Nowadays in United State, obesity is really a big problem. According to a report from Forbes in 2007, 74.1 percent of people who are over 15 years old in America are considered overweight, which ranked number nine in the world (Streib). According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, nearly 34 percent of Americans are obese (Salahi and Meaney). Among all the reasons why people get fat, eating unhealthy food constitutes a high proportion. Junk food, such as candies and fries, provides more fats, sugar, salt, and calories, which could easily lead to obesity. Why people eat fast food instead of healthy food? One main reason is that healthy food is 1.5 dollar expensive than fast food (Dwyer). As I am a government officer, I suggest government to increase the tax rate of unhealthy food and decrease the tax rate of healthy food to improve our eating standard and reduce obesity. Generally, most healthy foods are more expensive than less healthy food. “Poor people are easy to identify because so many are obese. (Peck)” said by Anna Soubry, the Tory public health minister. The food prices have a significant impact on people who want to balance good nutrition. According to Geographic Differences in the Relative Price of Healthy Foods, the price of whole grains is 23 percent higher than that of refined grains in San Francisco, while 60 present higher in Pennsylvania and New York (Todd, Leibtag and Penberthy). Also, the price of fresh green vegetables is 20 to 80 percent higher than that of starchy vegetables in all markets across the United States (Todd, Leibtag and Penberthy). Due to the higher price of healthy food, a lot of people choose to eat unhealthy food, such as McDonald’s, especially for people who don’t want to... ... middle of paper ... ... do this action by changing people’s behavior. Children learn their eating habits from their parents in the early life. Adding tax on unhealthy food may be one way to force their parents to think about buying more healthy food and cooking at home, and start to teach their children eat healthily. To sum up, most of healthy food is more expensive which need to spend more money and time than unhealthy food, so most people would not choose to buy healthy food. Also, from the report example of tobacco, it shows that increase tax can discourage of sales in one production. I suggest decreasing the tax rate of healthy food and increasing the tax rate of unhealthy food to balance the price and encourage people to buy more healthy food. Then, there will be more people eating healthy and less obesity. In the long run, there will be less people in hospital because of obesity.
Stores are unable to sell items that have past their best before date due to regulations and consumer belief that the food has expired, when it is generally still safe to eat but has just passed its peak quality. (USDA, 2013) Food is also wasted once it has been purchased. 32% of all food purchased per year in UK households is not eaten and ends up in a landfill – a huge amount of wastage. Over three million people die of obesity related causes each year. There is a growing number of people becoming obese, in America, 34.9% of people are obese. This is up from 27.9% in 2013. (The Economist Intelligence Unit, 2014) Obesity contributes to a lack of food security due to the amount of food obese people consume. Eliminating obesity could result in 6% more food available. (Lipinski et al., 2013) The problem is however that food insecurity can also cause obesity. Where fast food options are more accessible and the cost of healthy alternatives is too high, people opt for the easier and cheaper option. This leads to obesity and nutrient deficiencies also may be evident. (Unit, 2014) Therefore changing people’s attitude towards food in the western world is critical, this could be most easily achieved by education. In countries such as New Zealand where every product had a good and services tax, it could be beneficial to remove the tax off unprocessed food, lowering its price and therefore encouraging people to choose a healthier option of
Research has shown that economic and other social factors are better predictor of health than individual behaviours or lifestyles (2). According to the McKeown hypothesis, many major improvements in population health was due to improving economic conditions (ie. improved nutrition, sanitation and social policies). Important determinants of health are upstream, such as those related to economic and social resources that promote living and working conditions, which result in healthy choices. These upstream determinants are mainly established through national economic, political and social welfare systems. Addressing obesity through regulations through a macro, top-down approach, such as law enforcement, is an effective way to make population changes. An important question to ask is: will this new policy help those who are at high risk of obesity-related diseases? The group of people associated with increased odds of obesity, coronary artery disease, hypertension, diabetes and dislipidaemia are those of a lower social economic position (SEP)(3). Studies have shown that when it comes to purchasing fast foods, calorie labeling benefits higher social economic position neighbour hoods significantly more than lower SEP neighbourhoods (4). People in lower SEP may not prioritize calories when they are making choices on a menu. They are looking to get the most out of their dollar. Therefore, calorie labeling may help those of higher SEP, who have the privilege to make informed decisions about their health. However, calorie labeling may not be as beneficial to those of lower SEP who are at greatest risk of obesity related
By adding a tax, people will stop buying unhealthy foods daily. Being able to decrease the number of unhealthy food people eat, will better our overall health, and will decline our obesity rates. A study done "as of 2003, US states without sales taxes on soft drinks or snack foods were 4 times as likely as states with a tax to have a relative increase in the prevalence of obesity" (Franck, Grandi, & Eisenberg, 2003). This is a good example of how taxing junk food will help the populations problem with obesity. With easier access to junk food, people are more likely to buy it because it is a cheap substitute for the pricey healthy
Campoy A.2010.taxes should be imposed on junk food to encourage healthy eating.http://www.sciencedaily.com.100224142046.html date of access 20 may 2014
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. ...
One out of every three Americans is obese and the majority of these obese people in the United States have eaten regularly at fast food restaurants. As the obesity rate increases, the number of fast food restaurants goes up as well. Although it is not certain, many believe that obesity in the United States is correlated to eating fast food. Since the United States has the highest obesity rate out of any country, it is important for Americans to monitor the fast food industry that may be causing obesity. With the pressure to get things done in a timely manner, fast food became a big necessity. However, when creating fast food restaurants, the industries were not thinking about the negative effects such as obesity. Other than obesity, other harmful effects exist as well. Fast food restaurants serve unhealthy products such as greasy foods and artificial meat that lead to dietary health issues in many adults and children. A recent study showed that “Young children who are fed processed, nutrient-poor foods are likely to become unhealthy teenagers, and eventually unhealthy adults. Now twenty-three percent of teens in the U.S. are pre-diabetic or diabetic, 22% have high or borderline high LDL cholesterol levels, and 14% have hypertension or prehypertension” (May, Kuklina, Yoon). The food that they provide is made to be eaten quickly, causing problems for the digestive system. Also, the health problems lead to the use for health insurance, which adds to the costs of Medicare. Health care costs will only worsen an already failing economy. Therefore, the government should regulate fast food restaurants in the United States in order to repair the deteriorating health and economy in America.
In the impecunious economy we are living in this current day, we as Americans are looking to cut cost anywhere possible which includes our food budget. Does eating healthy really need to be more expensive? As Pollan aptly stated, “There’s no escaping the fact that better food — measured by taste or nutritional quality (which often correspond) — costs more, because it has been grown or raised less intensively and with more care(Pollan).” While I do agree with Pollan’s statement part of me is left ruminating, are there actions that can be taken to ease the financial sting attributed to eating healthy? Many recent studies are projecting the percent of Americans that suffer from some level of obesity residing somewhere between 25-30 percent, this only further leaves the question to be answered. To answer it we must first look at some of the root problems that impute to the costly expense of healthy eating.
More tax on fatty foods will discourage some buyers from buying foods that don't really help for there health. Increasing the price for fatty foods may decrease the demand them. If that happens it will increase the demands for foods that cost less which might include healthier foods for the consumer. "Many foods that mightObesity causes a greater risk of heart disease, diabetes, stroke and angina of which a junk food tax would help pay to offset in terms of the
The Government, the media, newspapers and magazines play a very important role reporting how to prevent obesity and overweight. An Alarming increase of obesity in the population, and mostly in children under 5 years, from 1980 to date, is almost unbelievable, the obesity has doubled in the world. The sedentary lifestyle, poor feeding, the increase of the sugar in the diet in adults, but mainly in children and the lack of information about eating healthy and balanced are some of the causes that lead to obesity. Overweight and obesity are the result of a bad food education.
The first problem with this method is identification of which foods should be taxed higher. There are many challenges in determining which foods are considered healthy. If it was decided that sugar content would be the deciding factor, people could substitute for foods high in fat. The opposite holds true if fat content was chosen as the deciding factor; furthermore, many foods such as avocado, olive oil, and nuts are high in fat, but have many health benefits. Foods such as these prove that catch-all regulations would prove troublesome. Taxation of specific food groups has been proven to be ineffective in curbing obesity by researchers. Soda is often considered to be a leading cause of obesity, so it would stand to reason that higher taxes would lower obesity. A study conducted by American researchers showed that sales taxes on soda had very little impact on obesity levels (Powell, 2009). Even if the tax lowers soda consumption, a significant portion of people will still consume excess calories, and obesity will still be an issue. Taxing junk food is an ineffective measure; if people want specific things, they will find a way to obtain
Like I said more than fifty percent of Americans diets are affected by price because healthy foods are so expensive so people buy the cheaper unhealthy foods. Healthy foods are so, for example, take expensive because apple an a can of soda the can of soda is filled with sugar and unwanted chemicals but
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.
Many people eat fast food due to their low prices. Advertisement greatly inspires Americans to try the latest burgers or meals. It is known that anything that is not good for consumers is more likely to result in an increase in taxes. Raising the tax makes a certain product increase in price so it will be less affordable for the consumer to consume and more likely to stop purchasing it, and it will decrease the chances for the consumer to suffer health problems or deceases. Higher tax on unhealthy food can benefit America and it’s proven that it will
Some people abuse of the consumption of food when it should be consider a necessity. For example, when they are depressed, they find comfort in food, this results in obesity. Increasing the price of junk food might bring conscience to the consumer and can be persuaded to make healthier decisions. It is known that people with obesity are victims of discrimination. As a matter of fact, people with obesity are prone to develop cardiovascular problems, diabetes, and back problems. Under those circumstances, it is easier to do a change in habits rather than find a treatment for their condition. For this reason, increasing the price of fat, fast and sugary products is a positive change. In the long run, it will cost less to increase the price of the products rather than paying for treatments for health conditions when sometimes, health insurance do not cover in full for such
It became so clear that junk foods lead to a punch of catastrophic diseases like obesity, type two diabetes, vascular diseases and cardiac disorders. Those kinds of diseases cost more than $150 billion annually, just to diagnose, treat people who suffer from them. That disease is chronic and leads to many health-related issues, for example, obesity considers a risk factor for type two diabetes, and high blood pressure, joint disorders and many others (The Denver Post 2012). The key of preventing many chronic problems is nutrition. Low income plays an important role of limiting most people to buy and eat a healthy diet and in the other hand, it is easy for people budgets to purchase junk foods. So controlling the prices of healthy foods to be suitable for all people make good nutrition available for everyone. Adequate diets mean decreasing the epidemic of those serious diseases, and stopping the spread and break the bad sequences that may happen. Long-term exposure to junk foods that are full with chemicals like additives, preservatives have led to chronic illnesses difficult to treat. Also, the chemical added to junk foods are tasted unique and made millions of people becoming addicted to them and are available everywhere for example in restaurants, cafes, lunchrooms (The Denver Post