The government should educate people about eating healthy and reading nutrition facts through public service announcements, implementing nutrition classes in the public schools. If people are educated on the matter then they would be capable of making a choice to be healthy. While Bittman is right that allowing food industries to practice self regulation is not working for gauging what’s a healthy or unhealthy product, food industries should not be forced to adhere to regulations. That’s a choice that should be made by the company. Giving companies incentives to change their health standards would encourage them to give individuals a healthier choice.
These pitiable fast food industry business ethics portrays a major lack of customer concern. The industry ought to understand the adverse effects the food they produce exposes to the American citizens. There should be change in the business practices to ensure a healthy
That will not work because that would upset the processed food companies and also the consumers the foods. “It would bug those who might resent paying more for soda and chips and argue that their right to eat whatever they wanted was being breached” Bittman said (page 36). Another plan Bittman suggests is that we subsidize staple foods. The idea would cause people to use their health care and everyone would be able to afford healthier foods. “Direct subsidies to farmers for crops like corn soybeans keep the prices of many unhealth... ... middle of paper ... ...y school lunches are best because they teach children good food from bad.
The choices a person makes about the food they eat or the care they invest in their body is not a concern that resides in the public domain. Government concerns should be focused on global events, like the world wide military fighting and terrorism or the failing economy, not the growing average waistband size. Balko explains, “The best way to alleviate the obesity “public health” crisis is to remove obesity from the realm of public health because it doesn’t belong there anyway” (Balko 396). W... ... middle of paper ... ...esity crisis. Their arguments encompassed everything from government legislation to the evil of advertising to children.
Balko discusses how the idea of someone's "...well-being, shape, and condition have increasingly been deemed matters of 'public health,' instead of matters of personal responsibility" (Balko). He claims that deeming obesity as matters of "public health" is the wrong way to fight the obesity epidemic. He suggests that the best way to "...alleviate the obesity 'public health' crisis is to remove obesity from the realm of 'public health’ (Balko). He tries to convey the message that obesity doesn’t belong under “public health,” by emphasizing the fact that, “It’s difficult to think of anything more private and of less public concern than what we chose to put into our bodies” (Balko). Balko insists that if people take credit for their own actions, and stop blaming others for their condition, then they will start to make better choices when it comes to living a healthy lifestyle.
Additionally, it is challenging for any author to portray himself as an authority in the subject of discussion. The principle of ethos also d... ... middle of paper ... ... healthy eating among Americans will reduce government expenditure on health. However, Sabia argues that the only way to reduce government’s expenditure on health is by repealing medicare. In conclusion, Joe Sabia has successfully applied the three principles of argumentative writing to convince his readers that the government should stay away from the fast food industry. By virtue of his educational background, Joe Sabia appears to his audience as credible.
But regulation proponents believe that fast food needs regulation because of high obesity rates in poor inner city neighborhoods. In order to curb current obesity rates, local governments must intervene by implementing fast food regulations. In order to decrease obesity rates in Western nations, government regulation of the fast food industry is necessary. Critics believe that fast food regulations will not work. But supporters believe government regulation would place social pressure so individuals can eat healthy food.
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.
Who better to attend to our needs than the fast food industry? We make personal choices about what and where to eat. The government is not going to eliminate the unhealthy food because we think it is the cause of obesity. Ultimately, we must decide to either stay away from unhealthy food or eat them in moderation. Despite all the efforts of education, media and guidance it doesn’t prevent us from grabbing that cheeseburger with fries on the way to work.
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