Hi class,
This week we are talking about obesity and its effects on the health of individuals and populations. We have spoken so far about the causes of obesity at an individual and societal level. Now I hope we can transition into talking about government-level policies that can help to prevent obesity.
To read up on some of the problems with current policy, here are some articles:
Here is an editorial about the unfortunate way school lunches are structured from the NYTimes.
Here is a long article about potential policy solutions to the obesity crisis in the United States from Amber Waves, a food policy journal. This is a long article and you need only skim it for highlights (though feel free to read it more deeply if you have the time and interest).
Here is a Washington Post article about legislative solutions to obesity.
Your assignment for tonight is to go over this information and then come up with ONE policy suggestion that you feel will be the most effective in combating the obesity epidemic in the United States. This post need not be lengthy--a paragraph or so is completely sufficient.
Thanks and see you Friday!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-Nutritional Value labels should be required to one serving of that food to one serving of some sort of established norm for healthy food of that type, for example one serving of french fires should be required to be compared to one serving of homemade mashed potatoes or something like that. Soda should be compared to natural fruit juice, so that people truely know the difference between the food they are eating and a healthy alternative.
ReplyDeleteOne policy solution that has been proposed is the implementation of a tax on junk foods, thus causing the people who lead unhealthy lifestyles to pay a greater portion of the medical and societal bills they incur. Some people object to this on the grounds that it interferes with their “freedom” to eat whatever they choose. I suggest that instead of taxing unhealthy foods, the government should slowly start to remove the subsidies that allow these foods to be so prevalent and cheap and use that money to promote healthier foods. The amount of food produced per dollar spent may not be as good for healthy food as it is for junk food, but in the long term we’ll be saving a lot of money and lives. Policymakers should consider removing subsidies before they consider taxing the products of the subsidies.
ReplyDeleteAs those who suffer greatly from obesity and those who do not are offered a school breakfast, and lunch they seek that it consists of ‘healthy’ food, which they never learned to tolerate. Now as more and more schools are providing vending machines filled with junk food, that’s where many kids eat during lunch if they believe the meal being served is too nutritious for them. This isn’t solely happening to the oboist crew of society it also happens to those who for the time being are skinny, though eventually after enough time, will also become unwilling to eat the nutritious meals that schools/ and other facilities offer.
ReplyDeleteFor the most part, with adolescent obesity problems, schools believe the differ the terrible disease though truly many schools are promoting it by selling terribly un-nutritious foods throughout vending machines and school stores. Sure some schools offer healthy alternatives to pick from, but if the junk food is present what is normal teenager going to pick, a few sticks of celery or a snickers bar? This is a continually pressing problem throughout the United States, not only in adolescents but also in adults who ‘forget’ to grab a lunch. In doing so they travel outside of the work zone to fast-food restaurants and normally consume unhealthy food.
Truly the only possible policy seems to be that of cutting unhealthy junk food out of school districts personal vending machines and school stores, and replacing it with only healthy alternatives that provide much more nutritional value that candy or junk food. In doing so, kids/teens will grow up knowing what they have for alternatives, and what keeps them at a healthy weight. Also with that, needs to be a special emphasis on exercising and getting outside regularly, as the majority of schools are beginning to cut PE classes due to budget cuts. And as for the vast number of adults whom are already obese, they need interventions. Truly, how else can you get them to stop? Putting them on their deathbeds due to being overweight (with heart attacks, clogged arteries, etc.) would possibly work, though doing that seems quite irrational compared to what can be done in retrospect.
If people want junk food badly enough they will find a way to get it. And when there is profit involved, businesses will always find a way to get it to them. The way I see it those are two fixed things about society and the world in general. In my view, it is more efficient to go straight to the root of the problem -the people wanting the junk food.
ReplyDeleteHow do we make people not want junk food? It is in human nature to crave sugars and fats. But a lot of people craving junk food do so just because it is what they are used to. It is what they grew up on, or what they see their friends eating. In the worst cases, it is the only thing that they can afford for themselves and their family.
So I think we need to make healthy food that we have more affordable and available. I don't believe in the government handing out subsidies recklessly, but I this particular situation calls for some. If the government supports and subsidies farmers who produce healthy wholesome food, then farmers will not only be able to sell their produce for less, but other farmers will be encouraged to produce healthy food like them. Within time, grocery stores and restaurants will have no choice but to buy the products of these farmers, and the entire food quality of the country will go up.
It is a stretch, I know, and certainly not the only thing needed to be done, but you said to choose just one, and I truly think this would make a difference on our national health.
One policy that I think might be effective is if there was a law where only a certain percent of your food could contain harmful ingredients such as high fructose corn syrup. So if you were a fast food restaurant only a certain amount of your food could contain high fructose corn syrup and then the rest would have to be somewhat healthier foods. That way you are still letting people eat what they want but you are also broadening their horizons so that they are not stuck with one type of food. This would include drinks and anything else that is sold there, excluding toys and other knickknacks.
ReplyDeleteI strongly agree with Madeline. I think that there should be a tax on less healthy food, so that it wouldn't be the cheapest and easiest option for poorer families. I also think that there should be a tax insentive for farmers to feed their animals well and for them to subsidize better crops. Those two ideas combined would lead to a healthier society.
ReplyDeleteMadeline Allen
I think that we should reward local and organic farmers who make healthy food by giving them subsidies or tax breaks, which will then make healthy food less expensive and more available. Since this takes funding I think we should also tax snack foods, and use that money to promote healthy food.
ReplyDeleteObesity is an incredibly difficult health challenge to combat mostly because it necessitates a complete lifestyle alteration to cure. The only solution I can see that might have a lasting impact, naturally, is to originally promote an active and consciously healthy eating routine in children. If people enter a way of life at a young age that isn’t conducive to excessive weight gain, the concept (as we discussed in class) of purchasing organic food or eating only the needed amount of nutrients a day will not be so foreign and difficult to follow. I think that emphasis should be placed not on food in school (for a great deal of the problem that I see is the obsession this culture has with food be it healthy or otherwise) but rather on physical education. I think the PE kids are introduced to currently needs improvement; focus should be on running or similar individual ways of exercising. Kids who are good at team sports will be drawn to them and participate in athletics already. Forcing those who are not good at team sports to participate in them simply pushes them away from the idea of exercising altogether. Dance could also be another option. PE rotations would be another good method so as to appeal to groups of kids with different physical strengths.
ReplyDeleteI think that a PE mandate should be redesigned and then implemented as a more natural and universally appealing part of a childhood curriculum.
One angle to tackle the problem of obesity is through gardens. Gardening could be encouraged by implementing community gardens, offering classes at school for children and information sessions at community centers for adults, providing space/access to a garden area, etc. Not only would home-grown food be substantially more nutritious, it also would require people to do manual labor, thereby exercising in a productive way. Personally, I think that home-grown food even tastes better than store-bought food, so people would have satisfying food that is nutritious. Gardens would additionally serve as an education tool in botany and biology, foster community spirit if the garden is shared, and save money in the long run.
ReplyDeleteA major obstacle is that many of the people who would benefit most from gardens may not have enough time to start such a large-scale project.