Public health is becoming an urgent issue nowadays. Some argue that governments should create nutrition and food choice laws to improve public health, while others believe that it is a matter of personal choice and responsibility. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Sample 1 Public Health Is Becoming an Urgent Issue Nowadays
Maintaining health plays an indispensable role in everyone’s life, owing to which it is generally argued whether it should be the responsibility of the administration to create nutrition or not. Both views are discussed in the following, along with my perspective.
On the one hand, there are many reasons why public health is the authority’s responsibility to create laws to maintain health. First and foremost, it is advantageous for their holistic development. This is because if the lawmaker encourages the citizens of the nation to do physical exercise by announcing the reward, then it is fruitful for their not solely fine motor skill ability but also cognitive development. Besides this, the regime should also motivate residents to maintain their health by choosing a balanced diet. Take Canada as an epitome, which showed that every year, the government makes laws to encourage the masses to maintain their health with a select healthy diet. Consequently, it is constructive development and brings drastic improvement in every person’s life.
On the other hand, few masses opine that maintaining public health is the responsibility of individuals in the community. In other words, provided that the masses maintain their health, then it preserves capital as well as money as then government reduce their spending on the health sector, which is beneficial for educational purposes in order to develop the nation. For instance, in 2015, individuals maintained their health by doing exercise, which saved ample money for the nation and justified a boon for the education domain. As a result, it is fruitful for the country’s development.
Having concluded, although the maintenance of public health saves time and money through individuals, the government should make subjects in school to maintain children’s health and encourage the individual to do physical activities which will be beneficial for them.
Sample 2 Public Health Is Becoming an Urgent Issue Nowadays
It has been argued by a few people that to make public health mandatory and for it, a government must make nutrition and food choice laws to improve people’s health. Others disagree and consider that what kind of food people eat is their own choice and they are responsible for their health. In my perspective, it is their own choice as they have the right, and self-realization is better than imposing laws regarding eating food.
According to the first school of thought, to ensure people have good health, the government’s strictness on eating a healthy and fibre-rich diet can work as icing on the cake. Firstly, the intake of unhealthy food will reduce. To elaborate, if the government imposes heavy taxes on food companies that sell fast foods, then people will be less likely to eat such food, and their regular low-fibre diet will occasionally decline. Resultantly, individuals will rely more on a nutritious diet. For instance, the sales of McDonald Domino have reduced due to a hike in price rates of readymade food. Masses go to such places occasionally. Their consumption to eat oily food has fallen.
According to the second school of thought, what kind of food people should eat is a personal choice of people, and they are responsible for anything wrong. Because they know better what food is good and how much they should eat. To explain it, the masses search on the internet about the quantity and ingredients in any food items; then, they eat. Thus they reduce their chances of falling sick after eating a low-fibre diet. Enforcing laws on eating a certain food will only escalate their stress and put their liberty at risk. So, the state’s intervention can do nothing. People can cure themselves if they understand the difference between good and bad food. For example, there are many websites that inform the public to eat the right food. Even some food outlets sell instant food by adding veggies and other herbs, which do not harm individuals’ health. Therefore, people remain more responsible and agile.
To conclude, thus it is apparent that enforcing the government’s laws on unhealthy food items can deter the masses from eating them. However, it is their choice to eat anything because they are aware of the bad consequences of eating unhealthy. Various websites update them on eating packed food by adding nutritious things to ensure better health.
Sample 3 Public Health Is Becoming an Urgent Issue Nowadays
Public health has become a pressing issue with the rise of chronic diseases and lifestyle-related illnesses. There is a debate on whether governments should create nutrition and food choice laws to improve public health or whether it is a matter of personal choice and responsibility. In this essay, I will discuss both views and give my opinion.
On the one hand, some argue that governments should create nutrition and food choice laws to improve public health. They believe that people are not always capable of making healthy choices, and the government has a duty to protect the public from unhealthy foods. For example, some countries have introduced taxes on sugary drinks and foods high in fat to discourage people from consuming them. In addition, some governments have enforced labelling laws, which require manufacturers to disclose the nutritional value of their products. These measures aim to educate people about healthy eating and encourage them to make better food choices. On the other hand, others believe that it is a matter of personal choice and responsibility. They argue that people should have the freedom to choose what they eat, and the government should not intervene in their personal lives. They suggest that education and awareness-raising campaigns are more effective in promoting healthy lifestyles than laws and regulations. Furthermore, they claim that creating laws and regulations could lead to a nanny state, which undermines individual freedoms.
In my opinion, both views have some merit, and a balanced approach is needed. Governments should create laws and regulations to promote healthy eating, but they should not be too restrictive. For example, instead of banning certain foods, they could provide incentives for companies that produce healthier options. They could also improve access to healthy foods by providing subsidies for farmers and setting up farmers’ markets in low-income areas. In addition, education and awareness-raising campaigns are essential to promoting healthy lifestyles. People need to be educated on the benefits of healthy eating and the risks of unhealthy lifestyles. They should be taught how to read food labels and make informed choices about what they eat. Schools and workplaces could also play a role in promoting healthy lifestyles by providing healthy food options and promoting physical activity.
In conclusion, public health is a critical issue, and a balanced approach is needed to promote healthy lifestyles. Governments should create laws and regulations to promote healthy eating, but they should not be too restrictive. Education and awareness-raising campaigns are also essential to promoting healthy lifestyles. By working together, we can create a healthier future for everyone.
Follow Us on IELTSFever Twitter for more updates