Compare And Contrast What You Eat Is Your Business And Don T Blame The Eater

In his article Are You Responsible For Your Own Weight?, policy analyst Radley Balko argues that the Government has no business interfering with what individuals eat. Kelly Brownell, a Yale Chairman, and Marion Nestle a New York University professor state otherwise by arguing that the Government should intervene to create conditions that lead to healthy eating. Balko has a strong argument led with in depth examples, logical support, and credentials to support his tone along with minor fallacies. Kelly Brownell and Marion Nestle fail to go more in depth about her argument, but rely heavily on trying to counter the claims given by the opposing side. The lack of rhetorical devices in her article and inadequate organization weakens her tone as well as the appeal to their audience.

Diet and obesity are major contributors to health inconsistency, with the most deprived being most at risk. This is due to the poorest living in run-down areas with no reasonably priced nutritional food available from local shops. If they are unable to afford the costs of travelling to areas supplying this, or if they are time poor then cooking beneficial meals is difficult then they are more likely to buy cheap, fatty products. The involvement of the government in the population’s lifestyle means that they should be accountable for the effects that come alongside an unhealthy regime, such as an increase in health problems such as Coronary heart disease. This means that the treatment an individual receives shouldn’t be approached differently

“Canadian Lifestyle Choices: A Public Health Failure” by Daniel Rosenfield et al. is a journalistic essay published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal aimed at medical professionals as well as those with a passion for good health. It examines extensive factors that contribute to poor health in Canada, cunningly convicting the government as the major, if not sole, culprit of this issue. Health concerns with respect to cardiovascular and pulmonary illness arise in the wake of the author’s devious presentation of arguments regarding faulty food labeling. It audaciously emphasizes the characteristic health discrepancies between the past and current society, consistently commenting on the government’s constant failure to prevent issues

In “The Pleasure of Eating” Berry suggests people do not take the time to know the facts of what they are eating. People now do not want to take time to cook a meal, but instead want a fast meal to eat quickly in a busy day.(Berry) Not only does this show less appreciation for healthy foods, but it is allowing processed foods to become popular and allowing them to sell more, damaging people's health. And this is exactly what the food industry wants. (E-1)The food industry's main concerns are not the quality of their foods, they do not care about the ways it affects our health, instead they worry about volume and price.(Berry)

In The Omnivore’s Dilemma, Pollan encourages us to change the way we eat but he never instructs us on what consumers should be eating. He educates us on what we are eating and informs us of all the events that go on behind closed doors. By building and building on our knowledge, he can reel us in instead of driving us away with offensive remarks. He never attacks the fact that most of us eat without thinking about it. In doing this, he can calmly approach his audience with the facts.

Who or what is to blame for the increase of obesity? Thinking Sociologically about Sources of Obesity in the United States by Robert L. Peralta examines obesity as a "disease" (Peralta 200). Peralta provides multiple possibilities to why United States citizens are becoming heavier. He argues that the government aid programs, availability, and cost of nutritious foods makes it difficult to eat healthy (200). Next, the article infers that obesity could be largely a social issue.

While Zinczenko considers that, the government should be more involve helping reduce obesity Balko thinks we should not let the “government get between your waistlines” (396). Zinczenko reasons for the involvement of the government is the increase of health care cost due to diabetes, that causes other health problems (392). Whereas Balko believes that by stopping health insurers from charging the overweigh and obese clients a higher premium the government is removing the financial incentives for those that maintain a healthy lifestyle.

In the article “The Fat Tax,” Jonathan Rauch ironically discusses the new public policy concern with obesity. Although the article is a satire, it’s economic analysis is actually valid. In order to get his point across, Rauch uses sarcasm, appeals to logos, and degrades the issue of obesity to help Americans better understand the “big picture.” Moreover, if the diet of American consumers does not change then maybe advertising more exercise to lose weight will cut down the obesity rate; but to be just as effective, enacting the fat tax will improve health as well.

In recent decade, the United States has seen supermarkets continuously get filled with packages labeled with things like “Low sodium” or “No Trans Fats.” Companies stick these labels on their food to match the current fads of what is good for you and what is not. In his essay Unhappy Meals, Michael Pollan advocates a return to natural and basic foods, and deplores nutritionism. Pollan argues that nutritionism does not actually tell people what is healthy or not, and that the only way to be sure you are eating healthy is to eat natural, fresh food.

Few people have ever thought of food as more than just a source of energy, a fount of nutrients, or a delight to our taste buds. The only parts of our body involved in the work of eating are our mouth and digestive system-or so we think. But that’s only a fraction of the whole picture. The book The Omnivore’s Dilemma by Michael Pollan reveals the evolution, science, and thinking behind the simple action of eating. In this book, Pollan argues that a long time ago, humans were able to solve the dilemma they had about what to eat, but now, at a time when we think we’re so much more advanced, this dilemma has not only been made harder, but we’ve become even less healthy, and forgotten the point of eating, especially in America.

In “What You Eat Is Your Business,” Radley Balko tackles the issue of who is responsible for fighting obesity. Balko argues that the controversy of obesity should make the individual consumers culpable for their own health and not the government (467). As health insurers refrain from increasing premiums for obese and overweight patients, there is a decrease in motivation to keep a healthy lifestyle (Balko 467). As a result, Balko claims these manipulations make the public accountable for everyone else 's health rather than their own (467). Balko continues to discuss the ways to fix the issue such as insurance companies penalizing consumers who make unhealthy food choices and rewarding good ones (468).

Americans today are well-known for their eating habits. With all the options the food industry gives us it makes it hard to go to the grocery store and resist picking up that bag of barbeque-flavored chips or blueberry flavored candy. Due to these processed foods obesity is a growing epidemic in our country and who is to blame for it? In an article entitled “What You Eat is Your Business” by Radley Balko, Balko argues for less government intervention. Balko believes is it our responsibility to take care of ourselves and make it a priority.

He expresses that “For decades now, America's health care system has been migrating towards socialism.” He asserts that rather than it being a moral duty to carry on with a solid life, it is people in general's obligation to pay for your unfortunate ways. As he puts it, “Your heart attack drives up the cost of my premiums and office visits.” Radly contends that if the administration will pay for your solution because of your poor eating and living propensities, what inspiration does a man need to eat and live right? He trusts that in the event that we are altogether considered responsible for our eating and wellbeing decisions, we'll settle on more intelligent

In both David Zinczenko’s “Don’t Blame The Eater” and “ Radley Balko’s “What You Eat is Your Business”, the argument of obesity in America is present and clear from opposing viewpoints. Both articles were written in the early 2000’s, when the popular political topic of the time was obesity and how it would be dealt by our nation in the future. While Zinczenko argues that unhealthy junk food is an unavoidable cultural factor, Balko presents the thought that the government should have no say in it’s citizens diet or eating habits. Zinczenko’s article was written with the rhetorical stratedgy of pathos in mind.

He also states that the government should allow the citizens to access their health care funds account to support his conclusion, that, people will be more responsible for their health if someone else isn 't paying for their health problems. However, Balko fails to to provide evidence for to support his claim. Even though the problem of obesity is important, the Shorthorn should not publish "What You Eat Is Your Business" because it poorly argued and not interesting. Radley Balko’s central claim is that the government should not interfere in public health and diet. According to him people have no incentive to maintain their health when public money funds health care.