I agree that only nutritious drinks should be allowed at school. Firstly, a large percentage of kids are obese by age twelve. This can be fixed if only nutritious drinks are sold at schools. Secondly, some students may also need the drinks because they may not have access to them at their house. Lastly, students need to stay healthy and active. If schools do not offer the nutritious drinks, some students could suffer from malnutrition and other devastating diseases. Heart disease is a major disease in America, it is responsible for millions of deaths each year. The sugar in pop, and carbohydrates in other popular drinks are the two main causes of heart disease.
Many people believe that only nutritious drinks should be offered at school. They claim that by doing this, students will be healthier, and do better in school. However, I disagree with this policy, and would like to convince you why my opinion is correct. Even if you stop selling a particular product at school, students will always find some way to get it from somewhere else. I believe that you shouldn’t only offer nutritious drinks at school because they’re high in sugar, students will bring drinks from home, and students will boycott the vending machines.
Because in certain way affects in many families, and soda is coming directly from factory and it has another process to get and transported to store or schools that is more expensive than water. For instance, water should be more used than soda in schools since drinking 5 glasses of water daily decreases the risk or certain problems of
The many contradictions in the soda ban lead to many workarounds, proving how much of a bad idea the law is. According to “Soda’s a Problem But…”, an opinion
The highly debatable and argued over ‘soda ban’ has been taking over the world and grabbed the media’s attention. But why? Well, many think the ban is about soda, but really, it isn’t all about soda. Truthfully, it is about the world thinking about the decisions they make. But, the ban does restrict all drinks ran by city that are above 16oz or have 50% or more of milk and fruit juice. However the soda ban may have some positive effects, ultimately the ban is a bad idea. Due to the contradiction it brings, the fact there is only one person making the decisions, and the other ways people can spend money.
Most kids today drink sugary drinks when they get home or when go out to eat. Grocery stores sell soda and sugary drinks throughout the business (Leaf Group Ltd). Someone could be getting their groceries, and they would be able to get them with all of the other food or where they check out. “Researchers tracking 6,900 fifth-graders from public schools in 40 states through the eighth grade found that 85% of eighth graders reported drinking a sugared beverage at least once a week (about 30% said they drank them every day), regardless of whether their schools banned them or not.”(Alice Park). Most kids drink pop daily so it should not stop them from drinking it at school. “Students have many ways of accessing sugared drinks outside of the school lunch program, including vending machines, school stores and cafeteria a la carte offerings that students pay for themselves rather than with lunch vouchers.” (Alice Park).
That is true, however this argument is weak because there are in fact bigger problems than soda being a health issue. Itś your choice on whether you drink soda or not. It won't do much damage unless it becomes a very consistent thing. Though soda is bad, we have much bigger problems killing people. For example, cigarettes or smoking in general. It affects people who are not even committing the action, but people who are near it. The soda ban should not official because of those bigger problems. Stated in ¨Soda´s a Problem But…¨ on page 288, ¨There are times when the government has to step in on obviously dangerous situations- especially those, such as smoking, that affect the people other than the person whose behavior would be curbed-...¨ (Klein, 289) Furthermore, Cigarettes affect more than one person. The Soda Ban is something we shouldn't be worried about if we have another problem possibly killing someone faster and quickly. Despite the mentions of it reducing health issues, the ban still does not deserve to be put in place since there are other severe problems that should be discussed
Everyone has seen the ancient government infomercial made in the early 2000’s aimed to steer children and teens away from taking cigarettes. They have had some effect to the new generation according to Statistics Canada with the percentage of Canadians smoking declining from 21% to 18% over the last 5 year. This study also shows that the majority of smokers are in their 40s. Many Canadians still think that the government can do better and have campaigned relentlessly to make cigarettes illegal. Users of cigarettes have responded to these campaigns saying that cigarettes should still remain being legal as users have the right and freedom to do as they please. This reason is valid, but definitely not
They can argue that a ban on sugary drinks could help improve health problems such as obesity. Although it may seem reasonable like a reasonable solution, it can actually have negative effects on people. What good is a law when it can’t solve the issue it was made for. Therefore, the soda ban should not be put in place due to how it doesn’t solve the health problems it was made for. In the Washington times article by Samantha Gross, Joy Dubost, a nutritionist who works for the National Restaurant Association, explains what problems that limiting soda can cause. ‘“It’s not reasonable to blame or cite one product,”’ she said, adding that the proposal, “produces a false sense of accomplishment in the fight against obesity”’ (Gross, p.g 2). In other words, banning the amount of soda that can be sold won’t solve many health problems as, obesity doesn’t originate from one source. The ban also implies that people won’t have to worry about obesity and other health crisis because they will presume that everything has been cured due to this one mandate. Not only does this mean that the ban doesn’t solve anything but it also makes sure people will stray away from issues that need to be addressed and therefore, limiting the amount of soda a person can purchase is a unproductive concept. However much people may think that limiting soda will help control these health issues, it actually does a lot more harm than
With the constantly increasing paces of everyday life the search for an energy source, capable of boosting the human body to new limits by extending its endurance, continues. In the recent years a specific product, called an energy drink, has received much publicity worldwide. The energy drink is a highly caffeinated stimulant that is able to rise the performance of the human body. Many people consider it as a refreshment after a hard day’s work. What’s more one of the most frequently used cases of energy drinks is in combination with alcohol during parties. However, the majority of consumers do not understand the way they work and often abuse with the consumption of the substance. Furthermore, a great amount of them are unaware of what effects can be caused on the human body.
Other people also say that tax on soft drinks would do little to reduce obesity and will only hit Australian families where it hurts most – their pockets. I think if the sugar tax was introduced it would encourage people to drink more water from the tap and so they would save money by not drinking soft drinks.
The answer is simple--sugar. Sugar is just as deadly as a cigarette or a can of tobacco. Sugar is causing the obesity rates to skyrocket in America. Sugar has invaded every product that’s not naturally grown, it’s in yogurt, drinks, bread, and many other foods and drinks consumed on a daily basis. We need to start somewhere on banning sugar. That is why many propose regulating the purchases of carbonated drinks pact with sugar, or more commonly known as soda. One can of soda contains about 2.5 tablespoons of sugar, and on average, 9% of the daily calories consumed per person is from soda. Due to the high numbers of obesity in America, soda’s and other drinks high in sugar, should be regulated.
For the Coca-Cola, recognized its brand to be the best global brand around the world. Nevertheless, PepsiCo still working hard and catching up right behind the Coca-Cola, become the biggest rival for Coca-Cola in non-alcoholic drink industry. So what are the competitive advantages these both companies do have, let us discuss.
Consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages, which include soft drinks, fruit drinks, ice tea, energy and vitamin water drinks across the globe. Regular consumption of sugary sweetened beverages have been associated with weight gain, obesity and diabetes. The role of sugary sweetened beverages in the development of related chronic metabole diseases such as metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes, has not been quantitatively reviewed .
Business partnerships: Coca-Cola FEMSA is cooperating with The Coca-Cola Company to grow more propelled joint plans of action to keep investigating and taking part in new lines of refreshments, expanding existing product offerings and successfully publicizing and advertising our items.