New York City, and America in general, are facing one of the most serious health issues that affects the whole nation. This health issue is so bad, that when stereotyped, this is almost always a description that is associated with Americans. This problem is obesity.
Obesity is a real epidemic. According to the New York Times article, “Obesity Around the Nation” by Anahad O’Connor, 1 out of every 5 adults in every state is obese.In two states, Mississippi and Arizona, the rate of obesity has gone over 35%. O1 out of every 10 children, ages 1-5, also have problems with obesity. This is a major factor, as obesity increases the risk of heart disease and stroke, and lowers one’s life expectancy. O’Conor also points out that obesity rates are highest in minorities, specifically the hispanic and black communities, with whites having the lowest rates. She says that this: “showed an economic divide, with people in the lowest income brackets having disproportionately higher rates” (O’Connor 1).
The issue with obesity is known nation wide. So much so in fact, that national entities and private corporations are sponsoring active campaigns, in order to get kids to live more active lifestyles and avoid a sedentary one, leading to higher rates of obesity. These include instances like Michelle Obama’s “Let’s Move” campaign, and the NFL’s “play 60” campaign. However, as O’Connor pointed out, this goes beyond just getting children to be active, this has to do with an economic divide. The best way to deal with that, is policy revision.
Mark Bitterman’s Article, “Bad Food? Tax it, and Subsidize Vegetables,” advocates one of the best ways to combat obesity. Bitterman states that a lot of the unhealthy processed foods are subsidized, making it cheaper to produce, sell, and even consume. The problem is that these processed foods are highly unhealthy; they are high in sugars, fats, and sodium. Bitterman advocates to change the policy around, subsidize fresh food and fresh vegetables instead of the processed food. He states that we could start by subsidizing staple foods, like seasonal greens, whole grain, and fruit, and sell this locally, at drug stores, street corners, convenience stores, etc. This would work perfectly for New York City, where the city itself thrives on local businesses.
However, we can take this policy one step further, changing school lunches. Children, the next generation, are unfortunately the ones overly susceptible to processed foods. During school, the main responsibility of children for the first 18 years of their life, the lunch program which many kids depend on is full of processed and unhealthy foods. In Lucy Komisar’s article, “How the Food Industry Eats Your Kids Lunch,” Komisar explains that the processed food industry is subsidized, and is more cost effectient in providing cheap, unhealthy foods. However, Komisar explains that this isn’t the actual case. Schools may believe that they are saving money by using a private corporation for school lunches, but the reality is that the money they “save” is wasted through bureaucratic issues. There should be a policy change, and advocacy from the federal government to get rid of privatization of school cafeterias. The schools should use their funds, and be helped by the federal government, to hire their own kitchen workforce to prepare fresh food for the children. In this system as it stands, the only ones that stand to profit are the companies providing the fast food. As Komisar states, in this system: “Unfortunately, profit, not health, is the priority of the food service management companies, food processors and even elected officials. Until more parents demand reform of the school lunch system, children will continue to suffer” (Komisar 1). With such high officials like the first lady recognizing and acknowledging the problem, a push to publicizing the school cafeteria, put that into the hands of the schools themselves and provide schools with all the same funding to have their own kitchens, all these policy changes should at least have some support. If this is put into place, the obesity epidemic will take a major blow.
Sources:
The problem with school lunches goes even beyond the simple fact that they serve unhealthy food. In addition to this, school lunch programs include ad campaigns that are quasi-propaganda to convince kids that foods with dubious nutritional benefits are good for them. Most of us probably remember the Got Milk? ads from grade school. They featured famous athletes with milk mustaches, purporting the view that milk is good for you. I remember being pressured by the lunch ladies in my elementary school to take a carton of milk with my lunch everyday (despite being lactose intolerant). However, the claim that milk is good for your bones because it provides calcium and vitamin D is likely unfounded (Carroll). In fact, the high fat content of milk, especially whole milk, might do more damage to one’s health than good (Carroll). The Got Milk? ads were created by Dairy Management, Inc., a nonprofit organization established by the US government to increase dairy consumption (Carroll). This shows that the lobbyists for major agricultural industries not only influence the foods that kids eat at school, but also misinform children about what is and isn’t healthy.
Carroll, Aaron E. “Got Milk? Might Not Be Doing You Much Good.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 17 Nov. 2014. Web. 05 May 2015. .