Food Peddlers: Stop Them for Our Children's Sake

FOOD PEDDLERS: Stop them for our children's sake

DO you know exactly what your children are eating while they are at school? Most parents are careful of their children's diet, at home and at school.
Many children bring home-cooked meals to school while some buy them at the school canteen, which is monitored by the school authorities and the Health Ministry.
School canteens have a menu and price list, and under a directive from the Education Ministry, sale of junk food is prohibited.
However, schoolchildren can still get access to some unhealthy food in the school compound itself.
At a primary school in Seremban, pupils hand blue, green and red notes through the school fence to buy junk food from two food peddlers, who operate from their car boots, selling food from 50 cent and even up to RM10.
They also sell plastic toys.
These food peddlers carry on their business despite a signage prohibiting them from doing so.
The peddlers enjoy brisk business, with children jostling and shoving each other as though the items are distributed for free.
I noticed a pupil who handed two RM10 notes for two boxes of toys worth RM8.90, and he did not get back his change.
That was profit on top of profit for the peddlers, but a loss for the parents and the child.
Of course, some of us may ask how the pupil gets that much money.
But that is not the point here. The issue is why are these unlicensed peddlers are allowed to do business at a prohibited place?
Most of the foods sold are from China and are not nutritious.
Either they are high in sugar or have artificial flavouring, which can be detrimental to children's health.
Are we just going to stand and watch the children, who may be our very own or our neighbors’ children, eat food that can harm their health?
We talk so much about robberies and snatch thefts, and how heavy punishment should be imposed on the offenders.
What about the children, who are protected at home and at school, but lose their money and health to unscrupulous food peddlers?
This may be also happening in other schools in the country.
The Education and Health ministries' joint effort in introducing and controlling healthy food in schools for the benefit of the students is being ruined by these food peddlers who place profit as their priority.
I was told about this by a senior assistant of the primary school that every effort had been made to get rid of these food peddlers, including educating the children, reporting to the Education Department, complaining to the Seremban Town Council and putting up the signage, but nothing has worked.
These are unlicensed peddlers and they are contributors to serious health and obesity problems among children.
The authorities must act against these offenders before something bad happens.

Highlight from the article

Conclusion: That was profit on top of profit for the peddlers, but a loss for the parents and the child.
Premise 1: The peddlers enjoy brisk business, with children jostling and shoving each other as though the items are distributed for free.
Premise 2 : These food peddlers carry on their business despite a signage prohibiting them from doing so.
Premise 3: At a primary school in Seremban, pupils hand blue, green and red notes through the school fence to buy junk food from two food peddlers, who operate from their car boots, selling food from 50 cent and even up to RM10. Paraphrase
Conclusion: That was profit on top of profit for the street vendors, but a loss for the parents and the child.
Premise1: The street vendors enjoy the quick business, with children hustling and shoving each other as though the items are distributed for free
Premise 2: these food vendors carry on their business against a signage restrict them from doing so.
Premise 3: At a primary school in Seremban, pupils have some money, RM1, RM5 and RM10 through the school fence to buy junk food from two food vendors, who operate their car boots, selling food from 50 cent and event up to RM10.
A critical analysis of an argument

The analysis is on fallacies in an argument is based on a letter to editor which appeared in the New Straits Times dated August 29, 2013 entitled “FOOD PEDDLERS: Stop them for our children's sake”. The letter described a writer response on the peddlers who are selling their food at the prohibited place to the children which is not good. The writer seems to be completely against the peddlers throughout this article.

The first type of fallacy that has make this argument is weak is hasty generalization. It occurs when somebody make a broad general claim based on insufficient evidence. There is evidence of hasty generalization as the writer gives the impression that the writer claimed in the following statement; “Most of the foods sold are from China and are not nutritious”. There is no proof as referring to the food sold from China is not nutritious like the writer opinion. There also no specific study that has been cited to support his claim. The writer does not cite the s from China that is not nutritious.

In addition, the writer’s argument is also biased, that is one sided, because he has painted a completely negative picture about food peddlers. This is because no where in his arguments does he admit or acknowledge that food peddlers can sometimes give a benefits which it The food industry says that they are educational, because they enable parents and kids to discuss choices in the marketplace.

Next, there is also fallacy of appeal to fear. The writer is trying to gain the reader to agree his point by instilling fear like the following statement,” Are we just going to stand and watch the children, who may be our very own or our neighbors’ children, eat food that can harm their health?”. What she is implying is that all the peddlers are selling the innutritious food to the children and if the parents did not take any action, it may harm their children health. In this way the writer is trying to convince the reader that Malaysian people should make it an offence to against the peddlers with this statement.

The argument in this article is also weak because the writer is trying to gain support for her views by using the emotive language to persuade the readers in order to accept his opinion. Emotive words are ones which appeal to our emotive words to create an emotional response from the reader and to make readers feel like they can connect with what they are reading. This can be seen in the following example: such unscrupulous, detrimental, ruined, not nutritious, are contributors to serious health and obesity. These words are so colored or biased and in this way he is hoping to convince the reader to agree with him. There is more emotive language that sounded reasoning in order to influence the reader to accept his argument.

The last fallacy in this article is the fallacy of slippery slope. The writer says that “these are unlicensed peddlers and they are contributors to serious health and obesity problems among children.” This sort of reasoning is fallacious because there is no reason to believe that one event must inevitably follow from another without an argument for such a claim.