More and more people are becoming seriously overweight. Some people think a solution can be to increase the price of fattening foods. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Sample 1:

In today’s society, the issue of obesity is becoming increasingly prevalent, with more and more people struggling with serious weight problems. Some individuals argue that the solution lies in raising the price of fattening foods. I completely agree with this viewpoint, and this essay will elaborate on my reasons.

Firstly, increasing the price of unhealthy, weight-inducing food items can discourage excessive consumption and encourage individuals to opt for healthier alternatives. When unhealthy food items become more expensive, people are more likely to reconsider their choices and seek out more nutritious options. For instance, if the cost of a sugary beverage is significantly higher than that of a bottle of water, individuals may be more inclined to choose the latter, thereby reducing their calorie intake. By creating a financial disincentive for unhealthy food choices, people are more likely to make healthier decisions for the benefit of their well-being.

Secondly, raising the price of fatty foods can help offset the societal costs associated with obesity. Obesity not only takes a toll on individuals’ health but also places a burden on healthcare systems and economies. By increasing the price of unhealthy foods, the revenue generated can be allocated towards initiatives and programs aimed at promoting public health and preventing obesity. This could include funding educational campaigns, subsidizing healthier food options, and supporting fitness and wellness programs. Ultimately, the financial resources generated from higher prices can be reinvested into combating obesity and creating a healthier society.

In conclusion, I firmly support the idea of increasing the prices of fattening foods as a solution to the growing issue of obesity, given how this policy can discourage excessive consumption and promote healthier choices among consumers, and how the additional revenue generated can be utilized to fund obesity prevention programs and alleviate the societal costs linked with this pressing health concern.

Sample 2:

There could be said to be an increasing number of individuals who are becoming obese. Recent policy decisions have proposed that a price hike on fattening foods be implemented in order to dissuade people from consuming them and thereby curbing the obesity epidemic. I personally think that while this measure might help, it would not be nearly as effective as other measures such as portion control.

Whilst there is no doubt in my mind that making fattening sugary foods more expensive would certainly curb the rise in obesity, it is still uncertain that it would necessarily be as effective as we might expect due to the price inelasticity of fast-food products. Some might state the law of supply and demand as a reason why we might expect sugary food consumption to decrease when prices rise, but behavioral economics might propose that people would be more than eager to hand over more money for the fattening foods that they enjoy. This is why other addictive substances such as cigarettes, for example, have also been shown to be somewhat immune to price increases.

Furthermore, a larger issue may actually be portion control, as having larger portions in each meal could actually encourage people to eat more. Particularly in fast food chains, food portions are exorbitantly large leading to each meal being calorically higher than normal meals. If portions are decreased for every meal, even if the price is lowered, it could lead to people consuming less calories per meal and thus becoming less obese. Studies have shown that by making bowls smaller, for example, individuals also consume less food. If governments apply this method to fast food restaurants, it could potentially decrease obesity rates more effectively than price hikes could.

Overall, I argue that whilst increasing the price of fattening foods might help to a degree, I argue that other options such as portion control might be more effective.  

Sample 3:

An alarming rate of obesity in many countries has raised great concern regarding the potential for charging a higher price on fattening foods to alleviate this healthcare problem. In my view, while I partly agree with the notion that a rise in unhealthy food costs can address the issue due to its short-term effect, I firmly believe that public campaigns can be a more viable and sustainable solution.

There is no denying that pricing fattening foods at a higher cost can demonstrate some effectiveness in reducing the risk of obesity. That is to say, if cholesterol-rich burgers or sugary sodas are priced at a premium, these items will become less affordable for consumers to purchase, therefore reducing the likelihood of being overweight in the general population. However, it is important to recognise that this pricing method may be limited due to the enduring appeal of high-fat and high-sugar foods, such as fries or doughnuts. In other words, the irresistible temptation posed by these unhealthy processed foods may compel consumers, especially those who regularly indulge in snacking, to continue making purchases, regardless of their unreasonably high price.

Alternatively, other measures with far-reaching impacts should be given greater consideration. One of the most effective and sustainable approaches to combating obesity is to implement comprehensive public campaigns. These government-operated education programmes promise to reshape community awareness and attitudes towards foods high in cholesterol and sugar and the associated health risks. Moreover, including public consultations with nutrition experts can provide valuable insights into a healthy and balanced diet. By gradually transitioning from fat-heavy to more nourishing food options, individuals can make better-informed choices for their daily diet, leading to a significant decrease in obesity rates over the long run.

In conclusion, I partly agree with the implementation of increased costs for fattening foods, as it can fall short due to the strong craving for snacking in many individuals. Instead, public healthcare education involving nutritionists can hold greater value in addressing the issue of overweight, thanks to its long-term impact on educating the community about proper nutrition.

Sample 4:

As a large number of people are suffering from severe obesity in many countries around the world, various proposals to alleviate this issue have been put forward. Among them, the idea of increasing the cost of fatty foods is being considered. In my perspective, although this suggestion can be effective for the impoverished demographic, it may only partially solve such a complicated problem.

The most compelling explanation is that this practice can be a surefire way to reduce fattening food consumption. A surge in the price of a product in this case, fatty foods can potentially discourage consumers from purchasing it. As a result, this change may promote healthier food options when people stop consuming greasy meals and opt for a more nutritious diet, leading to a drop in obesity rates. However, this measure may have little to no effect on wealthy buyers who can afford those foods regardless of prices. In other words, it is likely that only the less financially privileged classes are influenced by the price hike in high-fat food.

More importantly, the suggestion to inflate the cost of fatty meals may fail to address this health crisis as there are various factors resulting in weight gain. It is true that some people can be overweight due to either their metabolism or their lack of exercise. Regarding the former, even if those with fast metabolism eat less food containing a lot of fat, there is a high chance that they still gain weight as they need to consume a larger portion of food. Similarly, people leading a sedentary lifestyle may still find it challenging to lose weight as they usually do not participate in any physical activities to burn calories, irrespective of the number of fatty meals they have.

In conclusion, for the foregoing discussions, it can be argued that while the rise in fattening food prices can be a viable solution to a certain extent, other measures need to be taken to comprehensively mitigate the roots of obesity.

Sample 5:

The increasing prevalence of obesity worldwide has led some people to propose that the price of high-fat foods should be increased to address the issue. While I agree that raising the cost of unhealthy food items might have some positive impacts on curbing obesity rates, I believe that more comprehensive solutions are necessary.

Raising the price of fattening foods could be an effective deterrent for some individuals due to the basic economic principle of supply and demand. By making unhealthy foods more expensive, the government can encourage people to seek healthier and more cost-effective alternatives, thus promoting better eating habits. This approach has already been implemented in some countries, such as Mexico and Hungary, through taxes on sugary drinks and junk food, with some partial success. However, I am unconvinced that this strategy alone can significantly reduce obesity rates, as it does not address the root causes of poor dietary choices and sedentary lifestyles.

To me, a more holistic approach to combating the rising number of overweight individuals would involve implementing educational programs and promoting physical activity. Education plays a crucial role in informing the public about proper nutrition and the dangers of excessive weight gain, empowering people to make better choices. This can be achieved by incorporating nutrition education into school curriculums, offering community workshops, and using public health campaigns to raise awareness. In addition, creating safe and accessible spaces for physical activity, such as parks and recreational facilities, can inspire people to adopt more active lifestyles. Similarly, public policies that support the development of bike lanes, pedestrian-friendly streets, and subsidized sports programs can contribute to fostering a culture of health and fitness.

In conclusion, while increasing the price of fattening foods may be a useful tool in the fight against obesity, it is not a comprehensive solution to the problem. From my perspective, A multifaceted approach, including education and promotion of physical activity, should be prioritized to effectively address this alarming health crisis.

Sample 6:

The prevalence of severe obesity is on the rise, prompting the suggestion that raising the cost of high-calorie foods could be a potential solution. However, I believe this suggestion may not lead to a significant reduction in obesity rates for two main reasons.

To begin with, although prices do impact the accessibility of high-calorie foods, they do not solely determine people’s choices to consume such foods. The hectic lifestyle that characterises modern society also significantly influences these decisions. Given the quick and easy availability of fattening foods, they often become the go-to choice for many individuals, including office workers and students, seeking the convenience that aligns with their busy schedules. Another crucial aspect is emotional eating, whereby the consumption of calorie-dense foods triggers the release of brain chemicals like dopamine, providing temporary mood enhancement. Consequently, individuals may turn to these foods as a coping mechanism to address negative emotions such as stress, anxiety, boredom, or sadness, regardless of their prices. Hence, even if the prices of fattening foods were to rise, individuals who are constrained by time and those seeking emotional solace would still gravitate towards consuming them.

Furthermore, it is crucial to recognize that weight gain is not solely attributed to consuming fattening foods. Obesity stems from various underlying causes. Firstly, a lack of physical activity and a sedentary lifestyle can significantly contribute to weight gain. When individuals engage in limited physical activity, their calorie expenditure decreases, leading to the accumulation of excess body fat. Additionally, genetic factors play a role in an individual’s predisposition to obesity. People with a family history of obesity may face greater challenges in managing their weight. Therefore, simply focusing on reducing the consumption of fattening foods would be insufficient in effectively addressing the issue.

In conclusion, I strongly disagree with the notion that merely increasing the prices of calorie-dense foods would effectively resolve the issue of severe obesity. This approach falls short in addressing both the individual choices made and the fundamental causes contributing to obesity.

Sample 7:

As is known to all, the problem of obesity is haunting the public, with an increasing number of overweight populations nowadays. While some people opine that increasing the price of fattening food can be an effective solution, I would argue that the other means can better fundamentally address the issue.

Admittedly, raising the price of food, especially those directly related to corpulence, can refrain people’s purchase desire to some extent. Considering relatively higher costs for such kind of fattening food, such as burgers and cakes, residents may reduce consumption gradually, therefore leading to less fatty food lovers and accordingly a less overweight population in the long run.

However, this solution can hardly uproot the obesity issue since it is impossible to stop public’s crazy pursuits for fattening food when they have not raised the consciousness of healthy lifestyle. Under the circumstances, higher prices merely exert considerable pressure on ordinary customers, rather than achieve the goal of dealing with the problem. Therefore, enhancing public awareness can radically play a pivotal role in tackling the obesity issue. For one thing, through non-commercial advertising on TV shows, busy office workers can be motivated to exercise on a regular basis, which is an effective method to promote healthy lifestyles. For another, holding lectures on mental health is also crucial for the public to change their mindset and get rid of overweight problems caused by excessive living stress. If they are able to relieve their pressure through adopting other efficient measures, fatty food is no longer the kind of pleasure they can hardly abandon.

In conclusion, although pricey fattening food can partly help resolve the obesity problem, people should change their lifestyles and mindsets to fully eradicate the issue.

Sample 8:

The fact that the number of obese people is on the rise has become a concerning issue for the public. While many argue that higher prices on fattening foods can considerably address this issue, I somewhat contend that there are more effective and sustainable solutions to the problem.

I concede that raising the prices of fattening foods can discourage their consumption to a certain extent. When faced with expensive prices of such products, people tend to turn to more affordable, healthier alternatives like vegetables, fruits and home-cooked meals. This is particularly relevant during the recent economic recession when the majority of consumers are prioritising budget-friendly options. By reducing the intake of unhealthy food and embracing a healthier diet, people can lower the risks of becoming overweight as well as developing diseases associated with it as a result.

However, I consider that increasing fattening food prices alone has limited impacts on combating the issue. It is widely acknowledged that besides food-related factors, sedentary behaviours also contribute to overweight problems. If people were to reduce their intake of fast food without adopting an active lifestyle, the overall improvement in their health would be minimal. Moreover, for those who are heavily reliant on junk food, this approach can be seen as unfair and could potentially lead to social discontent within this group.

Therefore, I believe that to effectively and sustainably tackle the issue, a multifaceted approach is needed. Organising free educational workshops and programs can help raise awareness about the detrimental effects of unhealthy food while highlighting the impressive benefits of highly nutritious products. Equipped with such in-depth knowledge, people tend to become more conscious about the food they consume on a daily basis. Providing accessible places to engage people in regular exercises is another beneficial approach. Constructing more parks and sport centres, for example, is a real necessity that motivates people to incorporate physical activities into their daily routines.

In conclusion, while raising prices on high-fat food may help lower the possibility of becoming overweight, it is not a comprehensive initiative. I mostly believe that a holistic solution to this problem should involve educational campaigns about food consumption and the development of exercise facilities.

Sample 9:

In the light of the current rise in the number of obese people, some suggest that increasing the price of high-fat foods can be an effective solution. I mostly agree with this suggestion given the fact that it holds the potential to decrease the consumption of these foods although it may fail to tackle the factor regarding inactive lifestyles that contribute to obesity.

My first rationale is that an increase in the price of fatty foods can demotivate potential customers. It is true that many buyers are sensitive to changes in prices, thus an increase in the cost of fat-laden options is likely to discourage their purchase. This price surge will prompt individuals to reduce the frequency and quantity of their purchases, reducing the overall consumption and eventually the likelihood of obesity.

Additional reasoning for my support of the price increase is that a major contributor to the rise in the consumption of fattening dishes is the appealing advertising campaigns. These are often run by restaurants and other food providers to boost their sales. However, the drop in consumption resulting from the rise in product prices will make these businesses less profitable, forcing them to cut down their budget on these campaigns. Consequently, with fewer advertisements promoting high-fat foods, less people will be tempted into buying and consuming them.

However, I concede that higher prices for affected foods might not be an ultimately effective solution to the issue of obesity. This is primarily due to the fact that people can still become obese when consuming fewer fatty foods, if they embrace the sedentary lifestyle which involves a minimum amount of physical activity that helps burn the excess fat in their body.

In conclusion, I mostly agree with the idea of raising the prices of fatty foods to address the problem of obesity. The increased prices will effectively discourage consumers from making purchases and lead food companies to reduce their advertising efforts for such foods; however, this solution does not address another cause of obesity which is the lack of physical activity in daily life. Therefore, a comprehensive measure would be increasing high-fat foods’ prices while concurrently encouraging people to engage in regular physical exercises.

Sample 10:

There is a growing issue in our society of people becoming dangerously overweight. Some people propose that increasing the cost of high-calorie foods can offer a solution to this problem. However, I strongly disagree with this opinion.

Firstly, increasing the price of fattening foods may not necessarily lead to a decrease in consumption. People may continue to purchase these foods, even at a higher price, as they are often more affordable and convenient than healthier alternatives. Furthermore, many people who struggle with weight issues often have underlying psychological or emotional factors that drive them to overeat. For example, an individual with a mental health disorder may turn to food as a coping mechanism, leading to an eating disorder. In cases such as this, simply increasing the price of fattening foods will not address the root cause of their overeating behavior, and they may continue to consume unhealthy food options.

Moreover, increasing the price of fattening foods may disproportionately affect low-income individuals who may already struggle to afford healthier food options. For instance, a low-income family may rely on fast food and other unhealthy, high-calorie options due to the lower cost compared to healthier foods. If the prices of these foods increase, they may no longer be able to afford them. This could lead to a situation where those who are already economically disadvantaged are further marginalized and may even be forced to rely on even cheaper, unhealthier food options.

In conclusion, while it may be tempting to think that increasing the price of fattening foods is a simple solution to the problem of people becoming overweight, it fails to address the root causes of the issue and may disproportionately affect low-income individuals.

Sample 11:

Obesity rates have been steadily rising, raising concerns about the overall well-being of individuals. To address this issue, some argue that increasing the price of high-calorie foods would provide a solution. I believe that this approach is insufficient at best.

On one hand, raising the price of fattening foods can certainly produce a positive impact on curbing the obesity epidemic. It is quite obvious that excessive consumption is mostly traced back to the availability and affordability of unhealthy food options. By increasing the price of these items, individuals will be deterred from frequent purchases, as higher price generally leads to reduced demand. Consequently, this measure may encourage people to make healthier food choices, which usually include fruits, vegetables, whole grains and lean meats, leading to a reduction in obesity rates.

On the other hand, there are limitations to the effectiveness of price manipulation, mostly concerning the equality in its application. The socio-economic factor plays a crucial role here, as individuals from lower-income backgrounds may still find it challenging to afford healthier alternatives. Additionally, price increase alone fails to address the root causes of obesity, such as the lack of education on nutrition and limited access to exercise facilities. Therefore, solely relying on price hikes may not yield comprehensive and long-lasting results.

From my perspective, while raising the price of fattening foods can be a step in the right direction, it is crucial to supplement it with other comprehensive measures. Public awareness campaigns on healthy eating habits and the importance of regular exercise should be implemented on a national scale. Moreover, the government must spare no effort to improve the accessibility and affordability of nutritious food options, particularly in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas. Combining these initiatives with price increases can create a more holistic approach to combating obesity.

In conclusion, although raising the price of high-calorie foods may discourage their consumption and have some positive effects on reducing obesity rates, it should not be considered a standalone solution. A multi-faceted approach that includes education, accessibility and affordability of healthier food choices is necessary for long-term success.

Sample 12:

The escalating issue of obesity has sparked debate over solutions, including raising prices on unhealthy foods. I believe this strategy, while not a panacea, forms part of a multifaceted approach to tackling obesity, alongside education and accessibility to healthier alternatives.

Increasing the cost of high-calorie, low-nutrient foods can indeed serve as a deterrent, making them less accessible to the general populace. Economic disincentives have historically influenced consumer behaviour, as seen in the tobacco industry, where higher prices significantly curbed smoking rates. A parallel can be drawn with fattening foods; by making them less economically attractive, we might encourage healthier eating habits. However, this approach alone is simplistic. It fails to address deeper societal and psychological factors that contribute to obesity, such as stress, lack of education about nutrition, and the availability of healthy options. Without addressing these root causes, the problem may persist or manifest in other unhealthy behaviours.

Moreover, focusing solely on price increases overlooks the necessity of fostering a culture that values nutrition and physical well-being. Education plays a crucial role in this. By implementing comprehensive nutritional education programs and ensuring access to affordable, healthy food options, we can empower individuals to make informed decisions about their diets. This, combined with price adjustments, could create a more effective strategy for combating obesity. Communities need environments that support healthy choices, including safe, accessible spaces for physical activity and supermarkets stocked with fresh produce.

In conclusion, while increasing the price of fattening foods might contribute to the fight against obesity, it should not stand alone. A holistic approach that includes education, accessibility to healthier options, and societal support for a culture of well-being is essential. By adopting such a comprehensive strategy, we can address the multifaceted nature of obesity and move towards a healthier society.

Sample 13:

The alarming rise in obesity rates, where people are becoming seriously overweight, has fueled debates on effective solutions. A popular proposal calls for raising the prices of high-calorie foods to reduce consumption. While this fiscal strategy has some merit, I argue that it is overly simplistic, neglects the impact on economically disadvantaged groups, and fails to address the multifaceted nature of the obesity epidemic.

In the lexicon of economic theory, the principles of supply and demand are more than theoretical constructs; they wield an undeniable influence over consumer behavior. This has been conspicuously validated by Mexico’s sugar tax policy, which triggered a marked decline in soda sales. Yet, the seemingly resplendent success of such a fiscal strategy masks the bleaker and more complex realities of socioeconomic inequality. Raising the cost of calorie-rich foods could inadvertently instate a 'nutritional divide,' making balanced diets a rarified luxury that only the affluent can regularly afford, thus entrenching a cycle of poverty and deteriorating health.

On the other side of the coin, the mounting complexities tied to the surge in obesity rates - where people are becoming seriously overweight - cannot be solved by economics alone. Scandinavian countries, in spite of their elevated food prices, demonstrate remarkably lower obesity prevalence. The secret lies in a multi-pronged public health strategy that extends far beyond economic disincentives. It encompasses educational campaigns, meticulously designed urban spaces conducive to physical activity, and stringent food-labeling laws that are transparent and informative. These varied elements synergistically forge a nuanced, comprehensive strategy, transcending economic solutions to offer a socially equitable and sustainable approach to a pervasive public health crisis.

In summary, the notion of augmenting food prices, while superficially appealing, is myopic and fraught with economic inequities. The genuine panacea resides in an integrative, multidisciplinary blueprint that combines fiscal levers with educational and environmental reform, thereby ensuring a sustainable and inclusive resolution to this burgeoning health epidemic.

Sample 14:

The escalating prevalence of obesity has become a pressing public health concern, affecting millions globally. A segment of society contends that surging the prices of high-calorie, unhealthy foods could serve as an effective deterrent. However, although economic intervention like increasing the price of high-calorie foods has merit, I assert that it's a superficial remedy that disproportionately affects lower-income families and overlooks broader, systemic factors such as educational programs and comprehensive public health policies.

The theory of supply and demand suggests that inflating the prices of calorie-laden foods would likely lead to a decline in their consumption—a point vividly illustrated by Mexico's sugar tax, which significantly curbed soda sales. However, such a strategy has its drawbacks; it disproportionately burdens those in lower socioeconomic tiers who often depend on cheap, unhealthy foods. This could perpetuate a form of dietary elitism, where nutritious meals become a luxury only the wealthy can afford, thus sustaining a cycle of poverty and deteriorating health.

On the flip side, obesity is a complex issue with a myriad of contributing factors that extend beyond simple economics. For instance, Scandinavian countries maintain lower obesity rates despite high food prices, a success attributed to comprehensive public health initiatives that encompass educational outreach, city planning that encourages physical activities, and strict food labelling laws. Therefore, a more integrated, multifaceted approach is essential. Initiatives like Singapore's "Healthier Dining Program," which incentivizes eateries to offer balanced food choices, showcase how socially inclusive, varied strategies can lead to sustainable improvements in both individual and societal health.

In conclusion, while the economic tactic of raising prices for unhealthy foods shows promise in curbing consumption, a holistic and inclusive strategy, incorporating educational programs, urban planning, and incentivized healthy eating options, offers a more sustainable and equitable solution for combating this multifaceted public health crisis.

Sample 15:

The problem of overweight is one of the most troublesome signs of deteriorating public health. Many people are suffering from obesity, and some hold the opinion that the effective remedy is to raise the cost of unhealthy food. While I agree that this action may bring certain merits, one could argue that there are far more suitable solutions.

On the one hand, it is advisable to reduce the obesity rate by increasing fattening food’s price due to the correlation between fast food and health. Since people are living in a fast-paced society, fast food chains are becoming more ubiquitous and cheaper in order to satisfy customers’ demand. If the price of junk food goes up and nutritious options are more widely available, there is a likelihood that fewer people would opt for the unhealthy ones. Obviously, when the demand for fattening meals goes down, this can help minimize the risks of contracting obesity.

On the other hand, one would contend that a more drastic measure to combat the obesity crisis starts from the family. This is because parents should act as role models for children to imitate by cooking healthy home-cooked meals and make sure the whole family has sufficient physical activities on a daily basis. Mothers can substitute ready-made meals and fizzy drinks with food with less fat and sugary contents, fresh vegetables, or fruits. Moreover, the family can schedule a suitable timeframe to walk or play sports, which not only helps with weight control but also can tighten family bonds. As a result, it is undeniable that the effectiveness of the solution to impose a tax on fast food is pale in comparison to the proposed initiative.

In conclusion, it is true that obesity is growing at an alarming rate. Establishing a well-balanced eating habit from the family is proven to be more effective in handling this problem instead of focusing only on raising the price of unhealthy ready-made meals. Unless people take action now, the younger generation shall be outlived by their parents and even grandparents.

Sample 16:

In this century, obesity is considered a global issue because of its consequences among all aged people. Many claim that the rise in the cost of fattening foods should solve this problem. This essay agrees with the statement as the increase in price makes people less affordable to eat out and also, they begin to appreciate food cooked at home.

One main reason for the reduction in consumption of fattening foods is affordability. It is a known fact that children are the major victims of obesity, and they inherit the condition when they grow up. For instance, the rise in the price of street foods would make the kids stop or eat less as they have minimal pocket money when they study. Hence, they become less addicted to the taste and overcome the habit in the long run. In adults, the surge in the rates would make them think twice to shell out extra money from their hard-earned savings.

Secondly, it is evident that home-cooked foods will be valued. Due to the growth in rates of fast foods, people begin to eat a lot at home in order to save money. Consequently, they understand the real benefits of home foods apart from saving them. The pandemic period, for example, threw new opportunities for families to try new dishes and taste them. This paved the way to test their taste buds with a variety of foods that are still healthy. Subsequently, they realized that home-based foods could be delicious, which indirectly creates a healthy eating habit.

To conclude, the surge in the rates of fast foods is a blessing for a healthier world. This is due to the lack of affordability and the high value and respect they give to home-cooked foods.

Sample 17:

Obesity has emerged as a significant health concern in numerous countries, and its multifaceted nature calls for various approaches to combat it. Some argue that increasing the price of fattening foods could be a solution to address this issue. In this essay, I will share my perspective on whether such a measure can effectively tackle obesity.

On one hand, there are several compelling reasons to support the idea of raising the price of fattening foods as a means to combat obesity. Firstly, it may dissuade individuals from consuming unhealthy and calorie-dense foods. With increased prices, people might be inclined to opt for healthier, low-calorie alternatives. Secondly, such a measure can generate revenue that can be channeled toward promoting healthier eating habits and physical activities. Thirdly, it could potentially alleviate the burden on the healthcare system by preventing obesity-related health problems.

On the other hand, there are also reasons to believe that solely increasing the price of fattening foods may not be the ultimate solution to the obesity problem. Firstly, individuals with low incomes may still find it challenging to afford healthier food options, leading them to continue consuming fattening foods. Secondly, some people may turn to cheaper, albeit less healthy, alternatives such as fast food, which can be equally fattening. Thirdly, even with higher prices, some individuals may be resistant to changing their eating habits.

In my opinion, while increasing the price of fattening foods can serve as a valuable strategy to address obesity, it should not be viewed as a standalone solution. Instead, it should be accompanied by a comprehensive approach that encompasses education and awareness campaigns, subsidies for healthy foods, and the promotion of physical activities.

In conclusion, although some argue that increasing the price of fattening foods can resolve the issue of obesity, I believe that it is a partial solution. Combating obesity requires a multifaceted approach that encompasses various measures to achieve long-term and impactful results.

Sample 18:

The prevalence of obesity has been steadily increasing, prompting concerns about overall health. Some propose that raising the price of high-calorie foods could offer a solution. In my opinion, this approach falls short.

On one hand, increasing the cost of fatty foods could potentially mitigate the obesity crisis. It is evident that excessive consumption often stems from the availability and affordability of unhealthy food choices. By raising prices, people may reduce their purchases due to decreased affordability, potentially opting for healthier options such as fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and lean meats. This shift could lead to a decline in obesity rates.

On the other hand, there are limitations to the effectiveness of price adjustments, particularly concerning fairness. Socioeconomic factors play a critical role, as those from lower-income backgrounds may still struggle to afford healthier alternatives. Moreover, solely increasing prices fails to address underlying issues like nutritional education and limited access to exercise facilities. Therefore, relying solely on price hikes may not yield comprehensive and sustainable outcomes.

From my perspective, while increasing the cost of high-calorie foods can be a positive step, it is essential to complement this strategy with broader measures. National campaigns to raise public awareness about healthy eating habits and regular exercise are crucial. Furthermore, governments must prioritize improving the accessibility and affordability of nutritious food options, especially in disadvantaged areas. Combining these efforts with price adjustments can create a more holistic approach to combating obesity.

Ultimately, while increasing the price of high-calorie foods may deter their consumption and contribute positively to reducing obesity rates, it should not be seen as a standalone solution. A comprehensive approach that includes education, accessibility, and affordability of healthier food options is essential for sustained success.

Sample 19:

Inveigled by their aroma and the gut’s responsive bleat, people today have been completely ensnared by their favourite fast-food treat. However, this transient decoy comes with its ramifications. The primary causative effect that it causes is a fallacious and unhealthy body mass index of people owing to their obesity. To this, some people peddle forth to increase the selling prices of such fast-food products causing health hazards. However, I would differ from the viewpoint presented. In the subsequent paragraphs, I shall propound my views on the issue.

To begin with, as is rife, modernization has caused and paved the way for the cornered sections of the society to be educated, empowered, and employable, and with it, more and more working professionals have come along. With more people entangled in their daily workloads, lesser emphasis has thus naturally been on cooking the meals at home, and more so, the hoopla of managing both has certainly been overwhelming and making one feel work like a trojan. In such a “click and flick” era where a significant number of people may approach their fast-food outlets easily, simply putting a higher price quotation couldn’t ever curb people from consuming and feasting on junk food. More so, as is found in a survey, people falling in the bracket of the upper class with an above-average income are found to be the steadfast consumers of such packaged and unhealthy meals. Hence, as is pretty comprehensible, raising the prices of these eatables wouldn’t make much of a dent in the pockets of people who may afford it easily.

The wages of people in concomitance to what they could frugally spend would be negligible, even after upheaving the taxes on such edible items. The striking need of the hour is to make people more aware of the cataclysmic causes of having such food that might render them extremely unhealthy and frail. Acknowledging people with the detrimental corollary and pernicious eventualities of having an imbalanced diet and a decrepit BMI may keep them alarmed and watchful of what they are being served or choose to be served with to eat. The health confederations should focus on pragmatic and logical foregrounds where they check the roots of such causes. That would perspicuously mean indoctrinating people and spending providently on such health counselling sessions.

Although putting junk platters on a high tax bracket might, to an extent, mitigate the consumption, it couldn’t entirely debase the proliferation of such unhealthy lifestyles that could only get etched in the minds of people upon their being guided and informed.

Hence, to conclude, we may say that increasing the prices and making junk food expensive couldn’t go in alignment with the idea of keeping people fit and healthy. Rather it is extremely important to enlighten and propagandize the benefits of a sound lifestyle and the malignant denouement of fattening and chemically preserved food.

Sample 20:

Given that obesity has become an impending trend today, it is assumed that a hike in the prices of fattening foods will curb the problem. However, I would say it is oversimplified to pin the hope on inflating the prices of junk food since the approach does not do much to encourage a healthy diet.

Indeed, it is not difficult to understand why increasing the prices of fattening food is considered effective to constrain the trend towards overweight. Those who think in this way opt to attribute the conundrum to people’s unhealthy diet: the impressionable majority are inevitably susceptible to the low prices when shopping for groceries, while such foods tend to contain excessive sugar or fat. Based on this understanding, some people believe that inflating costs of fattening foods can compel consumers to buy more healthy products.  

Plausible though the above reasoning seems, I would say that to make junk foods less affordable does not have much of a role to play in improving public health. The overriding concern here is: those championing the claim in question reach their conclusion based on an erroneous causal connection between the problem and its reason – what exactly results in people’s bias for junk foods is their economic plight: those living in poverty are intimidated by the prohibitive prices of quality foods (i.e., fresh vegetables, fruits, etc.) and turn to less expensive counterparts. With this in mind, to increase fattening foods affordability will not change reality on the ground, whereas other options may be more practical, with one measure being governmental subsidy for healthy diet among less well-off class.  

From what has been discussed, I would say that inflating fattening foods will improve people’s healthy diet, while a more practical solution is to make quality food more affordable.