Free «Reasons to Exclude Soda From Food» UK Essay Paper
There is a debate whether to exclude soda from food, based on the advantages and disadvantages of excluding it. These advantages and disadvantages have been come to after an evaluation of the benefits and negative causes of the product. The evaluation was done through SNAP, a program run by the agricultural department. Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is a program meant to empower low income earners to buy foods needed for good health. This program is designed to enrich the nutrition of Americans regardless of their levels of income.
The author of this article, Jonathan Shenkin, gives the advantages of excluding soda from foods. These advantages are the support points for the proposers. To begin with, excluding soda from foods will cut down, the budget of SNAP. This reduction on cost will enable SNAP to invest in more helpful programs than sweet drinks. Jonathan argues that since SNAP uses 4 million dollars in the purchase of sweet drinks (Sorensen, 2012). This is a lot of money that can be put into more beneficial use. The 4 million dollars used in the purchase of soda can be used to buy fruits and vegetables which add nutritional value to meals. Secondly, research has shown that consumption of soda increases the risk of obesity (Jonathan, 2010). The world at large is struggling to reduce nutritional diseases, and, therefore, with soda as a causative of obesity, should not be support as food (Angela et al., 2007). Obesity is the base at which most nutritional diseases arise. With an increased risk of obesity, the society is at a high risk of cases of blood pressure, heart diseases, diabetes and many others. Since the health of the public is at question, then, it would be rational for SNAP to exclude soda and in its stead increase the budget on fruits (Sorensen, 2012). Third, research also shows that soda consumption increases the chances of tooth decay in children. Being a sugar drink, soda is not health for teeth. Therefore, it would be advisable for SNAP to exclude it from foods and buy other healthy foods (Jonathan, 2010). Tooth decay is a problem that can be regulated through avoidance of sweet foods and drinks. Since SNAP is meant to benefit low income earners, it would not have achieved its obligation, if what it offers causes health complications (Jonathan, 2010). Health is a priority in all government programs, therefore if soda is undermining this priority, then should not be supported by government programs. Fourth, SNAP is a program meant to provide nutritional foods to low income earners. Soda and other sweet drinkers have very low if any nutrition value, therefore, its availability at SNAP premises contradicts SNAP mission. Soda adds no nutrition value to its consumers; thus, need not be provided by a government nutrition program (Angela et al., 2007). Lastly, due to political complexity, SNAP ought to be restructured to ensure it provides nutrition food to low income earners as it was designed to do. To enhance the restructuring, the institute of medicine should carry out an analysis, then advice SNAP appropriately (Sorensen, 2012).
In conclusion, according to Jonathan, it is inevitable to exclude soda from foods. In my opinion, soda should be excluded from foods since it adds very low value to human life compared to its adverse effects. As a result of its negligible benefits to its consumers, and notable effects, it should not be sponsored by a government program such as SNAP. Literary, provision of soda at SNAP premises, contradicts SNAP objective of providing nutritious food. The nutrition value of soda is negligible, thus cannot be termed as nutritious.
Do you need professionally written papers?
Place your order on our website to get help from qualified experts!Order now