Persuasive Essay On Childhood Obesity

With obesity rates increasing at an exponential rate, a tax on fat foods and specifically high sugar beverages of 20% or about 1 cent per ounce could reduce obesity rates by 3.5%, bringing the rate down to 30% among adults (Kalaidis). While 3.5% may not sound like a lot, if you take an approximate U.S. population of 350 million people, suddenly that mere 3.5% turns into over 12 million Americans who would no longer be considered obese. Marion Nestle, a well-respected expert in food policy, recently conducted a study investigating the impact of a junk food tax through predictive modeling. Her study revealed that 2,600 deaths, 9,500 heart attacks, and 240,000 new cases of diabetes could be prevented with a simple 1 cent per ounce tax on sugary beverages (Satran). A junk food tax of this kind could greatly increase the health of the American public as a whole by reducing death rates and healthcare

“ We have become a fast food Nation of bulging waistlines and high blood pressures.”,said Ronnie Cummins in his article, “ Tax on Junk Food Can Help Pay the Costs of Diet-Related Diseases.” Diet related obesity,diabetes and heart diseases are now USA’s number 1 public health problems because of non-healthy foods,this is why there should be a tax on junk food,why we should serve healthier lunches in school cafeterias ,and why we should restrict advertisements of junk foods in the mass media.Would taxing junk food ,eating healthier ,and restricting junk food advertisements be so bad if you thought about how many people it could save?

Even if consumers stop buying a certain type of junk food, they will move on to something else that all before wasn’t considered “unhealthy” until people started gaining weight from it. With having that opinion, to me there is no need to even put a tax on junk food in the first place.

The United States of America is known for having a high obesity level. According to David Frum from CNN, except for Mexicans, American citizens are more likely to become obese than any other nationality. Some obese countries have enforced an extra high tax on fast foods and other high calorie foods, and many people believe that the U.S. should adopt the fat tax as well. According to Dictionary.com, the fat tax is “a tax imposed on or proposed for high-fat or otherwise unhealthy foodstuffs”. Although a tax on junk food could reduce obesity, the low prices could protect low income families from going broke, and therefore a tax on junk food would not be beneficial to America.

It can ultimately do damage to low income households and the free market economy. Instead of attacking unhealthy foods, healthy foods could be marketed more heavily instead. Supporting education of health and nutrition will help people understand what their better options are and then putting them up as much, if not more, than unhealthy food advertisements, could give the same effect as a tax without all the ill effects. If it could be more about actually helping people and less about making more money, then actual progress could d be made on eradicating the obesity epidemic that plagues the human

If less people eat junk food, there will be fewer diseases and medical costs will decline. The government will save a lot money by adding taxes on junk food, but also will save many peoples’ lives which is more important and trough this policy the government will interfere in peoples’ food choices in a good way.

A bag of potato chips, for example, contains 10 grams of fat, 170 grams of sodium, and only 2 grams of protein. A whole pineapple, on the other hand, has 1.1 grams of fat, 9 milligrams of sodium, and about 5 grams of protein. The chips have about 10 times the fat, 18,889 times the sodium, and about half as much protein as the pineapple. Which is healthier? The pineapple, it is a no-brainer, right? Actually, 66.7 percent of the 18 people surveyed in a private poll would rather choose a $5.00 pineapple over a $2.50 bag of potato chips. Therefore, it would be smarter to raise the tax on junk foods, just like the government raised the tax on cigarettes. “Significant increases in tobacco taxes are a highly effective tobacco control strategy and lead to significant improvements in public health,” according to Chuck Marr and Chye-Ching Huang, authors for the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Meaning, raising the tax on fatty foods would encourage people to choose healthier options, limiting the amount of junk food consumption. Just like increased taxes on cigarettes decreased the amount of smokers. Both are bad for you, so it would make sense. So, by increasing the tax, people would be even more inclined to purchase healthier

Obesity and diet related disease like diabetes are one of the biggest challenges today in America. The situation continues to worsen every day; obesity becomes a serious health crisis. Cities like Philadelphia and Berkeley, California, are sounding the bell of danger by imposing a tax on the consumption of soda and sugary beverages to cutback sugar consumption; which is a major contributor to the obesity epidemic. Some people say that tax on soda and sugary drinks aren’t beneficial to society and don’t generate any positive effect on public health. Others say that it is a powerful weapon against the obesity epidemic invading the American population. I agree with the later. Taxes on sugary

In America’s present economic state, citizens are looking for one thing: convenience. The American lifestyle has evolved into a quick pace, overwhelming schedule with Americans looking to fulfill their needs through affordable and easily reachable means. There has been an increased approval in fast food and convenience store establishments that provide swift and stimulating products. It is the inexpensive and easy way to purchase these “goods” that is slowly deterring the well-being of our country. The reason behind the low prices of such unhealthy choices provided by fast food restaurants and convenience stores is attributed to the subsidizing of producers of companies making the junk food. These companies such as McDonald’s, Coke, Pepsi, and Burger King contribute to the amplified rates of diabetes and obesity. Therefore a sensible solution is to tax the companies’ goods to make them less attractive to consumers who sequentially will lead improved life in buying less expensive, healthier foods.

Obesity has been a problem in the United States for far too long, and it is time for the government to take action and protect the health of its citizens. This could be accomplished by taxing junk food and subsidizing healthy food, such as fruits, vegetables, and meats. The easiest foods to find and the cheapest foods to buy are foods that contain large amounts of calories and few nutrients (“What’s Behind the Obesity Epidemic”). This means that obesity disproportionately affects poor families (Mitchell, Catenacci, Wyatt, & Hill). In order to redress this issue, the government should put extra taxes on foods with high amounts of calories with few nutrients to act as a deterrent and keep people from buying them. The money gained from the taxes

An additional tax on junk food would lead to high cost of production and prices thus reducing the overall output and

The fat tax in America; an attempt to improve the obesity epidemic using the legislature. The fat tax will not cure obesity in America however, one idea is it will be used as an incentive to help improve the eating habits of Americans. The revenue collected can be used to enhance education as well as implement programs to teach healthy lifestyle tips such as exercise, and even implementing gyms in places like community centers. Another suggestion is to reduce cost of healthy foods using some of the tax money. As a result of the healthy habits of the population, Medicare and Medicaid may be less stressed resulting in less expenses. This could lead to less government debt as well as a healthier population. The percentage of obese adults doubled in the last thirty years, and obesity in children tripled. The cost of obesity annually is 100 billion dollars due to medical issued.

Paying taxes is something everyone does. We pay taxes on cars, property, and on our income. What about the junk food we consume? This has been debated for years that it will or will not work. How do we educate the public? Why should we do it? Where will the money be going? What groups will it serve? Prices are already high, so where is the money coming from? Everything that is done must be motivated because if not, it becomes a fad - here today and gone tomorrow. Only things that are done repetitively are made into habits. As a person, all things can be done if we have a desire and a need. Taxes on junk food and soda will not work unless everyone is educated on the utilization of revenues, health advantages, and motivated sufficiently to make a more healthy change.

The fat tax would encourage a healthier diet. Due to the rising price of unhealthy food, people would rather choose a healthier diet. This would lead to better health and reduce food related diseases. The fat tax would also encourage people to get food that are lower in sugar and fat. Fast food places would also give more of a wider range of food options.

Taxing sugary products will force consumers to make healthier food choices due to the cost of food. They might go over budget or not have enough money for essential necessities, if they purchase too many sugary products. Taxation of sugary products would encourage healthy behaviors in adults, which will have an effect on the children. Third, adding a tax to all sugary products that are sold will create extra revenue for the state. This revenue will not be used to benefit the storeowner; instead it will be used to benefit the community.