Friday, May 13, 2011

Comment on a colleague's work

Brandyss Drost is one of my classmates who wrote an interesting commentary piece on a bill about banning an unhealthy ingredient, artificial trans-fat, in Illinois. Brandyss believes that it is not the U.S. Government responsibility to prohibit an ingredient. I think Brandyss made a compelling argument against this bill. Right at the beginning there is brief explanation about the bill in question and its context. Then there is a short background about the ingredient that is going to be ban from restaurants and bakeries. 

However, I disagree that the Government has no business getting involve in Americans food choice. The food regulations are there for a reason. Not everyone is aware of all the harmful aspects of eating trans-fat. Most of us do not bother reading all the fine print ingredients at the back of our snacks. Moreover, some of  us who bothers reading the label probably won’t understand all the ingredients and their benefits or harms to our body.

If this Government's decision would result in lowering teenager’s obesity rate, why do we think it is such a bad idea? Isn’t it better to have one less poison out there on supermarket shelves? If the “ingredient has been tied to 30,000 (U.S.) heart disease deaths a year” what is so wrong by banning it? I think we have to be thankful for a government who is concerns about its citizen’s health.

No comments:

Post a Comment