Junk food Essay

Creating a fitter living environment whitethorn be able curtail fleshiness and new(prenominal) things that whitethorn come about from drinking sugar-coated drinks. Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg of New York City decided in 2012 that he wanted to restrict the amount of procures on sugary drinks. His motif was to limit the product to being no more than 16 ounces sell at places other than grocery or convenient stores. This drive out was plan to go in effect in 2013. Could it really befuddle a difference? Many flock feel the government should non be allowed take away the mountains expelwill to choose how more than sugar drinks one should drink, but rather people should have the honorable to choose, be exploit sugar drinks many non be the cause of fleshiness. Many people ar in debate about this ban to stop the purchase in restaurants and little quick stands of selling nothing over 16 ounces. In the article, Junk Food should the government regulate our using up, it was stat ed, Michael Bloomberg, however, is overreaching with his newly plan to ban the sale of sugary drinks larger than sixteen ounces, He argues that prohibiting big drinks at restaurants, movie theaters, stadiums, and other food sellers bunghole supporter combat obesity. But as he admits, customers can get approximately the ban by purchasing two drinks (page 582). Meaning if one decides he or she wants more of a sugary drink, a person can al ways purchase another cup or bottle of 16 ounces at any given time to get around the ban.With ways to get around this ban the control of sugary drinks is not instrumental and will not stop obesity. Another author (Mr. Gary Taustine) states, Mayor Michael R. Bloombergs effort to promote healthier life-styles is commendable, but the government has no overcompensate whatsoever to go beyond promotion to enforcement. You cant reduce obesity with smaller cups any more than you can reduce gaseous state violence with smaller bullets. (Page 582) Next , by trying to ban the sale of 16 ounce sugar drinks in places other than stores takes away from the choice of free will. Mr. Daniel Lieberman states, People have certain rights, this argument goes, including the rights to drinks lots of soda, to eat throw away food, to gain weight, and to avoid exercise(page585). People should have the right to freewill. voluntary is the ability or discretion to choose free choice. As humanity society a person should be allowed to choose how overmuch he or she wantsto drink without any limits. This is because it is going his or her body not the governments. Another positionor that people need to look into is genetics. jibe to the www.cdc.gov/features/obesity/, some obesity comes from the peoples genetic makeup. The doctors corresponding to call this the family history. Families with a history of diabetes, heart disease, high blood wardrobe and etc, are proven to have more obesity in their family. Therefore, the cause is genetic. Some start the trend by the rich calorie intake they consume.Some people may do everything to try to splay bandaging on obesity. Some are successful and others follow their genetic makeup. However, the fact that limiting the sale of 16 ounce sugar drinks will not subjugate down on obesity. It is proven that some people unspoilt have obesity in their genes. It is understood why the government would give care to cut back on obesity. Mark Bittman feels the government needs to educate the people. He feels if people cut the cost on strong foods and rising prices on junk foods or sugary drinks, that this will save capital in the long run. By vinegarish cost on healthier foods and making them more economic, people will buy more and slight of junk foods and sugary drinks. He argues that if the cost is better for foods that are healthy it will cut back on obesity and save in health care cost in the long run. Right now, it appears that the blebby foods are more economic and easier to choose. This is why so many people are obese. He feels that people will be able to make better choices if the prices were lowered. Finally, he feels that it is the government responsibility for public health. By cutting back on sugary drinks being sell in restaurants and other places, such as movies and concession stands, it will not stop obesity or cut down on the risk. Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg is all for a healthier living life style.The people of New York is note not doubting this at all, but to think that he can cut down on obesity by limiting the amount of ounces sold is not the way to go. As there are many ways to get around this ban. Especially, if the restaurants has free refills, this may be difficult to monitor. It may also be a bit of an inconvenience as advantageously to the people. This is because they will have to spend more for a product that they are custom to by having to buy more amounts of the product, instead of one large cup or bottle. People have the right to choo se how much they want to intake. The government should not be allowed to limit the consumption of sugary drinks, because it is thepeoples right to freewill. Serving smaller cups does not cut down on obesity because sometimes obesity is genetic. Therefore, having a healthier lifestyle may help with obesity, but enforcing a drink ban on sixteen ounce sugary drinks will not be effective.Work Cited Sylvan, Barnet & Bedau, Hugo editor Adam Whitehurts, Harold Chester and Karen S. Henry Current Issues and Enduring Questions 10 editionBedford/St. Martins , 2014, 2011, 2008, 2005Chapter 22Junk Food Should the Government modulate our Intake?Anonymous Editorial, New York times June 1, 2012 (page 582)Mark Bitterman, New York Times Essay reprint form July 24, 2011 (page 587) Daniel Liberman, New York Times June 6, 2012 (page 585)Gary Taustine, New York Times, June 1, 2012 (page 583)http//www.cdc.gov/features/obesity/, Article written January 19, 2010 , March 22, 2014