The first of these is Non Sequitur, the fallacy of drawing a conclusion that does not follow from the evidence. This happens when the ad concludes that the teens in the studies tended to be leaner only because they drank milk instead of sugary drinks. The second one is the Post-Hoc Fallacy, this assumes that because one event precedes another event, it is the cause of that event. This is evident when the ad states that after teens began to drink milk instead of sugary drinks, they began to be lean. Hence, drinking more milk makes you
The solutions popular today focus on the introduction of medicines, supplements, or individual “super foods” into one’s preexisting diet, instead of changing or eliminating parts of their harmful lifestyle. Americans have fallen into the trap of convenience, and quick short term fixes. Dr. T. Colin Campbell of the Nutritional Sciences Department at Cornell University states that, “Nutrition has long been viewed through the lens of reductionism, which focuses on parts instead of a whole” (Campbell 1077). This is the way nutrition has been practiced for several years, yet it has failed to improve the health of society. The only way for people to change their health is through long term measures.
Fluoride, the government’s way of saying “we don’t want you to succeed”, has been poured into the water supply by the government for years and has still gone strong. The government thought it was a great way to protect our teeth, but instead it caused more pain which brought forth the fluoride conspiracy. The fluoride conspiracy can be proven because there has been extensive research on the subject, and the side effects of fluoride are easily visible and they include lower IQ, certain cancers, and the feeling of docility. The U.S is ranked low on the totem pole of countries in terms of education and some don’t know why. The reason for this lower standard is because of Americas own screw up.
One way to show how far these people are being misled is by examining the supports they base their arguments on. Many gluten-free diet supporters are most likely to use one specific source to support their arguments, Dr. Perlmutter’s best-selling book, Grain Brain. The actual reason for its popularity is that Perlmutter appealed to people as an authority, being the only American who is both a board-certified neurologist and a fellow of the American College of Nutrition. Most of the general population of people, who probably do not have much background information about gluten or mental diseases, are most likely to accept the supports someone with these credentials would provide. Fortunately, many other scientists, health professionals, and neurologists had various critiques to his argument and his rhetoric, which can be described as misleading.
Recently, there have been many reports of children being vaccinated, and later on, they begin to develop these disabilities. This has created a scare within the American society, and parents are starting to speculate that vaccines contribute more harm than help. Like I stated before, “...the negative statements transform into rumors…causing a false conclusion on the topic of vaccines” (Walny). People do not perform their own investigation on the vaccination process, therefore, they must believe in everything they hear. For the individuals that do their studying, they know that vaccines prevent disease, not cause disease.
He closes his introduction by displaying his concern for children, due to the fact that “this is an industry that boths feed and feeds off the young” (9). He uses an appeal to pathos and a somber tone in order to state the serious effects of fast food on children. The display of serious concern appeals to the audience and urges them to read on. Schlosser proceeds to include several USDA studies (197), which not only establish his credibility, but serves to assure the readers of the content of the book. The author then ends his argument by making a comparison of drugs and food “ Far more Americans are severely harmed every year by food poisoning than illegal drug use” (264).
For example, most doctors recommend increasing carbohydrate consumption and decreasing protein and fat. Why is this bad? Because carbs are made of SUGARS, so if you have a problem in dealing with sugar in your blood, like diabetes, it makes no sense to increase its consumption. Doctors are not the main problem that is not the message being sent. The message is that there is things can be done to combat diabetes, it is your responsibility to ask your doctor for your options if they do not tell you.
In the prologue of his book Salt, Sugar, and Fat, Moss recounts a time when CEOs of processed food giants, including General Mills, Pillsbury, and others, gathered to address the issue that many medical experts were slamming processed food as very unhealthy. Moss uses his word choice to paint former General Mills CEO Stephen Sanger in a very bad light when he writes, “But most often, he said, people bought what they liked, and they liked what tasted good. ‘Don’t talk to me about nutrition,’ [Sanger] reportedly said, taking on the voice of the typical consumer. ‘Talk to me about taste, and if this stuff tastes better, don’t run around trying to sell stuff that doesn’t taste good.’ To react to the critics, Sanger said, would jeopardize the sanctity of the recipes that had made his products so successful. General Mills would not pull back.
Part two, working the system, discusses how food companies lobby Congress, use personal connections with legislators and agency officials who can promote regulations, and use nutrition experts to approve their products. Part three, exploiting kids corrupting schools, talks about how children at or under the poverty line are far more likely in danger of nutritional deficiencies and discusses the childhood obesity epidemic and how companies specifically target their advertisements at young children, especially through schools. Deregulating dietary supplements or part four, discusses how supplemental companies convinced everyone that their products didn 't have to be regulated to strict
Lustig (2012) explains and suggests the following: Authorities consider sugar as ‘empty calories’ but there is nothing empty about these calories. A growing body of scientific evidence is showing that fructose can trigger processes that lead to liver toxicity and a host of other chronic diseases… they [Government] must consider limiting fructose and its main delivery vehicles, the added sugars HFCS (high-fructose corn syrup) and sucrose, which pose dangers to individuals and to society as a whole. (p.28) Another process that occurs in the body is that, “sugar dampens the suppression of the hormone ghrelin, which signals hunger to the brain…interferes with the normal transport and signaling of the hormone leptin, which helps to produce the feeling of satiety…and it reduces dopamine signaling in the brain’s reward center” (Lustig, 2012, p. 28). Though these are only a few examples and there are many more such as sugar feeding cancer cells, it should give you a basic understanding of just how bad sugar is for the
Furthermore, if there was more government intervention, there wouldn’t be consumer crises to begin with. Since consumer crises are a growing issue, it is important that the government takes necessary action to make it a declining one. “The scientific community overwhelmingly agrees that trans fats pose major health risks, and the FDA estimates that a ban could prevent 7,000 deaths and 20,000 heart attacks every year” (Filipovic). This shows how reluctant the government is to intervene because despite the clear negative effects of trans fat, it is still widely distributed within the food industry. Additionally, the government generally pushes forward a more individualist approach to food and water safety, which most people contend that it should instead be more systematic.
In an article from national society they mention that the foods that are killing people slowly isn’t only the fast food or the high processed foods that is found in the grocery store but the extremely processed salts, and refined sugars. It is mentioned that because of that it can cause autoimmune diseases. Schlosser also mentions one of the diseases that are deadly if not treated properly, “ More than half of all American adults and about one-quarter of all American children are no obese or overweight”(240). All this had started since the late 1970’s and its still going on in this day in age, but many do not want to realize that it is something that n one should be proud of. Obesity happens because many people tend to consume fast food because it is the easiest option than taking time to make a nutritional meal.
It is clear to many people that the combined eating habits of a majority of Americans are lacking in better judgement. The overall health of the country has become, and continues to be, a deep issue in which people are beginning to take a stand against. In Mark Bittmans ' article "Bad food? Tax it, and subsidize vegetables," he makes the argument that it is the governments duty to the people to look out for their well-being by taxing "bad food," such as chips, sodas and other fatty foods, and with the extra money generated, create a program that benefits the American diet. Many people may disagree, this is a stance in which I side with due to many reasons.
The government, responsible for protect those it serves, allows the obesity rate to increase rapidly and seems to ignore the large issue at hand. The government prompts the obesity epidemic by allowing the food industry to violate codes while doing nothing in retaliation and focusing on greed rather than health. Eric A. Finkelstein and Laurie Zuckerman, authors of The Fattening of America: How the Economy Makes Us Fat, If It Matters, and What to Do About It, discuss the power and role the government has on the food consumption in America: “Government has imposed numerous laws and regulations that, whether directly or indirectly, influence our food consumption and physical activity decisions, and ultimately our rates of obesity” (Finkelstein and Zuckerman 115). The ordinances and rules that governmental programs, like the FDA, dictate what Americans eat on a daily basis. The restrictions and codes, also provided by the FDA, force the food industry to create, produce, and package foods in a certain manner in order to sell them.