The issues of obesity and legislation are juxtaposed in the administration of President Obama and especially of the first lady, Michelle Obama, who are responding to the health crisis of obesity that is currently surmounting dramatically in our era. Implicative of change, this consideration toward this health aspect of United States provides sufficient justification as to why people and citizens should implement the conception of consuming healthy food and nutrients and exercising daily to ensure adequateness. Nevertheless, the opponents of this movement attempt to jeopardize the smooth enactment and development of an anti-obesity bill justified on the conception of government stringency and monopolization. Currently, this health disease endangers the world population as according to the World Health Organization (WHO) reported in 2005 that 1.6 billion were determined as overweight and 400 million were determined as obese. Inclusively, the United States reported a 19% change in age range of 20 to 74, who are determined as obese, from the early 1980’s to 2005. As this impending epidemic commences, legislation is required as a guidance to elucidate a sufficient quality of life and to restore the perception of living healthily. Therefore, to counteract this incrementing dilemma, acknowledgment is necessary for involvements from the areas of government, movements, and within the aspect of health.
The involvement of the federal government and state governments are imperative to combat this health issue as both sectors are indirectly affected by obesity in the terms of deficits and financial downfalls. Conversely, the continuation of this surmounting problem could result in a $344 billion medical expense by the year of 2018 that would be appropriated of 21% from the health care budget. In addition, the projection of obesity in the United States could include 43% of American adults by the year of 2020. With this prognosis, it is necessary to implement an effective way to eradicate this problem, which is through legislation, which is confronted nationally. Consequently with United States incrementing in obesity, American are being subjected to rising health-care cost due to the underlying maladies that are associated with it such as some heart diseases and diabetes, which are pronounced as costly in their medical supplies and required physician visits. Opponents consider that the intent of legislation is to contrive taxation and governmental manipulation, which is indisputably inaccurate as the future of American depend on the adequate health status of our future employees.
Some legislation had been accredited to the impending attempts that state or regional governments are implementing to schools and children as they have justified that children of this generation will exhibit and represent the United States until superseded by the next generation, which are several years. This correlation is ideally possible with the funds that were appropriated by the Centers for Diseases Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Nutrition and Physical Activity Program to Prevent Obesity and Other Chronic Disease (NPAQ) to promote and supply access to nutritious, healthier foods and physical activities. In addition these agencies will provide through the funds Coordinated School Health Programs that will intend to educate students on the importance of sustaining sufficient health status and practices. These attempted implementations with their results at state and regional levels have publicized for obesity-related legislation due to their effectiveness. The opponents of these promotions have emphasized their aspect of indoctrination through this, which is not as these promotions were conceived by human intuition and common sense, communicating what is ethically responsible to lives of the present and future generations.
Legislations have included indirect measures such as imposing and approving taxes on confections to counteract obesity as what is being rendered in California where the legislators are excising on sugary sodas which have accounted as the single largest contributor to the obesity epidemic as concluded from the California Center for Public Health Advocacy. The intentions of this legislation will provide Californians the consideration to healthier alternatives and will financially generate money for the $20 million deficit. The challengers to this proposal assert that these taxes would interfere with families attempting to make weekly income, which insinuates that the challengers would accede with less fortunate families succumbing to obesity. Another Californian legislative measure would profoundly concern the whole entire population with the task force being rendered in response to the incremented costs of health care, absenteeism from employment, and low productivity. American employees have urged for anti-obesity indicating from a 2007 national survey from Synovate Global Opinion Panel that reported that out of 5000 people surveyed, that two out of three respondents were desired for their employment to promote weight loss programs. This report invalidates the assertion from opponents that people are being patronized in opting for the best solution to obesity by the government. With these weight loss problems, employers can disseminate the message that with gradual weight loss conducts in reducing the financial impact of increased health care costs.
Assertively, the First Lady, Michelle Obama desires to reform the perception in children and possibly the next generation concerning the health aspect of America. The implementation of her new movement, referred to as Let’s Move, articulates her intentions to combat childhood obesity through counteractive measures, involving the collaboration of food companies, children, and their parents. This initiative, as the U.S. News and World Report comments, is a noncontroversial goal as the objective is to incorporate a healthier lifestyle into children and possibly adults too. Contrarily, the United States appropriate $150 billion on medicating obesity-related ailments yet the obesity in children sustain its prevalence to a statistic concluding that in1 out of 3 children are determined as obese. Michelle Obama, who had conceived this movement from her own daughters, initiated this program to infuse new standards and education of health toward the impending generation and their influencers, the adults and caregivers. As the influencers, parents and elemental people in children’s lives must instill in children that adopting healthier foods and exercise habits will be beneficial in their lifetime by actually participating in the consuming healthily and exercising daily. The Let’s Move initiative intends to provide the momentum for the present, laboring generation to foster the aspect of maintaining health through schools, which would serve healthier food, through parents and guardians, through food companies implementing a healthy attitude, and through implementations of physical activities in children-oriented vicinities. Michelle Obama has articulated that she does not intend to federalize this initiative to parents and children yet she desire to provide the necessary information of health for parents and guardians to render food decisions for them and their children. In addition, she has repeatedly asserted that cooperation, enthusiasm, and the willpower in this initiative will render this program to be influential in this generation.
In accordance with the intentions of the Let’s Move initiative, the Task Force designated on obesity preclusion accentuates the assertion that this initiative is not intended to propagandize government stringency, yet is to provide sufficient information to the private sector, political officers, and parents that can intentionally have an influence in children of this generation to circumspectly regard their health. This message communicates as a counteraction to the opponent’s conception of this reform as they have remarked that the federal government has inserted strict regulations even though the valid response from the federal government consist of the nation improving health through promoting healthy and efficient lifestyles. In addition, the opponents have suggested that these aspects, as implemented in the task force and obesity, legislative deliberations, such as reverting to healthier food from processed food, are no substantiated and are invalidated. However, the task force incorporated the recommendations and information from twelve distinct credible-federal agencies, such as the Department of Agriculture, Health, and Education, that seems to resonate the conception of consuming healthily, which will transact in a healthier life. Some methods as to how the government can assist in reversing childhood obesity is incentivizing on healthier food, on healthier supermarkets to low income families, and on playground and recreational facilities.
Unequivocally, the opponents have politically justified future legislation on obesity on the government manipulating the minds of its citizens as they have numerously iterated that the federal government is attempting to regulate the health and food sector and therefore ridding the intellect of citizens. The political aspect is superiorly involved into the perception of opponents rather than the life and health aspect as it is suspected from this indirect aspect that opponents approve of the strides in obesity yet are opposing in the methods the federal government initiate the reform. Morally, it should be acknowledged that the life and health is regarded essentially in obesity preclusion as sufficient recommendations and information are obtained from credible sources such as physician and scientists.
Currently, the reauthorization of the 10 billion in funding over the next 10 years for the federal Child Nutrition, which will be expected to be approve, will assist in the childhood obesity epidemic as for some children acquire 2/3 of their daily meal (usually breakfast and lunch) at school. The essentiality from this reauthorization is that it will provide and serve foods that are deemed healthy and nutritious. From the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Secretary Tom Vilsack asserts that distracters such as vending machines and a la carta line should not destabilize the goal of providing healthier alternative when they can utilize those component of lunch in promoting nutritious and healthy food such as restocking vending machines with fruits or reduced calories or fat snacks. For the unfortunate family of a low income, this reauthorization will manifest the accessibility aspect as parents can provide their children with healthier alternatives for free (in most cases) instead of spending money on processed food. Most supporters of this reauthorization accede in the president responding positively in this direction to reform schools’ food provisions. Furthermore, schools and education present a value role not just in nutrition yet in supplying healthier-lifestyle education in order to decline childhood obesity. The opponents have addressed that the federal government can and should assist in the constitution of a balanced diet yet they are obscured apparently as these elements such as providing health education and rendering healthier foods as accessible for all families including the unfortunate ones can negative affect the growth of childhood obesity.
Rather from the subordinate aspect of the incrementing health morbidity, the implicating health concerns is affirmatively asserted against consuming foods that are defined as containing high cholesterol, amount of fat, and sugar. Health officials have documented that the obesity epidemic, as it referred to, is incrementing the population of the United States as the prevalence of obesity in children had doubled in the 1980s and 1990s in the percentages of 5%- 10% and had currently increased at 20% in children 2-19. Conversely, this statistics seems to obscure the mental repercussions that are presumed in obese children, who are unfortunately patronized for their incompatibility to society for being corpulent. This negativity, exposed especially to children, can contribute to the instability in his or her future socioeconomic status. Obesity is attributed from dsyregulation of necessary hormones that function in response to overeating; however this dsyregulation of hormones could be reversed if legislation prohibits the increased advertisement of unhealthy food products and promote the practice of consuming healthy food and exercising daily. The aspect of this legislation seems to be coherent in the United Kingdom as they have enacted a law prohibiting company of unhealthy food and drink to advertising or promoting their products on the television or programs designated for children fewer than 16. The rates of obesity, there, seem to incrementing especially through youth factor and therefore they have considered that the only way is to inhibit the influence from food companies promoting their unhealthy items.
In essence, involvement from the government, initiatives and health information and officials can counteract in the fight against childhood obesity and obesity in adults and promote a healthier lifestyle for Americans. Childhood obesity has precedence in the issues concerning children’s lives as many associative diseases such as type II diabetes mellitus (which used to be exclusive to adults) are currently affecting the way children can manage in this world and society. The effects of obesity are fundamentally the counterparts of this disease, which are diabetes, high blood pressure, asthma, and the social stigma (in this society, it is undesirable to be obese). It seems in conclusion that neither opposition on taxation through these initiatives and legislation cannot supersede the aspect that life is precious and should be regarded in the healthiest way as one has only one life to live.