Should the government be allowed to take over our eating habits? I think not. Eating whatever foods we want, when we want is part of the freedom the people of the United States are guaranteed. Without this freedom, who are we?

People’s health isn’t based solely on what they eat, but also how much they eat, how often they eat, and how much exercise they do to work off what they eat. If it were the government’s job to monitor the health of the people, they would need to control all these factors. Not only would they need to regulate all those things, but they would also need to change everybody’s genetic make-up. Some people can eat a feast without gaining weight due to a good metabolism, while others who eat the same amount of food end up on the other end of the spectrum.

In John Stossel’s “Food Nannies” segment from his T.V. special “Myths, Lies, and Complete Stupidity,” Stossel looks at the problems that would arise from the government controlling people’s health. He points out if the government created new regulations on what food people can get, it would add costs for restaurants and food markets (who would then need to provide more information on their menus and products). He also mentioned that in a study where people ate out at a restaurant with posted information about their food, they ate more on average due to the knowledge of what they were eating. In this instance, government involvement caused a greater problem rather than solve an old one because we freely eat what we want.

Stossel also mentioned how in 2011, Denmark passed a law that taxed foods with too much saturated fat. The intention of raising prices was to get people to stop buying unhealthy foods. It was soon repealed though, as people started buying replacement goods that were just as unhealthy. And, as one study found, forty-eight percent of Danes bought food from other countries. This lead to a ten percent increase in spending to foreign goods. Sounds like a good idea for the economy, but it reduced their GDP because people were buying less from within the country’s border.

With the United States already trillions of dollars in debt and constantly rising, the government would have a long road ahead of them to keep people spending within the borders after imposing similar food laws. Imports are already a big part of what Americans buy every year and so what’s going to keep us from buying more from other countries if our food taxes were raised?

With these issues, I think it is clear many problems would arise from the government regulating our health. The government would need to spend millions of dollars to get big businesses (like fast food chains and food stores) to change. These charges would then end up back on the American people. How many people will pay more money to change their own habits?

I believe there are other ways the government should deal with public health problems. For one, the government could sponsor or advocate for exercise programs like the NFL’s play 60, and more gym classes in schools. They could also offer promotions for people who become active members of local gyms.

Public health is one issue the government should stay away from. The foods we eat are part of the guaranteed freedom of being Americans. Why should they be allowed to control our everyday habits? Our health is a responsibility in which we need to control, not the government.