More handpicked essays just for you.
How much control does the government have over our diets
Should the government have a say in our diets
How much control does the government have over our diets
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
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.
Janet Poppendieck is a professor of sociology at Hunter College in New York, and additionally she is the author of several books including her most recent Free for All: Fixing School Food in America. This book centers on America’s recent interest in whether or not our school lunches are healthy. This issue has been put into the spotlight recently through shows such as Jamie Oliver’s School Food Revolution and in the news because recent changes in the Nation School Lunch Program’s dietary guidelines. Poppendieck’s book looks at the in depth reasons into why school lunches have turned into what they are today, what challenges need to be faced in order to fix school lunches, and ultimately how our the system should be fixed. She accomplishes this by interviewing her current college students about their previous school lunch experiences, working in a school cafeteria, interviewing current school employees, and looking at the history and policies of the National School Lunch Program.
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
My claim states that the New York soda ban would not prove to be effective because it is will bring about a rebellious reaction in some people, it does not include supermarkets, vending machine and convenience stores and refills which means people can go around it and educating people should be the first step towards improvement in their lifestyle.
Obesity in America is a rising situation. The issue keeps getting more controversial and many people are blaming the fast food restaurants for this problem people are facing. Radley Balko the author of “What You Eat is Your Business” explains that no one should have a say on what people eat. The government plays a big role in trying to tell people what they can, and cannot eat. Balko explains how the government should not have any say so on what people choose to eat. David Zinzeko the author of “Don’t Blame the Eater” explains how it is not their fault they are obese. Instead, they are blaming the fast food restaurants for making them obese because of the small options they have are healthy. In my personal opinion, the government should have no choice in what we eat. Fast food companies should not be blamed for making people fat when people make the choice to go there knowing that it is not healthy.
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:
In the past couple years people all around the nation, whether it's in New York City or an 8th Grade classroom in Michigan, people have been pressed with the question, whether the New York Soda Ban, is a good thing, improving health, or if there is a larger issue. Is this decision showing evidence of the Government interfering with our basic civil liberties?
Radley Balko is the author of, “What you Eat is Your Business,” in this article he explains why he is against how much control the government is trying to exercise over the rising number of cases of obesity in the United States. Balko believes that the government is treating the American health problem all wrong. He states in his article," Your wellbeing, shape, and condition have increasingly been deemed matters of 'public health,' instead of matters of personal responsibility." (467) In order to better illustrate his point about government being too involved with what he believes is a private matter, he mentions politicians such as then Senator Clinton and President Bush, whom have taken up arms for the sake of public health. Balko asks the thought provoking question, "And if the
In May of 2012 Mayor Bloomberg announced his portion cap rule proposal (Renwick, 2013). This proposal would ban the sale of sweet and sugary beverages that are over sixteen ounces in size. This ban would affect movie theaters, restaurants, street vendors, and any other commercial entity that is regulated by the New York City health department (Yee, 2013). This proposal is commonly referred to as the New York City Soda Ban.
With the continued growth of fast food restaurants, low priced food, and fast friendly service, these restaurants have become very appealing to the average consumer. With this increase in popularity, there has come many problems for these companies associated with the fast food industry. These stores are being blamed for the rise of obesity and other health issues in America; leading to many wanting a ban or probation on these fast food restaurants. The Government has stepped in on this issue and is trying to coming up with solutions for this so called “epidemic”. “One ordinance has passed by the Los Angeles City Council that bans the issuance of permits relating to the construction of any new fast food restaurants in South Los Angeles, California to promote healthy eating choices” (Creighton, 2009, p. 249). This law stops fast food restaurants from building any new stores in South Los Angeles. This law tells people that the “government is better at making choices for people than the people are for themselves” (Creighton, 2009, p. 249). It is like the government is treating their citizens like children making decisions for them, because they do not know better. Fast food restaurants should not be blamed for the consumers’ health problems, because it is the consumers’ choice to eat there, and these restaurants are not as bad as anti-fast food activists make them out to be.
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).”
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.
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...
...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.