Argument Paper Fast Food

Zinczenko is saying that common sense would say it is personal responsibility to be an active eater and know what you are putting in your mouth. In discussions of fast-food obesity, one controversial issue has been the lack of the nutritional facts. On the one hand people should do research before they eat instead of blaming fast-food places. On the other hand the nutritional facts should be placed on the food itself. In my opinion, personal responsibility should be taken for what you eat because fast-food places are not forcing you to eat their food. For instance common sense says something that is dunked in grease and cooked in five minutes cannot be good for you. Becoming obese from fast-food is the result of no self-control. Grease in itself contains many calories and causes many problems with blood pressure, cholesterol and type two diabetes. Zinczenko states, â€Å"Today According to the National Institutes of Health, type 2 diabetes accounts for at least 30 percent of all new childhood cases of diabetes on this country† (Zinczenko 154). Type 2 diabetes is obesity related and a serious disease. Poulin 2 Common sense tells you eating two meals a day, in a fast-food restaurant, will cause you to gain weight. This unhealthy weight gain tells people that there is a problem to the way they are eating and it is not the washer shrinking their jeans. Instead of walking into McDonalds kids can walk into Subway and try a sandwich that is healthier and cost about the same as the huge meals they can get at McDonalds. There are healthier alternatives that re just as fast and taste as good as burger joints. Although I grant that many people might say there is no way of knowing how many calories are in fast-food meal has because of the lack of nutritional labels, labels are readily available on fast-food websites. The labels would not change the fact that it is personal responsibility to know that something that has been smothered in grease has no nutritional value. On the one hand, I agree with people that labels should be put on fast-food explaining what is in the food. But on the other hand, I still insist that people should do the research if labels are the main concern of nutritional values. Just because people have labels explaining the fat content does not mean they will stop eating the food. This is where personal responsibility needs to come into play. When people find out what really is in the food and the content of fat people need to be active and make the right decision to not add fast-food into their daily diets. Self-control is a huge factor here and people need to take charge, putting themselves in charge of a healthy lifestyle. In the end it is only the consumer who can control what they consume not the companies and blame cannot be put on that one party. Proponents of fast-food restaurants causing obesity are right to argue that the food causes you to gain weight when you eat it regularly, it is cheap, it is easily accessible, and it is catered to children. But they exaggerate when they claim that fast-food is the number one reason for child obesity in the United States. Poulin 3 You can argue that children who sit in front of video games and computers all day long are a huge contributing factor to the obesity rate. Their lack of activity can cause pounds to pile on and that has nothing to do with McDonalds Fast-food. For instance fast-food has always made me feel sick to my stomach. My common sense would tell me that as good as it does taste my body does not like fast-food. When I was younger I gained a lot of weight because I would eat at McDonalds every chance I got. I was unaware that I could be making better choices and choose not to eat it. Kids today are uneducated on how to make healthier choices and live healthier lives with the influences of fast-food. Zinczenko states, â€Å"But most of the teenagers who live, as I once did, on a fast-food diet won’t turn their lives around: They’ve crossed under the golden arches to a likely fate of lifetime obesity† (Zinczenko 154). If the country believes that fast-food is the cause of childhood obesity then why do we still continue to eat it? People need to realize labels are not put on the food because if people really knew what was in the food they would not continue to eat it. Again that is where common sense should tell you that you should not eat fast-food. Although at a first glance People, including young and old, might say that fast-food is the cause of being obese. But on a closer inspection it is really the individuals fault. For example people are so quick to blame fast-food restaurants for making them obese that they jump right to suing the corporation, but are they actually doing something about the obesity. Zinczenko mentions in his article how one meal can contain â€Å"up around 1,040 calories which is half of the government’s recommended daily calorie intake. And that doesn’t take into account the 450-calorie super-size Coke† (Zinczenko 155). The calorie intake should tell anyone that eating this way and especially eating this way twice a day is extremely unhealthy and fattening. People need Poulin 4 to speak up and demand labels. Zinczenko says, â€Å"They would do well to protect themselves, and their customers, by providing the nutrition information people need to make informed choices about their products. Without such warnings, we’ll see more sick, obese children and angrier, litigious parents† (Zinczenko 155). Parents need to be more active in their children’s lives and teach them about healthy life styles that way in the future generations can be much healthier. In conclusion people need to take personal responsibility for their own weight and stop forcing the blame on fast-food corporations. Common sense should tell you that greasy food is not good for you and that it has no nutritional value. Many people can say that labels are the cause of obesity because they are uniformed about what they are eating. Labels are readily available at any fast-food chain and on their websites. People need to speak up and come up with a solution to this issue rather than be part of the problem. Common sense also says that if it is cooked in grease it is a good chance it is covered in fat. People are responsible for their own lives and they need to stop blaming others for their short comings. Ultimately what is at stake here is a healthier generation.

Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methodologies Essay

Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methodologies - Essay Example Unlike research studies in other fields, studies in health and social sciences involving the use of human subjects requires greater caution. The Helsinki Declaration of the World Medical Association declares that, though progress in health-related fields requires research and experimentation involving the use of human subjects, considerations related to the 'well being of the human subjects should take precedence over science and the society' and that the primary objective of such studies, involving human subjects, is to better understand and improve on diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, and to better understand the causes and progression of diseases (WMA, 2000). Furthermore, the drive towards evidence-based practice in several fields has also meant that professional decision must be made on the basis of the best available evidence (Crawford et al., 2002). Putting all these factors together, it becomes obvious that making use of the most appropriate research instruments/methodology is not only important for the validity of the final result, but also for the utility and relevance of the result findings to professional practice. This fact has meant that deciding the best research methodology for any particular research effort is one of the most important decisions of a researcher. Obviously in response to this trend, over the decades, several research methods have been developed, while existing ones have been continually refined to meet the demands of the modern researcher. However, quantitative and qualitative research methodologies though composed of an array of several, and at times contrasting principles; have stood the test of time, in a number of research fields (Murphy, 2000). Therefore, the purpose of this essay is to argue in favour of the use of qualitative and quantitative research methods/methodologies to assess 100 risk factors collected over a period of five years based on interviews and considered as the primary data for a research study. To achieve this, the rest of the paper will be structured thus: the next section will define and briefly explain the concepts of qualitative and quantitative research methodologies; this will be followed by an analysis of the difference and similarities of these two methods of inquiry. The third section will examine the benefits of using qualitative and quantitative research methods in the research study at hand that is, assessing 100 risk factors collected over a five year period through interviews; in the light of other research methods like phenomenology and others. This is intended to show that qualitative and quantitative research methods are better suited for the study at hand. The last part of the essay wil l present the concluding remarks. According to Lindsay (2002), considering the fact that the ultimate goal of risk assessment is to achieve a health impact, through understanding the aetiology of disease conditions to effect a reduction in mortality and morbidity due to the risks, and thus, achieve an improvement in health (p.571), research studies involved with risk assessment are therefore better presented and more useful in quantifiable terms. As a result,

Deism Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Deism - Essay Example Moreover, belief in a miraculous and/or mysterious representation of the divine cannot and should not be viewed as something unique to monotheism. As can readily be understood from a cursory examination of the Hindu or Greek pantheon, a direct level of interference on the part of the gods is evidenced throughout the traditions and scriptures that these individual religious interpretations have developed. From such a long and historical/traditional understanding of what defines God/gods, it comes as something of a surprise that the belief system of deism ever came to any prominence whatsoever. As a means of understanding, explaining, defining, and drawing a level of inference with regards to how deism affected, and continues to affect the world in which we live, this brief analysis will seek to engage the reader with a more well-rounded and complete understanding of this belief system; as well as the key factors that contributed to it and the impacts that this particular belief system continues to engender. As with many historical theories and definitions of the world, deism was born out of a particular historical movement and time. In such a manner, within 17th and 18th century Europe, as well as the United States, the Age of Enlightenment was taking place. Within this particular time, the means by which the Catholic and Protestant churches of Europe could control and manage the means by which individuals thought and integrated with new and developing knowledge was severely and indefinitely curtailed. Nearly each and every movement of human history up until this point in time had moved humanity closer and closer to technological development, scientific discovery, industrial change, and a litany of other factors. Within such an understanding, the reader can come to the clear and definitive understanding of the fact that deism was ultimately borne out of the zeitgeist that was experienced during this unique era in human history. From a definitive standpoint, deis m is ultimately the belief that reason and observation alone are in and of themselves sufficient to determine whether or not God/gods exist (s). Furthermore, deism sought to reject prior norms that have long been accepted within Europe and the remainder of the world; namely the belief that revelation in and of itself could be utilized as a type of authority for knowledge, the belief and understanding that the divine regularly integrated with the human, the belief that Scripture was ultimately flawless, the belief in miracles, and many other standbys that had traditionally been understood by Christianity of various denominations to define the way in which God interacted with his creation. As is so prone to occur with religious interpretations and ideologies, deism soon came to be a way in which sociological factors of interpersonal and governmental relationships were determined. What is meant by this is that the Age of Enlightenment was a tumultuous period in world history in which t he constraints of both government and church were shocked in favor of reason and the human accrual of knowledge. It should not be understood by any means that this level of scientific and exploratory knowledge seeking is in and of itself bad. Ultimately, the spirit that gave rise to deism is the same one that helps to develop modern