Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Should government have a say in our diets? introduction
Importance of food regulations
Should government have a say in our diets? introduction
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
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 …show more content…
It shouldn’t be my problem whenever one cannot exercise and eat right. Yes, you can still go eat a cheeseburger at McDonalds every once in a while, but do not go and make a routine about it. While people are paying for others’ obesity, and heart problems for eating too much fast-food, it is not going to make them put down the cheeseburger. They will continue to eat as much unhealthy food as possible, because one does not appreciate it as much if they do not pay for it themselves. Most Americans are fat, and that’s a fact. Each and every one of us should only be accountable for our own unhealthy eating problems. It without a doubt should not be “public …show more content…
If one tries to manipulate kids, or even adults, into not eating junk food, when the opportunity does arise they will most likely chose the unhealthy version. It should be up to the parents on what their kids eat, and they should most definitely make them eat healthy, and foster healthy eating habits. Whenever those kids do grow up, it should then be their responsibility to eat healthy, and hopefully they will continue on eating healthy. That does not mean that they will though, but in the end they should learn their own way, and on their own time. This is American, it is a FREE country, so we should decide when and what we want to eat. It should also be our responsibly to take care of ourselves, and our bodies, and more important, our health. We cherish it more if we have to spend our own money on medical bills and medication. People need to realize if they want to eat out more than they eat in, they should exercise more regularly. All in all, consumers should have the right to eat whatever they want, whenever they want, because they should have to pay for their own medical supplies to keep themselves alive. If they want to slowly kill themselves by eating too much McDonalds, let them. If they have to money to keep buying unhealthy food, then they should have the money for all their medical
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.
I am responding to the request to analyze Radley Balko’s article, “What You Eat Is Your Business” and make a recommendation for or against publication in The Shorthorn at University of Texas at Arlington. In order to respond, I have examined the rhetorical appeals of Balko’s piece and determined why this article should be posted in the next edition of The Shorthorn. I believe that the Shorthorn audience would be interested in what is being discussed regarding of obesity, things that could potentially affect their lifestyle as well as the professors. In “What You Eat Is Your Business”, Balko claims that obesity is the responsibility of the individual not the government, and how our government is allowing American to live an unhealthy lifestyle
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.
Richard Balko and Mary Maxfield discuss personal responsibility, and choices in one’s health in their essays “What You Eat Is Your Business,” and “Food as Thought: Resisting the Moralization of Eating” respectively. Balko feels the government should not intervene in people’s food intake because it is an individual preference. Instead, Balko asserts that the government should foster a program to assist the American people to take on personal responsibility and ownership of their own health. Similarly, Maxfield paints the same picture that our culture now finds it immoral to eat what our body needs, therefore believing in the idea of eating less is healthier. Maxfield points out the multi-billion dollar campaign of corporations into advertising false hope into consumers by buying into eradication of fatness. Why has food have suddenly become a risky subject at the dinner table? And who is to blame? Is it everyone else or do we blame ourselves?
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.
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.
The question of what is the government’s role in regulating healthy and unhealthy behavior is one that would probably spark a debate every time. Originally, the role was to assist in regulating and ensure those that were unable to afford or obtain healthcare insurance for various reasons would be eligible for medical care. However, now it seems that politicians are not really concerned about what’s best for the citizens but woul...
Put that burger down? Obesity is a public epidemic because it is rising by the day. Some people are so quick to blame the fast food industry like McDonalds, Burger King, and other firms claiming that these industry aide in creating a society in which it is encouraged to eat unhealthy food. So who really is to blame? While we are busy pointing our sticky finger at restaurants, grocery stores, farmers, or government policies, we need to focus on our individual self as the main cause of this increasing epidemic.
"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 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”.
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
According to the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney diseases, states that More than two-thirds (68.8 percent) of adults are considered to be overweight or obese and in a classroom of six children one is guaranteed to be obese or overweight. Additionally the CDC website estimated the annual medical cost of obesity in the U.S. was $147 billion in 2008 U.S. dollars; the medical costs for people who are obese were $1,429 higher than those of normal weight. In the written essay “What you eat is your business” I believe that the author makes the makes many profound arguments of why “What you eat is your Business” I do believe that corporations and as well as America should make laws that help children and adults eat healthier.
It is the parent’s choice if they want to but the product. “There are no true legal grounds to support it, and honestly, everyone has a right to choose. Eating junk food is a life choice and should not be ashamed. It’s also a double edged sword to put forth a ban on ads and could hurt the industry.”(Should junk food) There is no good reason to ban junk food and fast food ads. “Junk food ads should not be banned during children’s programming because it’s the parents who should regulate what their kids eat or watch, not the companies.”(Should junk food) It is also not the company’s responsibility to keep the kids healthy but it i...
Junk food contains a high amount of unhealthy ingredients that affects our body in a bad way. Junk food also affects our brain negatively and obesity is also one of the effects of fast food on the humans body. In order to let young people and children stop eating fast food parents should help them with that. Eating junk food should be one day every week or also one day every month not more than that. There are many other reasons why junk food is bad but these three reasons are the most important one’s that people should be afraid of. Stop eating fast food from today and start a new healthy life. Our body needs to be clean and