Candy in the morning time, Candy in the hot sunshine.

The primary role of government is supposedly to ensure its citizens are safe in their pursuit of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. However, if you look beyond the overt military gestures at the regulations (or lack thereof) on things that directly effect our everyday life, like food, you’ll come to a sobering realization: we are not nearly as protected as we think we are. The quality of food in America, while not as bad as described in Sinclair’s The Jungle, is the lowest its been in many decades. 

In the 1970s and the 1980s, after much pressure from industry lobbyists, the FDA finally allowed the inclusion of aspartame and high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) into the mainstream production of American food. Both chemicals were used as cheaper sweetening alternatives to sugar, with aspartame also simultaneously serving as a “diet” option for the newly weight-conscious nation.  Just after these chemicals were introduced into American foods, doctors across the nation first noticed an alarming rise in both heart disease and obesity. Over 30 years later, scientists the world over have discovered this correlation is no mere coincidence, with countless dozens of studies that show how our higher consumption of both chemicals have direct negative effects on everything from the circulatory system to the brain. Yet, according to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), over one third of adult Americans are clinically obese and a quarter of all American deaths are related to heart disease, and our consumption of both HFCS and aspartame has never been higher. 

If the federal government was really as concerned for our safety as they claim to be, why has there been no effort to impose harsher regulations on food production in our country? While both military an terrorist threats are a real concern, millions upon millions more American citizens are negatively effected by the poor nutritional standards the food industry has coerced our government into accepting. 

Fighting against the Fat Tax

In “The American Right to Super Size,” Ashley Mcintosh discusses the possibility of the government implementing a “fat tax.” She continues to explain that these taxes would affect both the obese in the form of higher healthcare and an overall taxation on foods that have a high content of fat or sugar. Ashley then goes to argue that these fat taxes would not only be ineffective but that it is an American right to be able to purchase food of their choice. She then gives the reader alternative solutions to fighting the fat tax which would still go after the desired results including; mandating better physical education programs in schools, regulating additives & preservatives, and lowering the cost of healthy items. 

I agree with Ashley that taxation is not an effective method in lowering obesity rates and she has made a strong argument with supporting research to show better alternatives. If we want to lower the obesity rate in America we need to make healthier options more acceptable to the public. I full heartedly support the idea of regulating the food industry in regards to additives and preservatives, these substances are not only unnecessary but as Ashley states, addictive. The only thing I would have liked to see Ashley touch more on in her argument would be the importance of educating the public on healthy lifestyles. If we want to see real change I believe that healthy foods not only need to be more accessible but we also need to have better educational programs showing why these are better options.