Healthy and Unhealthy Restaurants - Research Paper Example

Healthy and Unhealthy Restaurants Work and studies are the fundamental activities that characterize the contemporary society and its vibrancy. In this case, people spend a lot of time either working or studying and seldom find time to prepare a well-cooked meal due to various factors after their daily toiling. On the other hand, it is evident that the days of packed lunch are over and the contemporary society is replacing the packed lunch with restaurants as a way of eating lunch. In this regard, it is a common thing to find students and employees assemble in a restaurant or food chain during teatime and lunch-breaks. However, the quality of the food that people ate in the restaurants remained a challenge since most people failed to differentiate between healthy and unhealthy food. On the other hand, most of these restaurants failed to offer healthful foods to their customers and effectively offered unhealthy foods with negative health implications. Nevertheless, this does not only affect Americans, but it also affects the rest of the world. While people fulfilled their needs of hunger and satisfaction by eating to their fill, the health challenges resulting from eating from restaurants are enormous since most people failed to distinguish between restaurants that offered healthy foods and those that offered unhealthy foods. First, it is important to point out that there have been shifts in the patterns of food consumption in America and over the world. One of the changes in the paradigms relates to the consumption of food away from home, which means food taken in recreation parks, movie theatres, restaurants, and many other social places although restaurants are the major places where people ate away from home. The U.S. Department of Agriculture noted, “Americans are eating food prepared outside the home more than four times a week” (Lichten 12). Jones and Angulo reckon, “Restaurants served more than 70 billion meals in the United States in 2005” (1324). In effect, this implies that Americans were likely to eat foods whose quality they did not have a guarantee about since they did not know the standards met in preparing the food or the fat and sugar contents in the food. In relation to eating food away from home, Jekanowski, Binkley, and Eales noted, “In 1997, food away from home accounted for about 45% of total food expenditures, up from approximately 26% in 1960” (58). Two reasons that drove consumption of food away from home are their convenience, and the increasing role of women in the labor force, which meant that the female population lacked enough time to prepare food for their families as their traditional role. In effect, these two factors pushed the spending and consumption of foods from restaurants upwards. Despite the number of times that Americans ate food away from home seeming to be few, there are dangers associated with these foods eaten. In this regard, Litchen observed the meals contributed to about 32% of the calories consumed (12). In effect, this puts health of most Americans at risk of diseases such as diabetes and heart diseases. In fact, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention noted, “The percentage of consumers regarded as obese more than doubled, rising from roughly 14% to 30%” between 1982 and 2003 (qtd. in Richards, Patterson, and Hamilton 425). In view of this fact, the implication is that a number of Americans were increasingly becoming obese due to eating unhealthy food from restaurants. Another reason regarding the rise of obesity in the American society is the increase in the size of food portions that Americans consumed from restaurants. At this point, it is important to add that fast food restaurants are primarily responsible for providing Americans with unhealthy food. Young and Nestle supported this argument and noted, “Portion sizes offered by fast-foods chains are often two to five times larger than when first introduced” (239). In effect, the portions offered to consumers come with catastrophic effects to the American society since they are responsible for obesity, which puts the consumers at a risk of diabetes and heart diseases. In this case, Young and Nestle further observed, “Large portions contribute to overweight in three ways: they provide more calories than smaller portions, encourage people to consume significantly more calories and to greatly underestimate those calories” (239). A study by Young and Nestle compared portions size of French fries, fountain soda, and hamburgers offered in 2006 to earlier portions offered in 2002 and 1998 in McDonald’s, Wendy’s, and Burger King. The principle findings regarded an increase in portion sizes the restaurants offered to Americans in 2006 from 1998. In this regard, McDonald’s phased out their largest soda size of 42 oz in 2002 and reverted back to 32 oz offered in 1998 while Burger King and Wendy’s increased their largest soda from 32 oz offered in 1998 to 42 oz offered in 2006. On the other hand, McDonald’s lowered its sizes on French fries while Burger King increased the size of their French fries offering a 6.9-oz King sized package of fries in 2006 from a maximum 6.1 oz offered in 1998 with Wendy’s offering remaining the same across the years. While McDonald’s and Wendy’s did not change the size of hamburgers they offered in 1998, Burger King introduced a 12 oz precooked hamburger within the same period. Nevertheless, these sizes exceed the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s recommended portions of 5.5 oz per day for a person consuming 2,000 kcal each day (Young and Nestle 242). These portions sizes pose a negative health risk to the consumers since the restaurants served more than the recommended portions. In this regard, Young and Nestle noted, “Consumption of fast drinks is associated with weight gain and obesity” due to the high sugar content in the fast drinks that the restaurants offered (240). Similarly, the consumption of French fries and hamburgers, which are the most common foods Americans eat in restaurants, has the same effects of weight gain and obesity. In support of this observation, a study by Currie et al. found a relationship between the levels of obesity amongst 9th grade students and the presence of a restaurant that offered unhealthy foods. In this regard, the study found a 5.2% increase in obesity on 9th grade children within a tenth of a mile presence of a fast food restaurant (Currie et al. 3). In effect, the study findings imply that an unhealthy restaurant predisposed children to obesity and weight gain children leading to the current phenomenon of “overweight children” in America. In support of this argument, Crook noted, “Over the last 20 years, children have become fatter and are exhibiting what were formerly thought of as adult diseases associated with overweight (e.g., type 2 diabetes, dislipidemia, and elevated blood pressure)” (182). However, it is obvious that the entire American population faces the problem of overweight and obese people although the impact is heavily on young children. Unhealthy restaurants do not put Americans at a risk of diabetes and heart diseases only, but they also risk an individual to mental conditions such as depression. In this regard, it is evident that unhealthy restaurants offered foods containing high sugar and fat contents. A research study that appeared in the British Journal of Psychiatry observed that people who regularly consumed food high in fats and sugar were 58% more likely to experience depression than those who consumed food served in healthy restaurants (qtd. in Mann). In this regard, there are some essential nutrients necessary for mental health that food consumed in unhealthy restaurants lacked. The researchers noted, “Relative to their calorie density, junk foods lack nutrients, like antioxidants, folate, and omega-3s that contribute to good mental health” (qtd. in Mann). In effect, unhealthy restaurants put an individual at a risk of depression than healthy restaurant since a healthy restaurant will offer food rich in nutrients that contribute to good mental health. In conclusion, the engagements in life failed to give people a chance to prepare healthy meals at home. In effect, more people are eating away from their homes and more so in restaurants that might be healthy or unhealthy. Consequently, eating in unhealthy restaurants, which offered unhealthy foods, predisposed people to obesity and weight gain. In effect, obesity may lead to life threatening diseases such as type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and other diseases. On the other hand, eating food from healthy restaurants does not put people at a risk of obesity and weight gain since the food has few calories compared to food from unhealthy restaurants. In addition, food from healthy restaurants will contain essential nutrients such as folate, omega-3s, and antioxidants that are paramount for good mental health, which will are not present in foods consumed from unhealthy restaurants that primarily serve food with high contents of fats and sugar. In effect, people who consumed food served in unhealthy restaurants are at a risk of depression since they eat food without essential nutrients essential for good mental health. Works Cited Crooks, Deborah L. Trading Nutrition for Education: Nutritional Status and the Sale of Snack Foods in an Eastern Kentucky School. Medical Anthropology Quarterly 17.2 (June 2003): 182-199. Jstor.org. Web. 28 April. 2012. . Currie, Janet, Stefano DellaVigna, Enrico Moretti, and Vikram Pathania. The Effect of Fast Food Restaurants on Obesity. University of California, Berkley. January 2009. Web. 28 April 2012. . Jones, Timothy F., and Frederick J. Angulo. Eating in Restaurants: A Risk Factor for Foodborne Disease? Clinical Infectious Diseases. 43.10 (November 2006):1324-1328. Print. Litchen, Joanne V. Dining Lean - How to Eat Healthy When You're Not at Home. 3rd ed. Weston: Nutrifit Publishing, 2007. Print. Mann, Molly. 4 Surprising Effects of Fast Food. Care2. 12 April 2011. Web. 28 April 2012. . Young, Lisa R., and Marion Nestle. Portion Sizes and Obesity: Responses of Fast-Food Companies. Journal of Public Health Policy 28.2 (2007): 238-248. Jstor.org. Web. 28 April 2012. . Read More