weigh-2-go.org

This week’s Newsweek contains a series of articles about Michelle Obama’s campaign against childhood obesity. This is a timely and important issue for the First Lady to adopt–one that will surely affect the health–and health care costs–of Americans.

President Obama has issued a memorandum to create a Task Force that will work on: “(a) ensuring access to healthy, affordable food; (b) increasing physical activity in schools and communities; (c) providing healthier food in schools; and (d) empowering parents with information and tools to make good choices for themselves and their families.”

It all sounds positive, but in the American tradition, there will be a partisan debate boiling down to this: who is responsible for the obesity of a child? Do the food lobbies need more regulation, and the schools need better food and exercise programs? Or do parents and children need to take more responsibility for the children’s choices and behaviors?

It’s a complex and essential question. As much as I am a fan of personal responsibility, I believe that foods affect our behavior like drugs, and the effect is increased for children. If my belief is a fact, then it would inconsistent to invoke personal responsibility in our use of food while we regulate and legislate tobacco, alcohol, and narcotics.

Example: Is it realistic to expect kids to stay away from a candy machine in school? Can we fault parents for a lack of control when their kids spend their lunch money on candy? Would food companies voluntarily turn their backs on the schools as a market, for the sake of the nation’s health? Would school districts turn down the money they make from these machines?

I love free enterprise when it works. It works great for magazines, blue jeans, and washing machines. It does not work for addictive substances, assuming we place the highest value on our health and safety.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS