Essay On Government Intervention
The issue of obesity is becoming worse in America, and there are many different opinions about how to solve this situation. One of the most arguable opinion is about government intervention. Experts who suggest government intervention focus on the epidemic of obesity and unethical ploys of the food companies such as indeterminate modifiers. They think the government should intervene to protect people. However, other experts who disagree claim obesity is a personal problem. They also warn about the ineffectiveness of regulating unhealthy foods. Although some experts say that the government intervention is not a good solution to obesity problems, the government should consider intervening, because counterbalances for the prices between healthy and unhealthy foods are needed, and because of the poorly-regulated unethical ploys that customers are unaware of. The counterbalances for the prices between healthy and unhealthy foods are necessary to solve this health issues related with obesity. Unhealthy foods, like fast-foods, are cheap and easy meals to the customers. However, healthy foods, like well-being foods, are expensive and inconvenient which is hard to attract
…show more content…
the customers. John Sotos, who is a cardiologist and medical technical advisor says, “The foods that best suit human physiology-vegetables especially-are so inconvenient and expensive (on a per-calorie basis) that consumers understandably walk past them” in “Government Should Tap into Our Natural Biology” (“The experts”, par 7). As the consumption of unhealthy foods increases, the obesity rates increases, too. The price difference between healthy and unhealthy foods needs government intervention to help people change their eating habits to be friendly with healthy foods. The food companies use unethical ploys to confuse the consumers who are unaware of it.
The names and labels of products are selected using profit-motivated strategies and are misleading about the quality of their product. In “What’s Natural about Our Natural Product?”, Sarah Federman, who works at the Institute for Health and Healing at California Pacific Medical Center in San Francisco explains about the indeterminate modifier-one of the most common advertisement methods that companies employ. She says, “’Natural’ serves as a meaningless label, a deceptive marketing tool, or means contains natural critters and natural toxins that may make you sick” (Federman 474). The government should regulate advertisements that confuse the customers to verify whether the food is healthy or unhealthy by
themselves. People who disagree with government intervention argue for personal responsibility. In “Take Politics off Our Plates”, Leah Binder, president & CEO of Leapfrog Group, says, “In democracy, we solve public problems without disparaging the dignity and agency of the citizenry, and obesity should be no exception” (“The experts”, par. 9). Although regulation can damage personal freedom, when the problems are exceptional, protecting the citizens is one of the duties of the nation. In “America’s High Obesity Rates Aren’t Going Down”, Alexandra Sifferlin of Times magazine reports, “New survey data from the National Center for Health Statistics released on Thursday show that in 2011-2014, 36.5% of adults and 17% of young people ages 2 to 19 were obese” (par. 3). Obesity is becoming epidemic in America, and it is reaching the limitation of personal responsibility and government intervention is needed.
Experts also warn about the ineffectiveness of regulating unhealthy foods, including fast-foods. In “Government Intervention Is a Tricky Act”, Gurpreet Dhaliwal, a professor of clinical medicine at the University of California San Francisco insists “No government action will directly alter someone’s decisions about eating and exercise” (“The experts”, par 5). However, as in the case of tobacco, intervention by the government has a significant effect. In “Independent and Interactive Effects of Smoking Bans and Tobacco Taxes on a Cohort of US Young Adults”, Mike Vuolo, an expert in Sociology, studying in Ohio state university states, “In sum, we found comprehensive smoking bans and excise taxes to be important forms of tobacco control for young people” (6).
In conclusion, intervention of government in the issues related to obesity can damage the personal responsibility, and some experts predicts that it won’t make a big difference, but the government should consider intervening because the price and convenience differences between healthy and unhealthy foods are significant and requires control. Also, unethical advertisements employed by the food companies are confusing customers and need government control.
the customers. John Sotos, who is a cardiologist and medical technical advisor says, “The foods that best suit human physiology-vegetables especially-are so inconvenient and expensive (on a per-calorie basis) that consumers understandably walk past them” in “Government Should Tap into Our Natural Biology” (“The experts”, par 7). As the consumption of unhealthy foods increases, the obesity rates increases, too. The price difference between healthy and unhealthy foods needs government intervention to help people change their eating habits to be friendly with healthy foods. The food companies use unethical ploys to confuse the consumers who are unaware of it.
The names and labels of products are selected using profit-motivated strategies and are misleading about the quality of their product. In “What’s Natural about Our Natural Product?”, Sarah Federman, who works at the Institute for Health and Healing at California Pacific Medical Center in San Francisco explains about the indeterminate modifier-one of the most common advertisement methods that companies employ. She says, “’Natural’ serves as a meaningless label, a deceptive marketing tool, or means contains natural critters and natural toxins that may make you sick” (Federman 474). The government should regulate advertisements that confuse the customers to verify whether the food is healthy or unhealthy by
themselves. People who disagree with government intervention argue for personal responsibility. In “Take Politics off Our Plates”, Leah Binder, president & CEO of Leapfrog Group, says, “In democracy, we solve public problems without disparaging the dignity and agency of the citizenry, and obesity should be no exception” (“The experts”, par. 9). Although regulation can damage personal freedom, when the problems are exceptional, protecting the citizens is one of the duties of the nation. In “America’s High Obesity Rates Aren’t Going Down”, Alexandra Sifferlin of Times magazine reports, “New survey data from the National Center for Health Statistics released on Thursday show that in 2011-2014, 36.5% of adults and 17% of young people ages 2 to 19 were obese” (par. 3). Obesity is becoming epidemic in America, and it is reaching the limitation of personal responsibility and government intervention is needed.
Experts also warn about the ineffectiveness of regulating unhealthy foods, including fast-foods. In “Government Intervention Is a Tricky Act”, Gurpreet Dhaliwal, a professor of clinical medicine at the University of California San Francisco insists “No government action will directly alter someone’s decisions about eating and exercise” (“The experts”, par 5). However, as in the case of tobacco, intervention by the government has a significant effect. In “Independent and Interactive Effects of Smoking Bans and Tobacco Taxes on a Cohort of US Young Adults”, Mike Vuolo, an expert in Sociology, studying in Ohio state university states, “In sum, we found comprehensive smoking bans and excise taxes to be important forms of tobacco control for young people” (6).
In conclusion, intervention of government in the issues related to obesity can damage the personal responsibility, and some experts predicts that it won’t make a big difference, but the government should consider intervening because the price and convenience differences between healthy and unhealthy foods are significant and requires control. Also, unethical advertisements employed by the food companies are confusing customers and need government control.