Consequences of Eating Fast Food - Term Paper Example

Negative Effects of Fast Food Introduction Eating habits in developed and developing nations have metamorphosed over the years; healthy nutritious foods are being replaced by low-cost and convenient junk food. These foods differ from traditional meals because they do not require immense preparation and structure; it is from this fact that they derive their names. The phenomenon had taken over all age groups, ethnicities and races, and raised serious concerns about the sustainability of the practice. People’s eating practices have a direct impact on their health, the sustainability of the food cycle and hence the environment as well as the quality of their relationships. How fast food affects health Health experts have found that all fast food tends to possess greater than 35% calories from fat, greater than10% calories from saturated fats, more than 35% sugar-derived calories and 200 calories in every serving of the snack (Ashakiran and Deepthi 7). This high-sugar, high –fat content implies that fast food consumers tend to have too much cholesterol thus increasing their likelihood of becoming obese. When a person becomes obese, the high percentage of cholesterol in their body triggers a number of conditions like high blood pressure. This eventually creates a chain of other complicated conditions like stroke and heart attack, which usually cause death or permanent paralysis. The great taste and large quantities that are served in most restaurants trigger greater craving for these food items and encourages people to eat more than they should. A number of other long-term health diseases have also been cited as potential consequences of eating fast food, and these include cancer. Junk food predisposes people to breast and prostate cancer especially when they begin eating such food at an early age. The clogging of arteries that arises from the habit also leads to osteoporosis, which is a condition of the bones and hypertension as well. It may also lead to the development of tooth decay owing to the high concentration of sugars in most of these snacks and drinks. In the short term, fast food causes sharp rises and declines in blood sugar thus perpetuating the susceptibility to diabetes, especially if this runs in the family. For persons without the diabetic gene, sharp increase and decreases in sugar causes lethargy, low concentration levels at work or in school, and hence low productivity. Currie et al (32) carried out an analysis of the overall effect of fast food on public health by collecting and analysing data from California, New Jersey and Michigan. Their intension was to compare the concentration of fast food restaurants in a particular area with the obesity rates of children and pregnant moths in the area. It was found that for the children, who all ninth graders were, a fast food restaurant within 0.1 miles of their school led to increases of obesity rates of about 5.2%. They also found that for pregnant mothers who lived within either 0.5 miles or less of a restaurant had an increased likelihood (1.6%) of gaining more than 20 kilos. The results in the above study validate the assumption that having a fast food culture increases obesity hence propensity to lifestyle diseases. This has implications for policy makers in various cities because it should affect the licensing and distribution of fast food restaurants within specific locations if health is concern to them. The above authors explained that this phenomenon arises out of the ease of availability of fast food as well as proximity to the outlets, which leads to higher access. People are likely to purchase unhealthy foods in restaurants than make them in their own homes, so availability of these facilities is a negative variable for healthy food practices. Travel costs serve as a significant determinant of propensity to buy food; if fast food is the predominant type of meal sold in a certain location, then families are likely to buy that type of food in order to save on travel costs. Effect of fast food on family life Families in the traditional sense (before industrialization) did not need to set aside time to spend with each other; they operated under the cyclical pattern of work and leisure. They transitioned from one activity to the next seamlessly as households usually worked, planted, celebrated, mourned and rested together. However, after the industrial revolution, work was no longer cyclical; instead people had to go and come back from work at designated time. Regardless, family dinner and children’s bedtime became ritualized as this was one of the few ways in which individuals could enjoy luxuries. Fast foods were introduced in latter parts of the twentieth century, and food became a commodity; the phenomenon had the effect of minimizing family interaction. Family roles changed as mothers no longer had the obligation to prepare elaborate meals; unfortunately, this also reduced the need to share and spend time with each other (Shwartz). These alterations in family roles were further amalgamated by changes in work conditions; continued economic development increased the pressure to earn more money. People started taking two jobs, extra classes and other activities in order to increase their employability; this means that there was even less incentive to make one’s food at home. There was an increase in demand for quick, cheap and convenient meals, so fast food restaurants responded by meeting this need. In others words, both demand and supply factors coalesced to make the country a fast food nation, and this has profound effects on family interactions altogether. Families that eat out in fast food restaurants or buy fast meals and eat them on the go tend to spend less time communicating with each other. Parents from such homes are more likely to eat while driving or when walking from one office to the other, so they will have little time to spend with their children. This causes them to become out of touch with their children’s goings on as a number of them often struggle to maintain a relationship with each other. When such patterns of behaviour continue to prevail, society bears the brunt because familiar bonds are broken; children become less principled and eventually grow up to be amoral adults (Renkyl 40). If families cook in their own homes, they tend to pass on information handed down from generations in the form of recipes. This strengthens their sense of identity and prevents certain traditions from fading away or dying out altogether. Eating together is becoming more important today than it was in the past because society has created so many alternatives to this arrangement; technology is constantly in people’s lives and distractions are always prevalent. School-going children tend to be away from their parents for relatively long periods of time, so this implies that the only opportunity to communicate with each other it at the dinner table. When children are away, they usually get exposed to unfiltered and perhaps wrong information; parents require opportunities that allow them to instil the right values in their children. Fast food has taken away the opportunity to interact with each other as people do not have to sit around the dinner table and reconnect with each other. They can now eat out and select different menus for each individual thus reducing the sense of togetherness and communality that comes with eating the same meals. Conversations at dinner time are no longer spontaneous and fun as chances are that different family members will eat at different times. Additionally, because of the fluid nature of dinner, some families prefer to skip it and eat little snacks throughout the day. Usually, some of them may even make plans at dinner time and thus reduce the amount of time that they spend with their families. Thus, Fast foods have established a disconnect between social interactions and food especially among members of the younger generations. Now children do not understand the relevance of food cycles and several of them struggle to prepare their own meals; some may not be able to distinguish between inedible and edible versions of foods. Others only know that that hamburgers contain meat but have no idea where the meat comes from or how those animals are reared. The above claims have been validated in a number of studies carried out around the country concerning the effect of family meals on the family unit. Cox (75) did a national analysis and found out that the rituals of sitting down together and enjoying the family meal tended to strengthen family ties. The author explained that this was because they tended to connect with each other by taking a break away from their pressure-filled lives. This author also found that differences in children’s outcomes could be observed from as early as two or three years. Families that made cooking dinner a priority tended to have children that were better communicators as well as more sociable. These teenagers were also less likely to engage to engage in risky activities owing to the tendency to become emotionally connected to their family members (Cox 78). Foods made at home tend to have fewer saturated fats, cholesterol or sodium, so this implies that having healthier dietary patterns is a reality for such families. Through imitation and exposure to the possibilities of healthy eating, children tend to adopt these habits and carry them forward into adulthood. Furthermore, families that cook and eat together also tend to make fewer deep fried foods or soft drinks, so this gives children instruction on adopting such a lifestyle. Effects of fast food on animals and the environment The preference for fast food in the country also has adverse implications on the environment especially because of the supply chains involved with making such foods. First, fuel consumption tends to go up when people buy meals from fast food restaurants as these entities rely on large scale production of food from different geographical regions of the world. Since most sources of transport are powered by non-renewable energy, then society continues to place itself on a path of poor sustainability. If people continued to make food in the traditional way through subsistence farming, then energy consumption would go down by as much as 50% (Foster et al 15). This is also true if the food was purchased from local organic farmers rather than large scale producers in different time zones. Fast food production requires huge supplies which cannot be met by local farmers, so most companies tend to rely on external partners for their needs. The creation of excess waste is also another challenge associated with having a fast food culture; this starts with the packaging used for these products. Municipal waste in the United States largely comes from these sorts of packages with over 3.2 million tonnes coming from the packaging of fast foods (Food Empowerment Project). Plastic paper bags and plastic containers are the preferred method for these items, yet most of them are particularly hard to recycle, so this causes environmental degradation. Unused fast food itself is also another way in which this type of food harms the environment; since most of it is made in restaurants, leftover food has to be thrown away. Such establishments have the opportunity to donate their food but prefer not to owing to the legal liabilities that may result if people get sick from their items. Additionally, composite makers have the option of picking up the food and using it to make manure; however, the demand for this far exceeds the supply as only 6% of wasted fast food is used for this purpose (Kenner 15). The rest goes to landfills and degrades the environment; it is also wasteful and causes the human species to live beyond its means in terms of resources. If such high degrees of wastefulness persist, it is likely that the resources available to feed man will continue to dwindle and hence become more expensive. The production cycle is something to think about, as well, since fast food makers are one of the most relevant sources of volatile organic compounds and greenhouse gases. Studies comparing the carbon footprint for the production of chips versus that of bread show how harmful the former are to the environment. Some Swedish researchers found that every kilogram of chips produced leads to the emission of about 2.2 kilos of greenhouse gases. In New Jersey, it was shown that the number of volatile organic compounds emitted by such restaurants was significantly higher than the particulates coming from diesel vehicles (Food Empowerment Project). This means that environmentalists have actually been focusing on the wrong source of emission; they may want to attack the fast food culture for the nation’s woes. Fast food restaurants also have an adverse impact on animals because they account for the greatest demand for meats, eggs and milk. Their presence has changed animal production methods used by farmers negatively as there is now a need to hasten the process. In order to make as much as possible, large scale farms tends to meet the huge demand from fast food restaurants by crowding animals in small spaces or putting them in cages. In addition, they tend to use growth hormones, antibiotics as well as artificial hormones in order to increase their growth rates. These companies also use inhumane ways of slaughtering the animals by passing them through assembly lines when they are still conscious. Pigs, chickens and cows tend to experience a lot of pain in these farms because their perception as cogs in the production machinery. Conclusion Fast food businesses epitomize the dangers that capitalism can create in society; their need for profit has altered man’s well-being as well as that of animals and his environment. They tend to be packed with calories and thus harm man’s health through a range of lifestyle diseases; these were present in only small portions in the past. Furthermore, fast food destroys the family bond by causing people to eat on the go and to eliminate the need to connect or communicate with each other. It harms the environment through excess food wastage as well as high consumptions of fuel, and the same is also true of animal well-being. Works Cited Ashakiran, Sanjay and Deepthy, Rama. “Fast foods and their impact on health.” Journal of Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences University 1.2(2012): 7-15. Print. Cox, May. “Reinventing the family dinner.” Good Housekeeping, 234.4(2002), 75-78. Print Currie, Janet, Stefano Della, Enrico Moretti and Vikram Pathania. “The effect of fast food restaurants on obesity and weight gain.” American Economic Journal 2(2010): 32-63. Print. “Food Empowerment Project”. Fast food. 2014. Web. 21 Jul. 2014. Foster, Chris, Ken Green, Mercedes Bleda, Paul Dewick, Barry Evans, Andrew Flynn and Jo Myland. Environmental impacts of food production and consumption: A report to the Deaprtment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Defra, London: Manchester Business School, 2006. Print. Kenner, Robert. Food, Inc. 2009. Web. 21 Jul. 2014. Renkyl, Mark. In praise of family meals. Family Economics and Nutrition Review, 12.4(2004): 33-44. Print. Shwartz, Lindsay. Effects of family mealtime practices on household inhabitants. 2006. Web. 21 Jul. 2014. Read More