The hottest topic discussed in every school is, “should junk food and candy be served in schools?” And if it is junk it should not be served at any public place. This food is tempting. It tastes good, it’s cheap, and it makes us feel good initially. But its effects can cause various health problems. Junk food companies usually target kids for profit.
The author uses argumentation to try to persuade the reader that many parents do not care what their children eat. He also suggests children are quite frequently allowed to eat unhealthy foods. Crister also states the foods are often from places which do not monitor what the foods contain and just make them attractive to children. Even though the author does make use of language which makes his essay appeal to who ever read it, he fails to address the other sides of the issues. For example he uses analogy when he states that thinness should be a way of life for people in today’s society.
To continue the promotion of the value of nutrition through education, eating right, and exercise, the removal of snack and soda vending machines should be removed. The first reason snacks and vending machines should be removed is because it goes against everything the schools are teaching about eating right and healthy food choices. “We are supposed to be teaching proper nutrition in schools , and having a vending machine inside of the school doesn’t make sense “said Joel Fuhrman, M.D,; a Board Certified Physician. Kids are being taught in health class how consuming a lot of junk food, and no exercise can cause many health issues like a
People are also pushing for restrictions to be placed on marketers that target the child audience, while they do not see who is actually buying the unhealthy food for their children. Placing restrictions on advertisement that targets children may or may not aid in reducing the soaring obesity rates since the child’s home life and surrounding advertisements both play a major role in their eating habits. It is obvious that marketing strategies that target children are not the cause of child obesity. Children follow their parents and official data confirms that children follow in their parents’ footsteps, so focus should be placed on the parents, not the advertisements. Passage two also writes that children are less active, and that “limitations on advertisements will not make them any thinner.” These reasons indeed prove why adverts cannot be blamed for child obesity.
(Finlay et al 2010) This type of intervention is effective as exercise is an important way of maintaining a healthy body and in these classes when the children are taught how to play games it might even encourage them to play the same games out with the school environment and so in turn they will get even more exercise and exercise is one of the main keys to all round better health. The second intervention that I picked out of the case studies was healthy food. Schools can provide children with healthy food to choose from instead of the usual fast food types associated with school cafeterias. Kate has been known to skip lunch and eat crisps/sweets instead and due to money her home meals are usually cheap filling ones like burgers. (Finlay et al 2010) Her school trys to help by providing children like Kate from low income families
You get just as many days off at a year-round school as you would at a traditional school, just at a year-round school, it’s spreaded out through the year rather than all in one big break (The Pros and Cons of Year-Round School). Short breaks gives time for kids to have a better education and avoids kids getting too board over the long break. Yeah, you wouldn’t get to have 3 week vacations, but who does? Some kids say that they get a break right when they need it and it’s refreshing to them and they’re ready to listen (The Pros and Cons of Year-Round School). It would be easier for them to pick up where they left
School meal programs will ensure that all food that is served in schools is healthy and nutritious for the children. Although the vending machine may be more convenient and is definitely quicker then standing in line for a school meal during a short lunch time or in between classes, they discourage healthy eating. At home, many parents may encourage their children to eat healthy and to make good eating habits, but at school younger children may not have the discipline to do the same. Healthy eating habits are formed when we are young and therefore if unhealthy eating choices are made in school, they may be continued
It is also very important to know how to make good decisions, and by choosing what you want to eat gives us a great opportunity to learn. So, I think we should keep junk food sold in school, because there are more varieties of food. My second reason of why I opposed the removal of junk food is that junk foods are convenient and delicious source for a quick snack. Usually, we get tired from work outs or after school activities like varsity
As you know, many schools sell junk food at lunch. Students may enjoy a sweet treat during the school day. Others are thinking differently that the junk food should be kicked out and replaced with healthier foods. Even though a healthier lunch program would be expensive and take some time to get used to, schools should use it. Providing students unhealthy foods can lead to obesity, it can cause early unhealthy habits; and students should have enough time to eat these healthy foods at lunch.
According to Pierce Hollingsworth (2004), the parents and school should not blame the food marketing for being the main cause of obesity rather than teaching and helping the kids to have good habit of eating. He thought that the responsibilities of the parents and schools were important for educating childhood obesity. However, there are so many problems with his arguments. He did not think about the bad effects of advertising on kids. For example, the food marketing companies usually uses the attractive poster about fast food to get the attention of the kids.