Regulations of foods served in public schools

Name

Professor

Course

Date

Should changes be made to the regulations for foods that are served in public schools?

Regulations of foods served in public schools

Eating healthy increases a child’s energy, but the introduction of junk food has significantly made them less productive compared to in the past. This is because of the sedentary lifestyle, which reduces an individual strength (Bové, Dufour & Luneau, 2001). The provision of the body with healthy food helps in keeping up the energy levels even without exercising. All of these advantages tend to add up to a major benefit, which is illness prevention. Healthy eating remains the stepping-stone in ensuring a healthy body as well as mind. People who eat healthy meals often livelonger lives and are much healthier compared to those who enjoy junk food. Many schools have embraced junk food and serve their students with them as their meals.

Eating unhealthy foods make an individual prone to various diseases as the ingested foods are extremely crucial in the ability to prevent illness, grow and function properly. Therefore, those individuals who value their health need to learn a lot on healthy eating. When a person does not get the proper nutrients or the natural defense system the body becomes susceptible to diseases (Heller & Heller, 1997). The situation makes the body system fragile in terms of virus as well as bacteria that attack the body. The body cannot operate efficiently on a daily basis without plenty of water and healthy foods. It is important to learn mechanisms of healthy eating and, therefore, the subject should be taught to children. The normal body growth and functions is not possible without the required nutrients. This is because they offer the cells the energy for bodily operations from the daily food intake.

The body of a human being devoid of proper nutrients is susceptible to diseases that cause bacteria together with viruses. The energy needed for performing body functions in relation to mental as well as body comes from the body fat reserves. The imbalance that is caused by interrupt ion of the level of fats in the body results to malnutrition and obesity, which is dangerous for the daily bodily functions. A person suffering from malnutrition and obesity is susceptible to getting diseases such as cancer, osteoporosis, heart dysfunction, diabetes, and others. A healthy meal assists the body to become active for a long time and encourage healthy living. A balanced diet, which is healthy, helps in maintenance of the needed body weight that increases the well-being of an individual.

A healthy diet, which is balanced comprise of vegetables, meat, milk, fruits, cereals, bread, potatoes and minimum sugar or fat quantity. It is obvious that the body cannot get the crucial nutrients from eating a single meal. This is because the body relies on various healthy food variety with sufficient amount of minerals, fiber and vitamins. Most individuals think that eating healthy foods is an irrational habit, but once one is determined to shun unhealthy eating foods then taking healthy meals means is much easier (Rosenberg, 2012). The maintenance of a healthy diet is helpful in weight reduction, which is significant in every stage of life as weight problems are linked to various medical problems. It is important to remember that healthy eating tends to reduce ailment threats as well as ensuring a better, lasting life. The most efficient approach in keeping a healthful skin as well as body is taking healthy meal choices with usage of best products. The situation necessitates an implementation of regulations of foods to be served in public schools to tackle obesity at a younger age.

Solution

The reduction of growth rate in healthcare spending remains one of the objectives of reforms in the health care sector. Obesity has significantly increased rates of death, disability and diseases and contributed to the costs of health care. Many children are getting obesity at a younger age. The policy recommendations in association to cost of health care comprise of the proposal to reduce the behavioral risks elements among the population like obesity. Advocates for public health argue that intervention from the government is warranted in relation to the meals offered in public schools. In instances that obese individuals impose uncompensated costs of health care on non-obese individuals a financial argument can arise in terms of market corrective taxes (Gaff & Fairclough, 2005). This is helpful in compensating for negative externalities as the proponents always make negative argument with externalities. The government has to enact both junk food and soda taxes to ensure the costs of such foodstuffs are high, thereby discouraging schools from buying them to serve students. It is obvious that many public schools give junk food to students as meals and ignoring the nutritional aspect of healthy eating.

Many proponents of the taxation issue consider the argument that obese individuals tend to impose high medical cost. This is in relation to people with normal weight who are not compensated. In most instances, obese individuals can impose the costs of health care directly on other people through health care initiatives financed by the government for instance, Medicaid. Presently, the percentage of expenditure on health care financed by government programs funded by the taxpayer has seen a significant increase. In addition, many obese persons can impose the costs of health care indirectly on other people by increasing private insurance premiums costs. This is the truth as obese individuals, although have no private health insurance as well as do not engage in health care initiatives, which are financed by the government, they have to be treated by hospital emergency rooms.

The uncompensated health care costs have been shifted to individuals with insurance in terms of higher premiums. The advocates for public health tend to draw similarities in successful interventions on tobacco control and proposed interventions on obesity control. Empirical evidence shows that the excise taxes on tobacco have been the most efficient mechanism of tobacco control intercession. This is the main reason that proponents of public health are proposing the anti-obesity soda together with taxes on junk food.

The reduction of the prevalence rate of obesity in terms of the goal of public health as well as fiscal necessity should be a priority in America. Policy makers have to come up with a multifaceted approach on reduction of obesity. For instance, they should take into consideration a school founded regulation and zoning limitation that would eradicate food deserts common in the urban areas. Food taxes need to a part of the comprehensive approach in terms of obesity regulation as advocates on public health need to take into consideration insights offered by economists (Currie 2009).This also includes empirical research touching on impacts of different aspects on food taxation. For instance, pairing a tax relating to unhealthy foods together with healthy foods subsidy is a reasonable approach in obesity reduction. This is because the strategy is a response to the regression objections by majority of food critics. The proponents of Public health need to clarify their objectives, and policy rationalization on food taxes.

The advocates on public health need to concentrate on responses from the consumers and food taxes. At the same time, they need to tackle behavioral responses attributed to producers. This is because the aspect has the capacity to lessen caloric intake as well as obesity in a significant manner. The government can also permit an opt out in relation to taxation to reduce welfare losses that arises from proposals on food taxation. Nevertheless, making use of the opt out requires the tax proposal on food to be harmonized with a relevant expected benefit in relation to consumers (Cobb, 2006). A single probable benefit that needs to be paired with food taxation is the general application of subsidy in terms of healthy foods. Another aspect is the augmented benefits that deal with healthy foods classified by SNAP and WIC programs. Definitely, counter instinctively, fast-food restaurants can be a solution to the increased cases of obesity in schools food restaurants. This would be successful if the participants of SNAP as well as WIC are given additional chances to spend time when preparing food on exercises that burn calories in the body.

Possible disadvantages

Many excise skeptics of tax have taken an anti paternalistic stance in relation to taking junk food arguing that the food taxes remains unwarranted. This is because they infringe on the right of the people to choose they want to consume on their own. The tax opponents believe that the approach of the public officials can be equated to a big brother approach in relation to curbing obesity, which makes them have a rhetorical stance (Bové, Dufour & Luneau, 2001). People need to be free to make a choice on the kinds of food they eat whether the ways are viewed as healthy or unhealthy. This is because an individual has to take personal responsibility on their health.

Richard Epstein has been in the forefront to criticize the concentration of the new public health by concluding that there should be a restriction in relation to the old public health activities. This includes the focus on pathogens elimination and fighting the infection of diseases. Epstein states that the “old” public health remains superior compared to the new one whose extensive definitions in terms of public health have spurred the action s of the state. The taxes on junk food are likely to risk the health of people that the new public health aims to protect (Oliver, 2006). This is because, it is an extension of regulations to inappropriate areas, which depletes the social resources and aims to deal with the public health issue in a narrow construed manner. Hall also condemns the latest public health approach on different grounds as he makes a distinction between the analysis of scientific public health and coercive interventionist (Edelstein, 2011). He argues that the latter needs to be limited in comparison with the former. In his opinion, the coercive, interventionist concept in relation to public health law is that they need to be appropriate in relation to pathogens that cause diseases. This is because the new law on public health is not appropriate to the context of illness caused by ecological as well as behavioral risks aspects.

Action is required in the eradication of the cause with the view of eliminating the challenge at the root. This needs to take place after the causal connection has been identified in relation to widespread concern on the public health. Action is necessary in the eradication of the cause of obesity and tackles the issue. This is because it falls in the public health authority and other government official has to undertake the necessary actions. These activities aim in production of desired results. A significant problem in relation to new public health advocates on making empirical assumptions consistent with the common sense that seems erroneous. The proposal consequences for instance nutritionists together with public health tend to advocate for modest soda taxes proposal that would significantly result to reduction of obesity cases.

It is important to improve the health of the population partly because of the assumption that the proposed taxes encourage consumers to drink little quantity of soda and not substitute other caloric beverages. Consumers might not substitute on equal amount of caloric or untaxed foods and drinks for foods together with drinks subjected to taxation. For instance, in cases that soda taxation applies to carbonated sodas that are sugar sweetened as well as noncarbonated drinks, consumers can substitute drinks that are untaxed such as fruit juice, coffee and milk for taxed sodas. The substitution seems desirable from a nutritional viewpoint and may not lessen obesity. Public health seems to advocates always assume that closely targeted taxation on food will significantly reduce cases of obesity as the related obesity reduction can be smaller than imagined by many people.

Conclusion

The significance of health eating is assistance in body growth offers sickness protection and enhanced body functions. Every person requires a healthy diet to have a long and better life. Healthy eating remains important in people daily lives since the day they are born. This is because growth and development of individuals is determined by the kinds of foods consumed. Foods contain nutrients, which provide people with energy to perform daily activities and also help in building organ tissues, muscles and bones. The body has hormones as well as other substances that ensures that everything is functioning properly. If an individual fail to eat the correct nutrients the body cannot produce the essential hormones, which results to inefficient body functioning. The maintenance of a healthy diet is helpful in weight reduction, which is significant in every stage of life as weight problems are linked to various medical problems. Action is necessary in the eradication of the cause of obesity and tackles the issue. This is because it falls in the public health authority and other government official has to undertake the necessary actions.

The reduction of growth rate in healthcare spending remains one of the objectives of reforms in the health care sector. Obesity has significantly increased rates of death, disability, and diseases and contributed to the costs of health care. Advocates for public health argue that intervention from the government is warranted because of poor diet linked to many chronic diseases that seems costly to treat. The government has to enact both junk food and soda taxes to recover some of the excessively high costs of health care linked to obesity. Empirical evidence shows that the excise taxes on tobacco have been the most efficient mechanism of tobacco control intercession. This is the main reason that proponents of public health are proposing the anti-obesity soda together with taxes on junk food. The government needs to impose high taxes on soft drinks and junk food to reduce obesity cases caused by unhealthy eating habits.

References

Bové, J., Dufour, F., & Luneau, G. (2001). The world is not for sale: Farmers against junk food. London: Verso.

Cobb, V. (2006). Junk food. Minneapolis: Millbrook Press.

Currie, S. (2009). Junk food. Ann Arbor: Cherry Lake Pub.

Edelstein, S. (2011). Nutrition in public health: A handbook for developing programs and services. Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Gaff, J., & Fairclough, C. (2005). Why must I eat healthy food?. London: Cherrytree Books.

Heller, R. F., & Heller, R. F. (1997). Carbohydrate-addicted kids: Help your child or teen break free of junk food and sugar cravings– for life!. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

Lankford, R. D. (2011). Junk food. Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press.

Myers, B. (1993). My life as crocodile junk food. Dallas: Word Pub.

Oliver, J. E. (2006). Fat politics: The real story behind America’s obesity epidemic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Perl, L. (2000). Junk food, fast food, health food: What America eats and why. New York: Houghton Mifflin/Clarion Books.

Rosenberg, M. (2012). Born with a junk food deficiency: How flaks, quacks, and hacks pimp the public health. Amherst, N.Y: Prometheus Books.

Schlosser, E. (2012). Fast food nation: The dark side of the all-American meal. Boston: Mariner Books/Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

Schlosser, E., & Wilson, C. (2006). Chew on this: Everything you don’t want to know about fast food. Boston [Mass.: Houghton Mifflin Co.

Smith, A. F. (2006). Encyclopedia of junk food and fast food. Westport, Conn. u.a.: Greenwood Press.

Spurlock, M. (2005). Don’t eat this book: Fast food and the supersizing of America. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons.