a normal since no one practices any type of active lifestyle. Of course this is a major problem and many wish it wasn 't in existence, but then we start to ask a major question. Who do we blame? There are two articles that discuss numerous sides of this question in their own unique way. “What You Eat is Your Business” by Radley Balko is better than “Don 't Blame the Eater” by David Zinczenko due to its position in argument, opposition, and it’s reoccurrence in evidence.
In his article “What You Eat Is Your Business,” Radley Balko emphasizes that we ought to be accountable with what we eat, and the government should not interfere with that. He declares that the state legislature and school boards are already banning snacks and soda at school campuses across the country to help out the “anti-obesity” measure. Radley claims that each individual’s health is becoming “public health” instead of it being their own problem. Balko also states, “We’re becoming less responsible for our own health, and more responsible for everyone else’s.” For instance, a couple of new laws have been passed for people to pay for others’ medicine. There is no incentive to eat right and healthy, if other people are paying for the doctor
Eating is an instinctual habit; however, what we decide to put in our body is a choice that will affect our way of living. In “The American Paradox,” Michael Pollan, a professor of journalism at University of California, Berkeley, disapproves of the way Americans have been eating. The term “American paradox” describes the inverse correlation where we spend more of our time on nutrition, but it would only lead to our overall health deteriorating. According to Pollan, our way of eating that had been governed with culture, or our mother, was changed by the entities of food marketers and scientists, who set up nutritional guidelines that changed the way we think about food. Nutritional advice is inaccurate as it is never proven, and it is not beneficial
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.
As consumers, we like to believe that the information we are told is truthful and unbiased however, this is not always the case in relation to the fast food industry. In his essay “Don’t Blame the Eater,” David Zinczenko builds a convincing argument by using logical reasoning that fast food companies should be more truthful with their caloric content. Zinczenko also uses this logical reasoning to show how ease of access and family structure can affect fast food consumption. However, Zinczenko’s use of hasty generalizations and cause and effect fallacies render his argument unconvincing overall.
Best selling author of Eat This, Not That, David Zinczenko’s article “Don’t Blame the Eater,” blames the fast food industry for the growing rate of obesity in the United States. Zinczenko’s main idea is that fast food companies should have warning labels on all the food they supply. Zinczenko believes that since health labels are put on tobacco and preserved food product, fast food industries should put labels on today’s fast food. Discussions about the availability of fast food compared to healthier alternative were brought up as well. Zinczenko states that when looked at, a salad from a fast food restaurant could add up to half of someone’s daily calories (155). He believes that because of fast food, Americans are having more health risks, which includes an insane rise in diabetes. Some agree with Zinczenko saying fast food companies should be the ones responsible to show people the truth about their foods. On the other hand Radley Balko, a columnist for FoxNews.com, states that fast-food consumption ...
In the article, “The Pleasure of Eating” by Wendell Berry, Berry was right about the fact that there should be a “Food Politics”. This article talks about “eating responsibly” and “eating agriculturally”. If you haven’t heard of these terms, they vary in Berry’s article. So “Eating responsibly” and “Eating agriculturally” basically means that everyone is expected to see and know about what they are eating. Nonetheless, not all fruits and vegetables are healthy. You might need to spend some time to take a look at the brand, price, and the facts about the products. Imagine, if Berry came to your dinner table? How do you get or purchase your food? What will you serve him? If Berry were to show up to my dinner, the best
We make personal choices about what and where to eat. The government is not going to eliminate the unhealthy food because we think it is the cause of obesity. Ultimately, we must decide to either stay away from unhealthy food or eat them in moderation. Despite all the efforts of education, media and guidance it doesn’t prevent us from grabbing that cheeseburger with fries on the way to work. In his essay “What You Eat Is Your Business,” Radley Balko argues that society should take full responsi...
"What You Eat Is Your Business" by Radley Balko is an article in which he argues about how government interferes in what we eat. Radley Balko says, "President Bush earmarked $200 million in his budget for anti-obesity measures. State legislatures and school boards across the country have begun banning snacks and soda from school campus and vending machines" (Balko 296). None of these methods will stop people from eating what they want; it is just a waste of money. In the essay, he argues about how health has become public matter, rather than private. The reason of very high health cost in America is that "We are more likely go to the doctor at the first sign of cold, when we are not paying for it from our own pocket." In the
The fact is that in our country, any government intrusion looks undesirable. We are so used to making free choice and to having access to everything we need and want that we have already forgotten the value and usefulness of the government control. No, that does not mean that the government must control everything and everyone. What I mean here is that the government control should be balanced with the freedom of choice. Unfortunately, plentiful foods do not lead to improved health conditions. We cannot always make a relevant choice. Our hurried lifestyles make us extremely fast, and eating is not an exception. We eat fast, but fast does not always mean useful. I believe, and in this essay I argue that the government must have a say in our diets. Because there are so many obese people, because obesity is an expensive disease, and because very often it is due to poverty that people cannot afford healthy foods, the government must control the amount and the range of foods which we buy and eat. Healthy foods must become affordable. Poor populations must have access to high quality foods. The production of harmful foods should be limited. All these would be impossible if the government does not take active position against our diets.
In this article “Fast Food and Personal Responsibility” (2003) which was written by Ninos P. Malek, Malek tries to argue and show people that it’s not entirely the fast food industries’ fault that people are obese or sick . He argues using 3 different supporting examples; first he says that, “High school students blaming their poor diets on school cafeteria” (Malek, 2003, p.309). Most student tend do that, but actually most cafeterias sell healthy and unhealthy food but people always need something to blame and never hold themselves the responsibility for their own action, secondly he says that no one is putting people under gun point to make them buy fast food (2003, p.309). That’s actually true but still he forgot to mention the fact that they are trying to brain wash people into buying their food through their erroneous advertisements. Third and last Malek tries to compare smoking to fast food, because back then tobacco companies were sued too for almost the same reason which is about health. Malek’s argument was precise because people need to learn to take responsibility for their own actions and should know that when they buy fast food they are weighing their own costs and benefits. But he didn’t show the immoral and unethical things the fast food industries were doing by using erroneous advertisements. The fast food industries shouldn’t be held accountable for this because everyone has a freedom of choice and they can choose whether to eat it or no.
Society should consider the physical and emotional problems of obesity in our nation. “Obesity is defined as an excess proportion of total body fat (Mayo Clinic).” American society has become increasingly obese, “characterized by environments that promote increased food intake, unhealthy foods, and physical inactivity (cdcinfo@cdc.gov).” Our nation increasingly has become consumers of a fast food diet. It is so simple to just pick up food on the go and not deal with the hassle of cooking and cleaning up afterwards. What are nation needs to acknowledge is the health risks they will obtain if they do not acquire a healthy life style.