'Junk food Essay\r'

'Creating a fitter biography environment whitethorn be equal descend obesity and former(a) things that may occur from inebriety honeyed drinks. mayor Michael R. Bloomberg of parvenue York City indomitable in 2012 that he wanted to restrict the mensuration of buys on lollyy drinks. His idea was to limit the growth to being no more than 16 apothecaries ounces sell at places other than grocery or cheery stores. This illegalise was scheduled to go in ready in 2013. Could it really make a deflexion? Many mint feel the g overnment should non be allowed take away the hatful’s discharge leave behind to choose how much sugar drinks virtuoso should drink, exactly rather raft should urinate the veracious to choose, be pretend sugar drinks many non be the cause of obesity. Many people ar in literary line of merchandise about this oust to stop the purchase in restaurants and little quick stands of selling nothing over 16 ounces. In the article, â€Å"Junk viands: should the government regulate our intake, it was stated, â€Å"Michael Bloomberg, however, is overreaching with his new plan to dislodge the sale of sugary drinks larger than sixteen ounces, He argues that prohibiting big drinks at restaurants, movie theaters, stadiums, and other viands sellers bathroom help combat obesity. But as he admits, customers can amount around the fling by purchasing two drinks (page 582). Meaning if one(a) decides he or she wants more of a sugary drink, a psyche can always purchase another cup or bottle of 16 ounces at any given time to get around the ban.\r\nWith ways to get around this ban the control of sugary drinks is not helpful and ordain not stop obesity. Another author (Mr. Gary Taustine) states, â€Å"Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s effort to promote healthier life-styles is commendable, but the government has no chastise whatsoever to go beyond promotion to enforcement. You can’t slue obesity with smaller cups a ny more than you can reduce gun 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 empty willing. Mr. Daniel Lieberman states, â€Å"People shed certain rights, this argument goes, including the rights to drinks lots of soda, to eat junk food, to gain weight, and to neutralise exercise”(page585). People should have the right to freewill. voluntary is the ability or discretion to choose; free choice. As human society a person should be allowed to choose how much he or she wants to drink without any limits. This is because it is going his or her carcass not the government’s. Another incidentor that people need to look into is genetics. According to the www.cdc.gov/features/obesity/, approximately obesity comes from the people’s genetic makeup. The doctors exchangeable to call this the family history. Families with a history of diabetes, heart disease, in high spirits blood pressure and etc, be proven to have more obesity in their family. Therefore, the cause is genetic. any(prenominal) start the trend by the rich nutritionists calorie intake they consume.\r\n almost people may do everything to try to push aside back 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 cut come out on obesity. It is proven that some people just have obesity in their genes. It is understood why the government would like to cut back on obesity. cicatrix Bittman feels the government needs to educate the people. He feels if people cut the price on healthy foods and turn on prices on junk foods or sugary drinks, that this will save money in the hanker run. By cutting cost on healthier foods and devising them more sparing, people will buy more and less 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 unhealthy 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 business for public health. By cutting back on sugary drinks being change 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.\r\nThe people of invigorated York is remark not doubting this at all, but to theorize 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 besides be a bit of an inconvenience as well 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 choose how much they want to intake. The government should not be allowed to limit the consumption of sugary drinks, because it is the people’s 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.\r\nWork Cited Sylvan, Barnet & Bedau, Hugo editor in chief Adam Whitehurts, Harold Chester and Karen S. Henry Current Issues and Enduring Questions 10 edition\r\nBedford/St. Martin’s , 2014, 2011, 2008, 2005\r\nChapter 22\r\nJunk Food: Should the Government Regulate our Intake?\r\nAnonymous Editorial, New York Times June 1, 2012 (page 582)\r\nMark Bitterman, New York Times testify reprint form July 24, 20 11 (page 587) Daniel Liberman, New York Times June 6, 2012 (page 585)\r\nGary Taustine, New York Times, June 1, 2012 (page 583)\r\nhttp://www.cdc.gov/features/obesity/, Article written January 19, 2010 , March 22, 2014\r\n'