Eat Food Sniff You Like As Much As You Want - Essay Example

It is becoming clear that 21st-century consumption trends are wanting. The consumption of sugary and fatty foods is on the rise. Statistics about this subject is not appealing in any way. This seemingly has affected the Americans more than any other people on the earth. Scientifically, fast foods are considered to contain high fats, low nutritional value, etc. These foods are closely associated with diabetes, cardiovascular conditions, weight gain and obesity. The current generation is trending on consuming more calories than the volume of the same calories burned during the day. Scientific findings indicate that teenagers between ages 8 and 17years are at greater risk of unhealthy eating. This based on the shifts in eating trends as well daily activities children take part. While eating habits have shifted towards fast-foods, children hardly exercise because most of them spend hours playing computer games. It is rather obvious that freedom in lifestyle choice is attributed to the current trends. Based on the current situation, government intervention will be important in addressing the issue of unhealthy eating. For a long time, the responsibility of the choice has been left for the consumer to decide. It is not arguable that freedom of choice is critical especially in the current generation. Nevertheless, the fact that many consumers are swayed away by adverts implies mechanisms have to be put in place to enable consumers make informed decisions in relation to healthy food. In the past, the efforts put in place to foster personal responsibility towards consumers seem to have been futile. The marketing strategies used by various companies specializing in fast-foods are responsible for the current trends in relation to unhealthy foods. Essentially, those who strongly argue for consumers to have complete autonomy in the choice of food they consume have failed to recognize the fact that these consumers are not completely free when it comes to decision-making. Studies have indicated that over two billion dollars are spent on marketing fast-foods in America on an annual basis. These firms have superior marketing strategies that influence consumers into being heavily dependent on fast-foods. These firms do not care about the health risk their products put consumers into. Instead, their sole focus is only making a profit and ensuring they are sustainable enough. Moreover, it is becoming clearer that consumers are very weak when it comes to making rational decisions. Magazines and other media prints have been used to shape the perception of consumers in relation to dietary. The manner in which the media is changing the perception of people regarding dieting is amazing. People are becoming victims of all kinds of adverts that come through their media. It is interesting to learn that totally indigenous communities have no idea what fast-foods are. The example given in Fiji is quite interesting to say the least. That before television networks were introduced in the region; there were no cases of dieting disorder. Nevertheless, statistics changed immediately after television networks were introduced in the region. This exposes the vulnerability of consumers to media content. To a large extent, it is evident that they are irresistible to media campaigns. This somehow explains why the role of the government is needed to come to the aid of its people. Regulations must be enacted to ensure that content is somehow filtered before it gets into the public domain for consumption. This is the best way of safeguarding the weak consumers who are cannot withstand the urge brought by commercial adverts. In addition, it is imperative to emphasize the fact that government intervention does not imply the government is choosing the kind of food products its people consume. That is a rather skewed way of understanding the word intervention as used in this context. It implies the government is involved in enabling its people make informed choices relating to food consumption. It helps people to gain understanding about misinformation concerning dietary trends. For instance, for people who have continually perceived fitness as a curse, it is good for them to be enlightened. The government is the most reliable source that can disseminate the knowledge that is required to make informed choices. This will be in line with authentic scientific findings. It has to be emphasized that most of the chronic diseases that are killing most people, especially the Americans, are directly linked to diet. These diseases include stroke, diabetes, cancer, coronary heart disease, etc. It is quite obvious that if the consumption trends among the larger population continue, the more lives shall be lost through these chronic diseases. Nevertheless, what many have cared less is the fact that these diseases are directly linked to consumption of processed food products. Highly processed foods contain a lot of chemicals and other components that have proven to be a serious risk to human health. In addition, genetic modification of plants and animals, in order to increase the level of productivity, seems to have neglected prioritization of human needs in relation to food. These products either from plants or animals that are genetically modified also contain a lot of chemicals that are hazardous to human health. These profit-minded companies and individuals are concerned with levels of productivity than they are concerned with human health. In such a scenario, only government intervention can save the ordinary consumer. It is upon the government to enact policies that will at least limit the level of industrialization of foods. In the same way, the government is responsible for creating awareness campaigns that will enable the ordinary consumer to understand the risk involved in relying on a lot of processed foods. In essence, there is a lot that the government can do remedy the current situation as it relates to unhealthy consumption. Part of what the government can undertake is the cultural change. It is important to appreciate the fact that it is not easy to change the culture of individuals. Nevertheless, it is the most effective way through which attitudes and perceptions towards food can be changed. For a long time, consuming processed foods with lots of sugar has been perceived as being trendy. A shift in culture will be facilitated if the consumers are made to understand that relying on processed food is not only unhealthy, but also socially unacceptable. It is understood that this cannot be changed overnight. It is a strategy that may take the time to be executed. This may involve media campaign whose main function is to create an impression or rather a perception that extreme dependence on processed food is not healthy. From a psychology perspective, it involves breaking away from the old associations with certain kinds of food. This is because new perceptions can only be created when the old ones have been either weakened or broken. More so, the government can do a lot because of the various resources at its disposal. Based on the nature of the issue of unhealthy eating, it will serve a greater impact if the government introduced some healthy literacy at lower grades in institutions of learning. This will serve to feed the children some degree of responsibilities in relation to the choice of food they consume. It will make children understand the various risks they get exposed to when they choose to rely on processed foods and other stuff that are considered as junk food. This will work well not only in instigating a culture of healthy eating, but also putting the responsibility of healthy living in the hands of the consumer. Children will grow up fully equipped to make informed decisions regarding healthy living. In order to ensure this strategy is successful, it is important to put in place other regulatory measures that will ensure the curricula includes these studies. At the same time, the government must be keen to control media campaigns that seek to influence teenagers in being too dependent on junk food. Apart of introducing some literacy education on healthy eating, the government must compel restaurants and other stakeholders in the hotel industry to be honest with the kind of food they prepare. For instance, these restaurants and hotels must be honest with the content in the food they sell to consumers. It is important for these restaurants to be clear on the nutritional content of their various foods. These hotels must list the calories, fat, sugar, protein and fibre contents in their foods before they sell them to consumers. This campaign has been effective in controlling cigarette abuse in many countries. Quite often, cigarette dealers are required to provide information about the side effects of using the product. Most companies have been forced to portray a picture of defective lungs to make it clear to the consumer that the product is harmful to their health. With such steps, there is no consumer who will be coerced into smoking. Those who decide to smoke in spite of the warning do so out of knowledge and, therefore, no one is responsible. The same tactic is supposed to be applied by companies selling fast-foods. They ought to make it clear that there are risks related to heavy reliance on fast-foods. This will work in ensuring consumers are not coerced into eating junk food. At the same time, there are other means through which the government can regulate consumption of junk food. While lots of people may be opposed to the issue of the government regulating food consumption, the effects of unhealthy eating are too overwhelming. Statistically, the government has been spending slightly above $150 billion annually to deal with cases of obesity and other health-related complications. Because this figure has been rising since 2008, it may get to levels that are unbearable. For this reason, even though government intervention could not have been the best option, it is the only mechanism that can be employed to deal with this menace. In order to address this issue, the government can enact laws that will usher in taxation on fast-foods. Taxing these food products will work towards raising the cost of fast-foods. This is important in making these food products unaffordable to the ordinary citizen. This means that consumers will have to spend a lot of money to manage these unhealthy food products. This is a strategy that will directly work to discourage the consumption of unhealthy food products. At the same time, the government can offer subsidies to restaurants specializing in selling healthy food products. It will go a long way to hearten consumers to choose healthy foods because they will be cheaper than other foods. In addition, it will also be important for the government to offer some tax incentives to organizations used for daily exercises. This will make it cheap to exercise in order to ensure that people can gain access to affordable exercise facilities. This will encourage more people to exercise in order to keep fit under all situations. Lastly, it serves well the healthcare system of the country if the government will understand that the task of managing healthcare is for the government. It is only the government that has the machinery and resources to handle such issues. This is because failure on the part of the government to ensure healthy living will end up to be a difficult burden to be lifted by the government itself. The amount of resources that have been pumped into dealing with issues related to unhealthy living. This is highlights the need for the government to show commitment towards fighting unhealthy trends in the society. This may go as far as enlightening people on various socioeconomic activities and the impact on their health. This is meant to enable consumers to understand the best way of aligning various socioeconomic activities to help them in keeping fit. Indeed, there is no limit to what the government can do in enabling its people live a healthy life. Whatever may be the cost, it is worthwhile as long as people can afford to live a healthy life. A good foundation in tackling health issues of the country is quite important since a culture is formed around such idea. Having analyzed the reasons in support of government intervention in combating unhealthy eating trends, it makes more sense to evaluate the issues raised by opponents of this idea. Embracing government intervention seemingly brings in a fearful expectation what next the government is likely to do. The fear factor comes in because people are concerned that the government may end up deciding for them on how they should appear in terms of shape, how much they must weigh, etc. That partially explains why opponents of government intervention prefer the issue of healthy eating to be considered a personal as opposed to being viewed as a matter of public health. The underlying factor is mainly to delegate the responsibility of healthy eating to the consumer. The government ought to put in place structures that will educate the general public on healthy eating trends and the risk exposures that arise with consuming junk food. The decision on when to eat and how to eat should still be reserved for the consumer regardless of how the situation. This makes sense to certain extend because state intervention has led to non-committal attitude on the part of the people in the country. People have left the government to provide guidelines on how they ought to eat and the kind of exercises they must do. In conclusion, it is vital to emphasize the fact that healthy-related disorders are on the rise. The number of individuals that lose their lives to cancer, obesity, diabetes and other health-related disorders is on the rise. Unhealthy eating is almost being considered a disaster especially in America. The annual budgetary allocation to deal with health disorders has been rising every year because of the increase in cases that require that attention. From this viewpoint, the decision on what to eat cannot be solely left to the consumer to decide. After all, the decision to consumer fast-foods is mainly influenced by frequent adverts on various media outlets. The dishonesty on the part of stakeholders in the hotel industry is letting down the health sector. The proposed government intervention measures are supposed to come in and help mitigate the situation as it is. Laws as well as regulations should be put in place to propel stakeholders in the hotel industry to come clear on the contents being given to the general public. Just like there is filtering in the movie industry, the same is necessary in the hotel industry in order to restrict their freedom to sell to the consumer whatever they want. Work cited Allison, Michelle, “Eat Food Sniff You Like As Much As You Want.” The Fat Nutritionist, 15th Feb 2010. Balko, Radley. “What You Eat is Your Business.” Graff, Birkenstein, and Durst 395-98. Bordo, Susan. “Globalization of Eating Disorders.” Unbearable Weights, Feminism, Western Culture and the Body. California: University of California. 2003. Print. Harding, Kate. “Don’t You Realize Fat is Unhealthy?” Shapely Prose, Wardpress, 20 June 2007. Web. 19 Jan 2011. Pollen, Michael. In Defence of Food: An Eater’s Manifesto. New York: Pergain. 2008. Print. Read More