It is commonly believed that implementing laws relating to people’s nutrition and food choices can greatly improve public health. Others believe it is a matter of personal choice and responsibility. This essay will discuss both perspectives before giving the reason why I am of the former school of thought
Admittedly, freedom of food choice is part of human rights, since food preferences and tastes are unique to each person. No governmental organization is in a position to intervene or restrict people from consuming the foods of their choice. For example, pre-prepared meals and convenience foods can cater to the needs of those who have to cope with a fast-paced lifestyle, providing convenience in terms of time saved on food preparation. As a result, this indicates that the responsibility for maintaining a balanced diet lies with each individual, who plans their daily meals.
However, it is necessary for governments to intervene in implementing laws concerning people’s nutrition and food choices. If nutritional information is clearly displayed on food packaging, this will enable consumers to make more informed choices. Besides, it is also important to have strict regulation of the fast food industry through taxing unhealthy food options such as junk food. By doing so, governments can curb its rising consumption and force fast food restaurants to diversify their menus by including healthier options such as green salad or whole-grain burgers. Consequently, through these macro-interventions, this can encourage healthier behavior change towards a more balanced diet. Therefore, ensuring public health on a larger scale, regardless of their own level of awareness
In conclusion, I am firmly convinced that although people have their own preference to the food and have their own responsibilities for their health, governments’ intervention plays a more crucial role in improving public health.