Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Policy proposal for obesity
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
More and more people get fat every year, money is being spent on diabetic patients and heart disease and it's just getting worse. What role should the government take while balancing individual rights and the common good? How do we stop it? Our individual rights say we have to right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and various others. But I'm focussing more on LIFE. We have the agency to choose our way of life whether you want to be fat or fit. It's the choice you make to live life.
In the movie “Hungry for Change” tells us that it is our responsibility to eat healthily and be fit. Making that extra step to ensure happiness. While in “Chew on This” tells us that the government should regulate. While we fight to solve our problem of obesity we work hard trying to find its source. Us or the companies? We both are a source and reason
…show more content…
While many think it's one or the other, we should be working together. Without food companies most people would die, without people, the companies will die. While we need healthy food, some companies make healthy food. While some companies produce unhealthy options it's okay once in a while to snack out and have a treat for yourself.
I can say there is a way to achieve balance. I would rather have balance then one or the other. I think it's best that way for everyone. I like fast food, it's tasty, but to much homemade juice will scar me. While the fast food industry thrives their people don't. Mostly poor they shouldn't have to buy that instead of healthier foods. This is where the government should come in.
The government should regulate what's good or not. Drug commercials are great examples. The government makes sure people know what's wrong with the product and shares that information through the ad. The same should apply to foods with sugar in them. In both “Chew on This” and A “History of Sugar” by Newsela, say sugar sprouts addictive qualities like
As of now, I am taking a business seminar course and I understand some of the ideologies and methodologies that businesses follow. One part of me says that it very clever that businesses are using science to their advantage in order to promote their product, but another part of me says that it is wrong that they are marketing junk food because it contributes to the increase of obesity in America. I find the idea the of marketing healthy food would benefit everyone in that businesses would be able to make their money and customers could live a healthy lifestyle. However, there needs to be people that would have to invent new foods that limits the amount of salts, sugars, and fat, yet still maintains a savory taste. I believe it will take time, but when the right foods are produced, then it would start trending and businesses would have to cater towards the health of the customers instead of causing unhealthy
Radley Balko, The author of the essay “What You Eat is Your Business”, would agree that in order to stop obesity, we must turn this public problem around and make it everyone’s individual responsibility. Instead of inflicting the importance of personal ownership, government officials, politicians and congress make obesity a public problem by prohibiting junk food in school vending machines, federal funding for new bike trails and sidewalks, and restrictive food marketing to children. Overall I agree that this manipulation of food options is not the proper way to fight obesity, however, I think that government should inform people about the food they are eating because then they have no excuses for not taking responsibility of the actions.
Jon Gabriel explains how sugar has become an addictive drug like nicotine, the only difference is that its legal. Once we become hooked on it we become habituated to its effects and need more and more to satisfy ourselves. As a result of the increase in marketing and the on going dependence on sugary foods and beverages, children are taking in more and more sugar and obtaining less and less nutrients. According to Gentry Lasater,
Direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising refers to one of the marketing strategies in a pharmaceutical industry. As pharmaceutical products directly affect people's lives and health, many industrialized countries ban DTC advertisements; the United States and New Zealand are the only industrialized countries that allow DTC advertising of prescription medicines. However, there is a controversy over whether DTC advertising, as one of the most effective forms of mass communication, should be more regulated than it is now. This debate is ongoing. This research argument, however, contends that people need stronger regulations against many DTC advertisements in the pharmaceutical industry because they are usually manipulative and misleading to people.
In his article, “What You Eat Is Your Business” Balko contends that government intervention is the wrong way to fight obesity. Rather, each individual should be held responsible for their own actions (Balko 467). This assertion is made through lines of deductive reasoning. He starts this argument by first arguing that former President Bush reserved $200 million in an anti-obesity budget that will foster measures to prevent and reduce obesity (467). Following that, he referred to some politicians trying to put a “‘fat tax’ on high-calorie food” (467).
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.
Obesity is a serious epidemic that majority of Americans face. The dangerous of obesity should not be taken lightly and addressed admittedly. However, the big question is how or why do some individuals stay skinny or become fat. The movie Weight of The Nations, Part 2: choice helps us explore this unanswered question to give us a better understanding of how this problem has gotten so out of control. This movie targets the obese society in America. This documentary uses scientist to research and address techniques to help people prevent weight gain and loss unhealthy weight. Most Americans want quick fixes to this problem, but have to realize big changes take time, but offer big results. Over all, the idea is to get people motivated by positive results to live a healthier live style.
In “Don’t Blame the Eater”, by David Zinczenko and in “What You Eat is Your Business”, by Radley Balko both authors discuss and make their stance’s clear on their believed cause of obesity in America. On one hand, Zinczenko argues that it is not the consumers fault for putting themselves at risk of becoming obese or being diagnosed with type 2 diabetes, but that it is the fast-food companies fault. While on the other hand, Balko argues that we as individuals hold responsibility on whether or not we are putting ourselves at risk for obesity.
In the article “What You Eat Is Your Business”, the author claims, Americans need to be more responsible for their own health and the government should not become involved (Balko). I argue this point; the American people have been tempted into buying foods that are unhealthy, cheap, and convenient, and we cannot be responsible when foods like this are so easy and available to purchase. We are also one of the fattest nations in the world. He conveys in the article that we should have some sort of responsibility for what we put into our own body (Balko), but I feel that with all of the tempting foods being right at our fingertips, we are getting fatter and fatter. When we turn on the television at night, and every fifteen minutes a food commercial comes on. When we go to school, there are vending machines in every building. Nobody offers water anymore with our meals; it costs extra just to get a cup for water with a meal.
Engler, Yves. “Obesity: much of the Responsibility Lies with Corporations.” They Say I Say. Ed. Gerald Graff, Cathy Birkenstein, Russel Durst. New York. W.W. Norton, 2009. 172-181. Print.
Take a second to understand why fast food firms choose to sell products that are unhealthy. Their unhealthy products are in a high demand in the food market; in fact, they are simply giving us what we demand for. Most firms have started putting food labels on their menus so there is no room for excuse when making the right food choices. Nobody is forcing us to eat a whole box of Krispy crème donuts or a super-size meal at McDonalds. I believe that we are always looking for shortcuts in life and now we can anticipate there is a shortcut in what we put into our bodies. So we are consistently after things that are cheap, fast and affordable. Who better to attend to our needs than the fast food industry?
The sole purpose of a company is to offer goods and services while making a profit. If people have a liking for food products with so many unhealthy items and are willing to buy them, the companies have no obligation to reduce the amount of added ingredients. The companies aren’t the ones forcing the public to overeat. However, these companies shouldn’t market their products to people who they can easily exploit like children and those who are penurious. Michael Moss, author of the article “The Extraordinary Science of Addictive Junk Food” interviews several people who worked for certain big brand companies and gives us an abundant amount of information on how the food companies make and market their food to “get us hooked”.
The government must have a say in our diets. Because the issues of obesity have already reached national scales, because the costs of obesity and related health issues have gone far beyond reasonable limits, and because fighting nutritional issues is impossible without fighting poverty and other social issues, the government should control the range and the amount of available foods. The cost of healthier foods should decrease. The access to harmful foods should be limited. In this way, the government will be able to initiate a major shift in nutritional behaviors and attitudes in society.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in the United States more than one-third of adults and one-sixth of children are obese. Over the next twenty years, these numbers will more than double. By the year 2020, obesity will be considered a normal thing, and a healthy weight will be the exception. Who is to blame for the increasing obese population? Some say fast food restaurants that are on every block in the city. Others say it is the obese people themselves because they do not know how to control themselves. Many major health conditions come with obesity and it is costing the government millions in healthcare to pay for others lack of self control.
In today’s difficult economy who can afford to spend their hard-earned money carelessly? Americans want good quality and low prices, and businesses that advertise their product make saving money possible. Advertising was created for one reason, so businesses could make known their product (Black, Hashimzade, and Myles). Some consumers may argue that advertising is not informative, but that it is manipulative because some advertisements make false claims. Fortunately, there are regulations and consumer rights that promote truth in advertising. Consumers must embrace their rights to keep advertising the way it is meant to be. Advertising is meant to be informative and not manipulative, and consumers play a great role in promoting truth in advertising.