As our former president Thomas Jefferson once asserted, "If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as the souls who live under tyranny." The government has decided to once again control the life of civilians, and this time it’s controlling what we can and can’t eat. In simpler words, they’ve become the “food nannies”. The government should leave the concern of health to the people they’re contravening. Every time a government official promulgates a new rule about what can and can’t be consumed, they infringe on the rights listed in the Constitution, limit choices, and are ineffective.
Mayor Bloomberg of New York has decided to attempt to implement a preposterous law that limits the size of soda being sold in restaurants. This law, and all others trying to control the amount of caloric intake violate the rights given in the Constitution. Article one of the Constitution states that all people have the freedom to make their own decisions, yet placing food regulations and taxes on certain items go ag...
The federal government does not have the explicit power to regulate public health so it bases its regulations on the federal government's exclusive ability to regulate interstate commerce. As an illustration of this power, there is a famous case - we will call it the fried chicken case - where the federal government was able to end a practice which forbid African Americans from buying food at a fried chicken restaurant a southern state in the 1960's. The Greyhound buses would stop at this restaurant for a break for the drivers. The federal government came in and said that the sale of chicken at the restaurant affected interstate commerce. Therefore, the federal government, and not the state, could control whether or not African Americans were allowed to eat there.
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.
Pratt, Katherine. "A Constructive Critique Of Public Health Arguments For Antiobesity Soda Taxes And Food Taxes." Tulane Law Review 87.1 (2012): 73-140. Academic Search Complete. Web. 24 Mar. 2014.
As explained in previous sections, Big Food has immense power to influence government decision making. It is important to understand how Big Food is able to participate and use the political system to their advantage. The main way that Big Food influences government decision making is through lobbying. Lobbying is a common practice within the American political system that is utilized by industries to further their interests. Lobbying manifests in two major ways within the political system. Industries lobby Congress for favorable regulations, and the White House for beneficial trade agreements. For this purpose of this thesis, the aspect of lobbying surrounding favorable regulations in Congress will be explored as it pertains to Big Food.
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...
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.
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.
Everyone loves fast food, surgery desserts and indulging in sweet and salty snacks covered in chocolate. What people rarely think of is how unhealthy they may be eating and what they’re putting into their bodies. The consequences can be life threating if not taking the right procedures to maintain a healthy lifestyles. As we continue these unhealthy lifestyles they can be taken after by our children and their grandchildren. Children that continue in their parents footsteps or start these habits soon learn the finances as adults such as health costs. Radley Balko criticizes Americans in “What You Eat Is Your Business” for not taking their own responsibility regarding be overweight and how it’s become a public issue. He says the government is not
We all remember that day when President Obama took office, and our school lunches changed forever. First Lady Michelle Obama, felt that too many American kids are overweight, so she thought she needed to make our school lunches healthier, with more fruits and vegetables. One of the major changes she made was how many calories the school cooks were able to give the kids. The new requirements are as follows: up to 650 for children in kindergarten through fifth grade, 700 for sixth through eighth graders and 850 for high scholars. These numbers are consistent with the Mayo Clinic’s recommendations ( Kuczynski-Brown). The main goal of cutting calories and taking away junk food, was to insure that kids are getting served a healthy lunch. At each lunch, schools must still provide a cup of fruit, a cup of vegetables, two servings of grains, two ounces of dairy, and a cup of fluid milk, so that students can get their needed vitamins and nutrients (Anonymous) . They are also wanting more local farmers to be involved, and give more of the food they grow to the school. At the high school I went to, we built a green house, and planted a garden to give us some local grown food. It was part of our Ag Science class. More and more schools are starting to do the same thing. The stats of overweight kids is really high. The guidelines are as follows:
As a kid, people are told, “It’s my body, it’s my choice.” and from there on, that is how they treat themselves. However, should it still be your choice when it starts to cause you health issues? In many parts of the world, largely America, people are wondering when it’s right for the government and food places to step in when it comes to the foods we eat and how much is just too much. At what point do we lose control over our bodies? Some think that it’s the government’s job to protect us from diseases that come with bad eating choices, while others think that it is the individual’s job to decide what goes into their body and how much. The discussion then turns to people wondering if too much of a healthy food is a good or bad thing. Eating
This is not the first time the U.S. has faced problems with the health of the nation. In 1946, President Harry S. Truman signed the National School Lunch Act. This legislation came in response to claims that many American men were rejected for military service due to diet related health issues. School lunch was established as “a measure of national security, to safeguard the health and well-being of the nation’s children and to encourage the domestic consumption of nutritious agricultural commodities and other food (Gunderson, 2013).”
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
...ues. Because nutrition, obesity, and overweight have already turned into a matter of national concern, the government should definitely have a say in our diets, to give us access to healthier foods and to restrict availability of foods, which damage our health.
Yet some readers may challenge my view that the U.S. government should further regulate Junk food. After all, many believe that the government would be infringing on the rights of consumers. Indeed, my argument seems to ignore that you should be able to purchase and consume what you want, and that reducing obesity comes down to personal responsibility. However, I still maintain that further government intervention is required because although we may think we have a choice in what we eat, the addictive properties in fast food prevent us from selecting healthier options. In fact, according to a study conducted by the American Journal of
To survive in life we need to consume food whether it is for nutritional value or for the pure enjoyment of its savory taste. Individuals, not the government, have the right to choose what and when to eat; but good nutrition is important to maintain health and live a long and happy life. People need to make choices everyday about what they put into their bodies. Without proper nutrition, our bodies may not be able to function correctly. Most adults know what is good and bad for the body. We all know that diets rich in fruits and vegetables fuel the body in a healthy way and that protein gives us energy. Although we know what food is best for our bodies, each individual has a personal choice of what they put into their bodies and that should not be dictated by the government, even though