More handpicked essays just for you.
How to write an arguementative essay
Trends in health promotion
Solutions and strategies to deal with global warming
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In the argument “Bad Food? Tax It, and Subsidize Vegetables” by Mark Bittman, it talks about taxing unhealthy food and promoting vegetables. With the use of different strategies like emotions, credible research, solutions to problems, and much more he effectively assures that a diet change is what Americans need and will benefit from. The argument talked about how the American diet should be changed since it is unhealthy and can cause numerous problems such as heart disease, diabetes, and cancer. In light of this issue, Bittman proposed the idea of taxing unhealthy food and drinks while promoting vegetables. This plan could potentially kill six birds with one stone. The benefits would include less unhealthy food consumption, the decrease of diseases, and the decrease of public health costs. They would also include in making healthy food more available to the masses, the environment would improve, and it would save billions of dollars annually that could be raised for other places and activities. Americans should implement ideas from countries like Japan and Denmark to help with this problem. …show more content…
1). This was an effective point because it immediately grabbed the reader’s attention. It also played on people’s natural, instinctive qualities to help those who are in need. It got readers to start thinking from the author’s point of view and could make them try to help him in any way they can. Another way he used an emotional response was by talking about “tax dollars” (par.17). This was well placed because many Americans think that they work too hard to have their hard-earned tax dollars go to waste. This also brought the readers closer to the author because they would not want that to happen, which is a typical fear of
While shopping at a local Trader Joe’s, Freedman spots a bag of peas, which have been breaded, deep-fried and then sprinkled with salt. Upon seeing this snack, he is in shock to know that this same store, which is known for their wholesome food, would sell such a thing. With a tone of exasperation, he admits that, “I can’t recall ever seeing anything at any fast-food restaurant that represents as big an obesogenic crime against the vegetable kingdom.” It was such an unexpected situation for him to come across this small snack that represented the opposite of what the wholesome-food movement is for. To settle his own confusion, he clarifies that, “…many of the foods served up and even glorified by the wholesome-food movement are themselves chock full of fat and problem carbs.” This further proves that just because a certain food is promoted by a health fad, it does not validate that it is genuinely better than fast-food itself. A simple cheeseburger and fries from any fast-food restaurant would more than likely contain less calories than a fancy salad from the next hole-in-the-wall cafe. Not only that, but the burger and fries will be tastier and much cheaper
In the article, “The Pleasure of Eating” by Wendell Berry, Berry was right about the fact that there should be a “Food Politics”. This article talks about “eating responsibly” and “eating agriculturally”. If you haven’t heard of these terms, they vary in Berry’s article. So “Eating responsibly” and “Eating agriculturally” basically means that everyone is expected to see and know about what they are eating. Nonetheless, not all fruits and vegetables are healthy. You might need to spend some time to take a look at the brand, price, and the facts about the products. Imagine, if Berry came to your dinner table? How do you get or purchase your food? What will you serve him? If Berry were to show up to my dinner, the best
American health, specifically our obesity epidemic, has grown into a trending media topic. A quick Google search will bring up thousands of results containing a multitude of opinions and suggested solutions to our nation’s weight gain, authored by anyone ranging from expert food scientists to common, concerned citizens. Amongst the sea of public opinion on obesity, you can find two articles: Escape from the Western Diet by Michael Pollan and The Extraordinary Science of Addictive Junk Food by Michael Moss. Each article presents a different view on where the blame lies in this public health crisis and what we should do to amend the issue. Pollan’s attempt to provide an explanation pales in comparison to Moss’s reasonable discussion and viable
In his essay “The American Paradox”, Michael Pollan illustrates his conclusion that Americans who focus on nutrition have a higher probability of decreasing their well-being. Pollan defines the American paradox as “a notably unhealthy population preoccupied with nutrition and the idea of eating healthily.” For most of our human history, our parents and culture have influenced our diet. However, today the idea of what to eat has been based on the opinions of scientists, food markets, and nutritionists. I agree with Pollan’s argument that being preoccupied with what we eat makes us unhealthy, however, we need a balance and a sense of responsibility in what we eat.
A testimonial appeal stemming from the article, was taken up by Denmark, who, in 2011 said that “any foods high in saturated fat” were to be taxed, and this was passed into law. A secondary testimonial came from the United Nations, which declared that heart disease and “uncatchable” diseases, such as cancer, diabetes, etc. pose a greater risk now than ever before. Another testimonial taken from the text was this: “Western diet is now dominated by “low-cost, highly-proc...
As the Western world experiences increasing occurrences of certain diseases, society is focusing not only on finding the source of this phenomena but also on finding a solution to the problem. In his essay “Escape from the Western Diet”, Michael Pollan places the blame on the Western diet, arguing that people need only to change their eating habits in order to prevent many chronic diseases. While the author makes a compelling argument, his usage of logical fallacies, his questionable credibility, and his apparent bias weaken his point; nonetheless, I agree with his overall surmise that the western diet should be improved.
There are also many people who have been in the armed forces who now find it difficult to live an everyday civilian life (The Passage). Awalt says we shouldn’t help the homeless because they are lazy and do not want our help. He provided us with an example of a man that he tried to give aid to. In the end Awalt determined that this man did not want his help. This was not very effective considering he only provided us with one example.
For years, the United States government has been trying to find a way to lower the obesity in the country. However, the approach it is using, i.e. taxing unhealthy food, is not the most effective one. People are going to purchase whatever products they wish, whether the price is increased a few cents or not. Junk food options are already set at a more reasonable price than healthy foods, enticing people to buy these less expensive goods. Even though putting a tax on other products, such as tobacco, has served the intended purpose, food is a necessity humans must have for survival. Society is used to consuming foods they want, and will continue to do so. Putting a tax on unhealthy food will not necessarily lower the obesity rate because there are other factors that contribute to this problem. Moreover, taxing measures are usually intended for the collective benefit of society rather than the individual. They are usually perceived as another way the government uses to take money out of the citizens’ pockets. Ultimately, thinking that higher taxes on unhealthy foods will help curb down the obesity rate in the country would be similar to say that cost is the sole contributing factor to this public health problem. Imposing taxes will not help lower the consumption level because these foods will still have lower prices than healthier choices. Taxes do not impact the nutritional value of foods, and their only predictable effect is to help in generating additional revenue for the government.
"Though experts increasingly recommend a diet high in plants and low in animal products and processed foods, ours is quite the opposite, and there's little disagreement that change it could improve our health and save tens of millions of lives." What will help us change the way we eat? What speech or moving moment would change out children's minds on the foods we ingest.Mark Bittman brings up this vital question in his article "Bad food? Tax it, and subsidize vegetables. He suggests that we tax the " health-damaging food", he is a firm believe that doing his will turn people from these choices while pumping money into Americas economy.
In addition, the author is sometimes being too forceful by telling the reader what to do. Since he uses such an emotional and forceful tone in the article, it is doubtful if Singer is successful at selling the audience on his point concerning this issue. He may have convinced many people to donate a particular amount of money for charity to poor countries, but his article is not effective enough to convince me. All human beings have the right to have luxury items even though many would argue that they are doing so at the expense of their morality.
The essay Junking Junk Food written by Judith Warner, brings to the audiences attention the wicked problem of how there has been a decline in Americans health. Warner’s information speaks loudly about being forced into a healthy lifestyle by the Obama administration. The Obama administration tried to enforce a healthy lifestyle among the citizens by focusing on the youth and taking away sugar options for them. Warner, puts her voice into this by mentioning the system during the world war when the soldiers had to eat overseas so there was less food consumption in America, which helped stop over consumption of food. Back then food was also much healthier thought, with less hormones, chemicals and less options of fast food. Again making it easier
To begin, I support the author’s argument that people think they know what’s best for the homeless when they
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.
As Americans, we all take our own approach to food, but most of us have the same initial feeling about it. And that is that we live and eat an unhealthy lifestyle to one that is leading to the increase of obesity and other diseases. In just 28years the rate of obesity in children has raised from 6.9% to 19.6%. We take that childhood obesity into our adulthood with us. Not only is the obesity rates increasing, but so is our chance of developing diabetes along with hypertension, high cholesterol and heart disease. People want to comment and have a say about the situation. But very few people want to take action and change the way our food today is processed and made accessible to us. The major argument people have is that they do not have the money for a healthier lifestyle. But,
Jamie Oliver’s lecture, “Teach every child about food” from 2010, opens up with the scary truth that Americans are putting upon themselves: “Diet-related disease is the biggest killer in the U.S.” It is said that the children of today will have a life span ten years shorter than their parents because of the food they are eating. Oliver continues by sharing the statistic that in ten years this country will be spending about $300 billion a year on obesity costs. Information like this is proving that money is being put towards all of the wrong things.