Wednesday, October 16, 2013

Government Involvement in Childhood Obesity

Summer Shroble

Government Involvement in Childhood Obesity
            Throughout the past decade, children across the country have been showing signs of childhood obesity. In the U.S alone, one out of five children is currently fighting this battle. This seems as if it is another “lazy” American problem, however, it can lead to serious health risks later in life. Children are developing this daily struggle through a shortage of physical activity, genetics, and bad eating habits. This problem seems highly preventable, but is still a common issue in our everyday lives. Recently, this struggle seems to have been looking up. Some may argue that childhood obesity can only be solved by personal obligations, such as a free market, but others believe that government involvement, such as a centrally planned economy, is what could potentially save future generations.
            Childhood obesity is diagnosed when a child has exceeded their normal amount of weight for their age and height. As mentioned before, childhood obesity is caused by little to no physical activity in a child’s life, genetics, and bad eating habits. This problem can also occur when all three of these causes are happening together. These treatments are put into action by personal obligations and preferences. If this problem were to be solved individually, families would be able to make their own decisions, which are expressed in a free market economy. Families are able to take the initiative and make a choice to change their lifestyles and eating habits. Also expressed in a fee market is the ability for households to buy goods and services from other businesses. Families could buy goods and services produced by certain businesses, however, these goods and services to help families create a healthy lifestyle are expensive. According to foxnews.com, “Organic products typically cost 20 percent to 100 percent more than their conventionally produced equivalents”. This healthy lifestyle would actually end up hurting families with lower incomes, because they are unable to afford the products that they need to defeat childhood obesity in their families.
Aside from individuals hoping to create a lifestyle to decrease childhood obesity in their homes, the government has been taking initiative to create programs and funding towards this issue. Programs such as Michelle Obama’s LetsMove campaign and another program called WeCan! are funded by the government to help families and communities create healthier lifestyles for young children. Although these programs have been helping children regulate their meal plans and exercise schedules, the government has decided to step in and add school lunch laws. According to education.findlaw.com, “The issue of childhood obesity and school lunches has come under increasing scrutiny in the past several decades. Despite efforts by local and national groups – such as the First Lady-inspired Let’s Move campaign and a host of other advocacy groups for healthy eating, children are continuing to suffer from the negative effects of unhealthy eating on school campuses” To reduce childhood obesity, the government took the initiative to change school lunch laws. They have set nutritional guidelines for each lunch, such as calorie counting and dietary intake. Although these laws do not only better children as a whole, they allow for low income families by increasing access to free or reduced lunches. These laws are set to reduce childhood obesity and create a better lifestyle for children.
This study raises many questions. Does the government have too much involvement over childhood obesity? Should childhood obesity be taken up as a personal problem, instead of a national problem? Which is better for low income families?


Works Cited
"10 reasons organic food is so expensive | Fox News." Fox News - Breaking News Updates | Latest News Headlines | Photos & News Videos. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2013. <http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2012/03/11/10-reasons-organic-food-is-so-expensive/>.
"School Lunch Laws - FindLaw." Education Law - FindLaw. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2013. <http://education.findlaw.com/student-rights/school-lunch-laws.html>.

VIDEO

22 comments:

  1. I believe that if schools either enforced gym, or gave extra credit for working out after school, kids grades and overall health will improve. if gym was forced and all students were expected to meet a certain level, the larger kids would be forced to work harder, but they would lose weight, and the athletes would not have to strain themselves before they had practices, or games. if gym gave extra credit to failing student, rather than study hall or resource more people would work out and lose weight, rather than sit around in a room in the morning.

    ReplyDelete
  2. If gym was graded on fitness it would increase the incentive for students to get and maintain to a healthy weight. Also I believe that the government should not worry about the weight of its population. People should be allowed to make their own health decisions. I believe that if someone wants to eat food and be lazy if they want to.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I believe that obesity is a huge problem in our country—the overall health of the United States is rapidly deteriorating. Although the country cares about the health of its people, it really is more of a personal problem; it is up to the individual to decide what he or she wants to eat and if he or she wants to exercise. However, schools could help with this problem. They could provide healthier options at lunch, such as a salad or fruit bar. Also, they could offer more intense gym classes to help heavier children lose weight.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think that it is good that the government is concerned about America’s health and its future but I do agree with Eric that in the end it is the persons choice if they want to be healthy or not. I think that the government programs like Michelle Obama’s are beneficial for children in school because if they don’t have proper nutrition at home at least at school they will have one nutritious meal. I do think that gym classes should be more intense or at least give kids activities that they can do at home to help themselves lose weight.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It is great that schools around the nation are trying to get kids involved more into physical activity and eat better, but I don't think that is going to help the widespread problem of obesity in children. This may seem like a good idea to enforce these rules at schools, unfortunately it all goes back to the kids and their behaviors. As much as you get them to interact with physical activity and make them eat healthier foods at school lunches, they may be disregarding everything at home. School officials can pound these ideas and plans into the children's heads but if they decide its something they aren't interested in, all of a sudden it becomes a lost cause. Although I feel this is a right step towards preventing and eventually stopping this child obesity, there may be a different and more successful way of doing so.

    ReplyDelete
  6. There's no doubt that the government has involvement in this matter, but it isn't that much involvement. Despite their small yet seemingly large contributions, the involvement they do have is pretty random. First off, Michelle Obama's new lunch program is to reduce calorie intake and salt from all school lunches, but the prices of the lunch stay the same, so what are we paying for? It's simply expensive to be healthy. And that goes back to what you said about organic foods as well. Those products are overpriced and I've always gone to the organic store, limited to certain things because I was on a budget. You can buy a lot more fatty foods for a cheaper price than organic, healthy foods. I believe consumer tastes has something to do with that though, as they demand those fattier foods for their children. Also, when children see a fast food commercial, they are all for it, so their parents take them there. The government can have some choice like reducing that unhealthy intake at school, but why take action there? One small meal for a child won't change what they'll eat during the other 60% of their day or 90% of their week when they're not in school. This problem is becoming more and more trendy these days I feel like, and it's sad to think about what the outcome may be for their future, their opportunities, their health, and their lifespan.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Having this issue arise in other schools doesn't really shock me at all because I realized that the push for healthy food has been really strong the past couple years. Personally, I think its great that our government is trying to push for healthy lunches, but their comes a point where the food still has to be editable. I think some government officials are not realizing what type of food and the quality of it because some food simply doesn't supply a flavor at times. Unfortunately, this may also be the main cause for students not consuming most of their lunches. I believe a better approach towards increasing the health of individuals would probably be increasing the calorie size for sure, but still maintain healthy and flavor full foods. Its not impossible to eat healthy and for it to still taste really good. Government officials should really question the ones eating it and ask them personally why the amount of food being wasted is increasing.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Sometimes the government can cross the line too much when trying to solve America’s problems. However, when it comes down to obesity, all the government is trying to do is help. I think it is great that they care about the health and well being of our citizens, which they should be; therefore, there should be no reason for us to be mad with what the government has set in place to help regulate obesity. Sure parents can try and help their children with the nutrition aspect, but with extra reinforcement from the government’s regulations it can go a long way to improving children’s health.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I am glad that the government is concerned about our health and that there has been an incredible increase in efforts to keep kids active, however, I don't think it is a good idea to regulate what schools serve for lunch. A person's diet is based on personal preference and how much they eat is up to that individual. I think it's great that the government is providing health education and different opportunities to keep students active but creating laws regarding school lunches is going too far. The government should be putting more emphasis on health education and exercise so students are at least given the resources to make their own choice.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I do think that the government has too much control over our personal lives and that childhood obesity is an example of that. I get that they want our country to be healthier, but that's shouldn't give them the right to control what we eat. Maybe the fitness plans make sense but the regulation of school lunches doesn't seem necessary. You wrote this well and made nice points though, good job!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Government is too involved in childhood obesity. No matter what we eat at school, which seems to be too little most days, doesn't mean people won't go home and pig out. Putting out fruits and vegetables and forcing kids to take them at lunch doesn't mean that they will eat them but if people have to take it, they are more likely to get something they like and may end up eating. Schools shouldn't force kids to eat this or that and should just allow them to eat what they would like. If the schools/government wanted kids to eat healthy, why are chips/cookies/icecream and more still available to buy at lunch?

    ReplyDelete
  12. The government does have too much control on obesity. While I think it is important that kids eat healthy and have easy access to healthier foods, I think more emphasis should go on the parents, to help guide theor kids on making better choices. The more supply we have for healthier foods would help satisfy the demmand. Instead of trying to control what kids eat through over the top lunch programs, the government should lead people to the right decision. This will help give people more of a choice, and help fight obesity.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I completely agree with this comment. I think the health of our countries children is important and an issue, however it is not the government's responsibility to pay for this cause. It is of the parent's responsibility to care for and show their children the healthiest way to live. I think our government puts too much money into forcing the well-being of our children. The option of healthy foods in school cafeterias is necessary, however I think the extra money spent, should be put more towards the child's education rather than their diet.

      Delete
  13. Gym classes should me mandatory and they should also be graded. What kid is going to want to try at all in a gym class if it doesn't count for a grade at all? Michelle Obama should just stop with all this health crap stuff because she is just making the kids crave junk food that much more, causing them to eat bad if they go home or if they bring a packed lunch to school. The government shouldn't worry about if people are fat or not. If these people want to gain weight and not do anything about it then that's their problem to deal with. Overall, nice job Summer!

    ReplyDelete
  14. I think the rise of childhood obesity in our country is a personal problem, not a national problem the government has to get involved in. It is a good idea to make school lunches healthier, but the problem is at home. Parents are held accountable for feeding their children unhealthy food. While unhealthy food is more affordable the cost of obesity is greater than the price of healthy food.

    ReplyDelete
  15. The government's efforts in trying to change the diet of school lunches is appreciated, but it only addresses half of the nation. What about all the athletes, and fit people? By reducing the amount kids receive for school lunches, sure they're helping the obese kids, but what about the athletes that need a lot of food to maintain their physique? Ultimately, the intention is appreciated, however, I don't believe it's the most logical solution.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I believe that if the government would put more time and effort into physical education classes we could reduce this problem drastically. Also, they should enforce healthier school lunches and a healthier lifestyle at home. Although money is scarce, the government should be able to evenly distribute its money toward causes like this. This could have a huge impact on everybody's life, not just for children

    ReplyDelete
  17. Although I believe that the government has good intentions in regards to the childhood obesity problem, I believe it is a personal problem. Also, going against - uh- the "mainstream" theme of the previous comments, I don't think gym should be so harshly graded as a lot of you guys mentioned before. There are too many outside factors to deal with to make such a, let's say, hefty goal. Is it really fair to grade people based on how fast/far they can run? No. It's not. Because, while some people may be in great shape at the start of semester, others may not be so fit, and their grades would suffer for it. Sure, it would be an "incentive" for kids to workout, but what about the people who physically can't? What if, like Summer said, it was genetics that helped give them this disease, and not simply laziness? Or what if the “goal weight” for the class was physically impossible for a student to reach? They would have to be different goals for different people, and most certainly not weights or fitness because that brings up other things that I will not delve into at the moment. Surely you would not want to be forced to take an art class if you couldn't draw a stick figure to save your life. Would it be fair if that class was mandatory even if you sucked at it or weren't interested in the slightest in the topic at hand? No, it wouldn't be fair. I'm sorry I threw all of that at you, but I don't think that "gym," of all things, is the answer to a nationwide problem like childhood obesity. It's so much deeper than that. The answer lies in the way the kids were brought up, not in a fitness regiment thrown upon unsuspecting schoolchildren by people who have spent their whole lives playing football.

    ReplyDelete
  18. This is a great topic. I believe that for people to be healthier they really just have to be educated. Obesity is largely due to the effects of the big food companies that put chemicals, that should not be ingested, into your foods and these chemicals increase weight that people carry along with having affects on many other diseases. If people were educated better on what they are truly eating they would make different choices, which would then influence the market, and the government wouldn't have to get involved. Although there needs to be a regulatory agency, the members of the FDA have very strong ties with big companies so this aspect of regulation wouldn't be reliable. Also in relation to organic being higher in price than conventional, pesticide covered foods, this is not always the case. Organic foods can sometimes be purchased for the same price or even lower, but people just are not educated on the benefits and costs of the choices we make especially in relation to our health.

    ReplyDelete
  19. It's great that the government is trying to get involved in what foods are served at school lunches but it's not enough to fight against childhood obesity. For example, PHS has revolved around more healthy choices (fruit, portion size, whole wheat pasta, less fattening foods), it may sound like they've implemented a healthy lunch but it's not. The main lunch meals consist of just carbs and not much of anything else nutritional wise (walking taco, pasta bar, just to name a few). Which leads me conclude that the government still needs to take more action to have school lunches give out more quality/healthy lunches.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Most definitely, this is a huge issue that people have been combating for many years now. We know that it is a problem, but we don't always know how to solve it. Michelle Obama instituted a law about the school lunches, and that is a step in the right direction. But also, it cannot just be laws that are put into place that will automatically make everybody happy and healthy. Instead, I believe it is also key to change the people's mindset on the subject of nutrition and keeping a healthy weight with exercise. Very important as well, is educating the parents of these kids who are receiving these school lunches. It is the parents who care about the kids, and who are raising them from the time they were born. Therefore, they should be the ones who are ultimately in charge of them!

    ReplyDelete
  21. It has brought to my attention that the government has spent a lot of time concerning about obesity in America, but are they really doing anything about it? I haven’t seen a great change over the past few years; they’re still keeping the fast food chains and offering “greasy” foods all around. If we really want to do anything about it, then everyone needs to stand up for it. First lady, Michelle Obama, has taken a role in various ways to help stop childhood obesity. Although it’s a great topic to deal with: but is everyone in America going to follow through with? No, because everyone needs jobs and those people producing those “fatty” foods need to make money too so they can’t just stop making them, but possibly reducing them.

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...