Junk Food Tax and Laws are the Angels of Health - Research Paper Example

Junk Food Tax and Laws are the Angels of Health Introduction Junk food continues to grow globally in the twenty first century. Its effect on the health of people continues to increase at an alarming rate and this explains why the discourse proposes taxation as the most viable means of enhancing healthy living. The paper borrows most of these strategies from those applied in the alcohol industry. Whether it is for the benefit of people or it causes more problems, this type of food is available across the globe. It is present in convenience stores, groceries, television advertisements, as well fast food outlets. The food appears very appealing and continued uses causes a craving for the same. Nutrition experts define junk food as that type of food with little nutritional value but contributing many calories to the body. However, people continue to define junk food differently depending on their interests and preferences. It is one of the precursors of the problems associated with eating junk food among people. A group of people will exclude pizza for instance, from junk food because it contains tomatoes sauce and cheese it in its ingredients. Whole-wheat and veggies add to the ingredients to make it nutritional. However, it is essential for all to understand that junk food has low nutritional value (Lapham and Gruenwald 601). The other problem associated with junk food is that its frequent use tends to replace other foods with high nutritional content. Comparatively, drinking soda cannot be equal to taking an orange juice or green tea in terms of adding to the body adequate low-fat dairy. While orange or passion fruit juice and green tea are healthful beverages, a soda is not. Cookies and chips do not have vegetables and fruits as part of their ingredients meaning they do not contain many nutrients (Sorenson 231). There are two categories of junk food although some of them appear innocent enough to appear in this category. The first category is the fast food also referred to by other health professionals as snack food. The other category is the breakfast cereals. Experts in nutrition refer to the second category as innocent but fall in the category of junk foods because they have mostly corn syrup with high-fructose and sugars. Milled corn and white flour are simply additional. Commercial companies manufacture and package snack foods releasing them to the market in form of chips, candy bars, cheese puffs, cookies, as well as snack cakes among many more (Cohen & Sturm 382). It is hazardous to underrate the amount of calories contributed to the population by snack foods. Revista Medica De Chile, a Chilean Medical Journal published a report showing that in one year alone from nineteen ninety-six to nineteen ninety-seven, the calories among American children increased by a minimum of thirty percent. Availability of fast foods in many foods outlets creates a culture of overeating among people. They appear in the shelves as sodas, chicken nuggets, French fries, and shakes among many others. Taxation as the solution Tax on fatty foods will make them expensive while taking measures to subsidies healthier foods will make them cheaper. The same way the government taxes alcohol and cigarettes, it would leave the buyer with a choice on spending more on what destroy his health. Elsewhere, Denmark became the first country in the world to impose taxes on junk food. Denmark introduced taxes on all foods that contain more than two pint three percent of saturated fat. Few days preceding the fat tax, businesses hoarded pizzas, butter, and meat. Denmark took the initiative after twenty-one percent of their citizens developed obesity (Elbel and Kersh 1115). While taxing unhealthy foods such as fast food products, governments should also put subsidy on organic food, healthy foods, as well as fruits, vegetables, and other low-fat foods. The type of taxation involved in this case, should bring everybody on board including professionals, supermarkets, and government agencies. It is necessary to regulate junk food and holding companies that manufacture and supply products sold in fast foods accountable for the best interest of citizens. It is easy to emulate the best policies applied in both the alcohol and smoking industry. Advertisements feature on the awareness of how smoking causes deaths in many ways among average human beings. Similarly, fast foods provide everybody with preservatives and fatty foods yet both government agencies and private food supplies do not take necessary precaution. Comparatively, junk food is causing more havoc compared to cigarette industries. Many statistics show reasons why governments should consider taxing junk food such as, candy and soda (Rolls and Morris 1207). A special report on taxation foundation number one hundred and ninety-six. Seventeen out of all states in the United States tax candy highly compared to the groceries. In addition, four others put an excise duty on soda. In two thousand and eleven, fourteen of all of the states planned though their legislative assemblies to impose new taxes on soda proposing higher increases as much as two hundred and sixty-four percent. It was besides two states proposing imposing excise duty on candy. From around the turn of the twenty first century to the end of the first decade, consumption of soda fell by a staggering sixteen percent across the nation. However, governments should consider taxing junk food because taxes on candy and soda alone do not decrease the amount of caloric consumption especially among adolescents. The same report shows that consumers shy away from soda and candy citing price increase. They, then compensate for the same by consuming other junk foods. The trend shows clearly that pricing re-shapes the eating habits of people especially adolescents. If candy and soda leads to a sixteen percent drop in the consumption of food, then extending the same to other types of junk food seems to have increased percentages. At the same time, the government should define all the terminologies clearly to avoid confusion. Currently, the United States faces a myriad of definitional problems, which affect compliance and enforcement of taxes of soda and candy. Any product with flour for instance, falls in the category of food while the one without falls in the category of candy. The confusion should not extend to other junk foods. Clarity is of paramount importance. Taxing fats foods will directly affect the consumers even if they do so at a small scale. Toward the end of the twentieth century, biologists, nutritionists, and doctors started gaining interest in the preventive measures of obesity and other cardiovascular as well as related diseases. Quoting obesity as an example, its prevalence shot from fourteen percent in the early years of nineteen sixty to thirty-five percent shortly before the end of the first decade in the twenty first century. The fervor spilled to include a clamor from politicians interested in controlling the health of the nation (Rolls and Morris 1209). The urge takes various forms including taxes on junk food among many other areas. Taxes on vending machines, salt, and direct bans on Trans fats. Complexity in the definition of candy foods emanates from the position that every state defines the foods to fall under the category differently. It becomes more challenging during taxation procedures. However, across many states, candy includes all processes of preparing honey, sugar, and all other sweeteners both artificial and natural combining with fruits, chocolate, nuts, drops, bars, and pieces. Treating candy differently from other junk foods brings complications while enforcing the special taxes imposed. Junk food is all over, people continue to consume it large amounts, and the rate of fattening is high. Lessons from control measures put on alcohol and related products seem efficient. It is possible to develop policies such as those applied in regulation of alcohol and use them in junk food. The biggest error in controlling junk food is the assumption that people consciously chose the types of food they eat. Policy makers do not factor other issues beyond the control of people while formulating policies applicable in the controlling fast food. Provision of information aimed at creating awareness is not sufficient as discussed in this discourse. Taxation of junk food will increase the costs of the same scaring away price-sensitive clients (Elbel and Kersh 1119). The density of restrictions requires strict instructions. In addition to taxing the junk food, governments should restrict the issuance of licenses to people interested in running these businesses. The agreement between the American Beverage Association and Alliance for a Healthier Generation continues to bear fruit as the beverages in schools have reduced sugars. However, it does not offer an efficient solution to the problem. Schools still provide sugary beverages to students. It explains why the solution in lies in national policies that affect both beverage companies and fast food restaurants and their products. Tax on junk food looks the solution to a healthy nation anywhere in the world. The policies should affect companies producing beverages for distribution to the market that includes schools. Access to sugary beverages within the school premises should be minimized as the policy looks a promising way to curb the prevalence of obesity and other conditions associated with junk food such as heart attack, high blood pressure, and hypertension. In two thousand and four, the state government banned sugary drinks in Boston. The results for the ban showed that more students cut back. The strategy applies in the alcohol industry and works well. First, it will make accessing these products difficult (Sorenson 238). Availing junky food to the population creates gorging. The presence of fast food restaurants all over creates the craving. However, if the licenses are expensive with many restrictions, they will not spread as they do today. The government authorities should consider reducing the density of food joints, especially outlets engaged in selling foods with little nutritional content. Such measures are important because the analysis undertaken in this discourse proof that the future of the nation remains under threat. Another measure is banning the selling of such foods in non-designated areas. Foods must remain at the primary food stores. Chocolate bars are available all over in the cafeterias, tuck-shops, canteens, and even by roadsides. The laws on taxation of also have restrictions on sales and displays. Just as California restricts the display of alcohol, cash registers in gas outlets that prohibit and make it impossible to buy alcohol at drive-through, the government should adopt the same methodology and permit displays only at primary food stores. It is possible to restrict junky food displays to the back of stores or ban them altogether. In fact, the amount of money paid as levy to display such promotional campaigns should be extremely high to enforce discouragement (World Health Organization 56). Restrictions can extend to drive-through as well. Buying of the fries, burgers, and other shakes must require getting out the car because of the distance and location. It is also important to regulate the portion size. In South Africa and Kenya for instance, it is illegal to produce alcohol in sachets and any quantity below two hundred and fifty milliliters. In addition to taxing the foods, the government can ban special offers in the name of special prices for junk foods. The same foods must bear labels about the ingredients and nutritional contents. Any dangers related to consumption of the same inscribed in the label. Among other factors, the food contains low fiber content, has high quantities of fat, has high palability because it has a good taste, contain high sugar content but in liquid form, and provides the person with more calories in a single meal. Despite his immense experience in serving two presidents of the United States, Dr. David Kessler discovered winning against the forces supporting the use of chocolate chip cookie was not as easy as he fought the Big Tobacco and the Congress (Rose 62). Dr. Kessler directed his efforts in researching on how fast foods caused gorging among people. First, he put his willpower to test by purchasing two gooey cookies without any plans of eating them. However, once seated in his house, he could afford to remove his eyes from the chocolate cookies. Any time he left the room, memories of the chocolate chips and chunks distracted his concentration on anything else (Rose 65). In addition to being terribly unhealthy, fats foods contain elements that enhance gorging. Various studies by different institutions of higher learning continue to research on this aspect producing alarming results. One of the studies took place in Boston Children’s hospital. Children in their teens between thirteen and seventeen received three kinds of fast foods as meals. The foods were cola, French fries, and chicken nuggets. In the first experiment, the researchers served the children with a lot of food at one go while in the second study, they served the teenagers with much food but in small amounts. The final experiment entailed serving the same adolescents in the same they did in the second experiment but the difference was that it was done at a fifteen-minute interval (Jason Fletcher 63). Finally, the outcomes showed that the amount of food served did not matter because the teenagers still consumed half of their calories needs in one meal. It formed the basis for the researchers concluding specific factors related to fast food encouraging overeating among people. The value for taxation Children form eating habits when they are young. It provides an opportune time to instill the art of making the right choices for eating healthy. Exposing the child to eating in fast food restaurants makes him develop the same culture throughout his adulthood (World Health Organization 83). The junk has high sugar quantities, sodium, and fat low nutritional content. The diet causes many health problems to the child. Milk shakes and soda have large amounts sugar. A chocolate milkshake obtained from one fast food joint for instance, has one hundred and twenty grams of sugar! This amount is alarming considering the number chocolate bars a child can take in one meal or in a day. Excess sugars weaken the immune system of the body and the case is fatal among children. Weakening the immune system of the body reduces its ability to fight bacteria, yeast, fungi, and viruses responsible for most illnesses in people. Increased intake of sugars closely relates to the prevalence of cardiovascular diseases among school-going children (Cohen and Sturm 383). One-quarter pound of bacon used to make cheese contains fourteen grams of highly concentrated fat, thirty grams of complete fats, as well as two grams of trans-fat. If the cheese comes along with a plate of large fries, it adds another twenty-two grams of fat on the already saturated meal (Act ABC 112). Saturated trans-fats available in junk foods increases the levels of blood cholesterol and results in health problems for children. The World Health Organization documents that atherosclerosis results from increased cholesterols. Scholars define it as the development of plague within the arteries. It also provides the recipe for development of coronary heart diseases among children. It is essential to identify at this point that it remains the leading accrue of death affecting the population of Americans. Sodium is an additive that increases flavor. All junk food contain high amounts of fats with elements of sodium. All people need sodium including children however, consuming them in excess causes the development of various diseases (Smith 33). One thousand four hundred and fifty milligrams of sodium are in bacon of cheese. Children who consume more quantities of sodium are at the risk of developing high blood pressure compared to those who consume recommended amounts or below the recommended quantities. Health books document that High Blood Pressure is the number risk factor for cardiovascular diseases (Elbel and Kersh 1111). Processed foods result in trans-fat, which are common features of fast foods. Besides trans-fats, they also have artificial additives, and preservatives. A meal at a fast food joint contains hundreds of chemical additives with the risk of causing many health problems to children. Fast food is appealing because of the price, convenience, and taste. The junk appears appetizing for children who do not understand its consequences. Among other problems, junk foods cause chronic illnesses, obesity, depression, and low self-esteem. The same extends to affect the concentration of the children in school leading to a drop in performance during internal and external examinations. The level of participation in co-curricular games is also very low. The diet has a significant influence on the study habit showed by pupils according to the report published by Women’s and Children’s Network (Act ABC 171). High sugar content contained in junk food depletes energy as well as the ability to pay attention to lessons extended by the institutions. Concentration on anything and energy are vital elements among school-going children. Childhood prepares the foundation for habits that develop into adulthood therefore; exposing them to junk food is hazardous to their health as children and in future as adults. Right from childhood, children of all ages just as adults require frequent physical activity (Rose 62) yet eating junk food reduces their ability to take part in these activities. Regulating the immediate environment People within the globe and especially in the United States spend most of their time at the workplace. The work environment makes it easy for people to access junk food in many outlets while at the same time offering limited time to get to vending machines providing healthier foods. Experts in nutrition concur that when the management makes changes in the types of food they offer at the workplace improves the quality of the diet. Such changes include providing healthier foods in canteens and cafeterias among other available food joints. Foods provided at most workstations are junk and increase the prevalence of obesity with other causes being fatigue resulting from work and stress (Jason Fletcher 69). Most of them result from low physical activity and poor diets. Similarly duration taken at work, also increase the chances of depending on junk available within the immediate environment. Some people worker longer-than usual leaving them with little time to either prepare or access food with the right nutritional content. Surroundings influence what people eat through many ways. What the population chooses to eat largely influences the risk of gaining too much weight or remaining fit health wise. Similarly, the complex environment shapes the choices made by people including what parents offer their children, means through which the government supports farming activities, distance from the supply centre, as well as other food joints. The food environment that constitutes the social and physical surrounding in many societies with a bigger impact on what people eat complicates the ability for people to select healthy foods. At the same time, it creates a leeway for the populations to choose unhealthy menus and diets. Nutrition experts call this type of environment toxic based on the negative effects it exerts on the lifestyles of people. It is significant to state that it is the leading cause of obesity. Fast foods fall in this category. Comprehending the concept of how the food environment affects the weight is important for people charged with the responsibility of formulating polices. They will modify the surrounding that will help in reducing the occurrence of obesity and management of the same among people. Managing the trends in obesity, now an epidemic will be easier if people become aware of the influences of the surrounding on the foods they choose. Statistics show that the higher prevalence of obesity is found in areas inhabited by people with low income as well as areas occupied by minority ethnic communities and racial groups. Barriers to healthy eating resulting from the environment are high among people with less education, low income, and those experiencing language barriers. In most cases, agencies and people involved in healthy eating campaigns do not reach them. Food scientists continue to study the effect of the environment on food choices. The experts use various angles when approaching the topic. The settings that people live in and influence their eating habits include schools, neighborhoods, homes, as well as workstations. In addition to influencing food choices, they also determine the availability of the foods, costs, and the chances of feeding on a healthy diet (Jason Fletcher 74). The professionals continue to scrutinize wider influences caused by the society on choices made by individuals, marketing of the food, and government policies. Families have a major role in determining the dietary selections for children and in the process determine the chances of them remaining healthy or exposing them to the risk of developing obesity in many ways. Families are important because they shape the preferences made by children in food choices that develops through to adulthood. The quantity and kind of food eaten by children comes what families keep in their homes. Research sanctioned by the World Health Organization found that a hitherto relationship exists between the availability of vegetables and fruits at home with the preference of the same by adults, adolescents, and children as well. Most families share meals therefore, increases the intake of vegetables and fruits among adolescents and children. Studies vary in the level of the BMI associated with frequency of sharing food among family members. Some studies record lower BMI while others record higher levels of the same. Families with low-income have higher risks of developing healthy complication related to unhealthy eating. Some of the products provided by fats foods are cheap and people with low income prefer to use ready and affordable food that their pockets can sustain. Among the health conditions is obesity prevalent in families falling in the lower income categories (Schlosser 66). One of the hurdles is that fast foods do not add ingredients that offer high nutritional value such as fruits and vegetables in their products because they are expensive and that will mean that they sell their products expensively. Fast food manufacturers target people of all cadre and adding refined sweets and grains in their products will make them unaffordable for low-income families. The other factor is limited time. To have healthful food, the manufacturer needs longer time. However, junk food takes little time and meant for convenience. Single families and those working fulltime form the group at the greatest risk of using junk food offered in fast food outlets. Children are in school most the time the same way their parents and guardians spend time at their workplaces. In the United States for instance, the lunch program funded by the government covers more than thirty million school-going pupils. It means that the school takes care of more than thirty million future labor-forces for the nation, thirty million future adults and parents shaping their diet choices for the entire period in school, which is likely to last through their adulthood (World Health Organization 67). Children enrolled in the school breakfast program record lower BMI although taking part in the lunch program did not show signs of influencing development of obesity in any way whether positively or negatively. Taking part in the breakfast program means that a child cannot skip the first meal of the day. It helps to minimize the chances of children being overweight because it spreads the food across the day. Additionally, schools offer competitive foods to pupils in cafeterias, canteen, tuck-shops, as well as other vending machines. Statistics show that more than forty percent of the pupils and students in the United States are frequent clients of these outlets. Foods in these outlets have low nutritional content but offer many calories. They constitute a poor diet and increase the risks of obesity among the children. The foods come along sweetened beverages containing high sugar levels, a factor that risks the development of a healthy nation in future. It is difficult for people to eat healthy foods if the foods are not available. These aspects continue to interest researchers and areas drawing their attention include among others the levels of availability of convenience food stores, supermarkets, as well as junk food outlets. Another area of interest revolves on the influence of racial and economic differences in the surrounding over the occurrence of obesity and other diseases such as diabetes associated with junk food. Works Cited Act ABC. California Business and Professions Code. California ABC; 2011. Print. Cohen, D. A & Sturm R. Discretionary calorie intake a priority for obesity prevention: results of rapid participatory approaches in low-income US communities. J Public Health, 32(3):379-86. 2010. Print. Elbel B, & Kersh R. Calorie labeling and food choices: a first look at the effects on low-income people in New York City. Health Aff 28(6):w1110-21. 2009. Print. Jason Fletcher, et. al. The Effects of Soft Drink Taxes on Child and Adolescent Consumption and Weight Outcomes. Journal of Public Economics. 2011. Print. Lapham SC & Gruenwald PJ. New Mexico’s 1998 drive-up liquor window closure. Study I: effect on alcohol-involved crashes. Addiction; 99(5):598-606.2004. Print. Lapham SC, Skipper BJ. New Mexico’s 1998 drive-up liquor window closure. Study II: economic impact on owners. Addiction, 99(5):607-11. 2004. Print. Rolls BJ, & Morris EL. Portion size of food affects energy intake in normal-weight and overweight men and women. A Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 76(6):1207-13. 2002. Print. Rose G. The strategy of preventive medicine. New York (NY): Oxford University Press, Inc; 1992. Schlosser, Eric. Fast Food Nation: The Dark Side of the All-American Meal. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2001. Print. Smith, Andrew F. Encyclopedia of Junk Food and Fast Food. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press, 2006. Print. Sorenson H. Inside the mind of the shopper. Upper Saddle River (NJ): Pearson Education; 2009. Print. Swinburn BA, & Sacks G, et al. The global obesity pandemic: shaped by global drivers and local environments. Lancet, 378(9793):804-14. 2011. Print. Wing RR, Phelan S. Long-term weight loss maintenance. Am J Clin Nutr; 82(1)222S-5S. 2005. Print. World Health Organization. Obesity and overweight fact sheet no. 311. 2011. Print. Read More