This paper "How Junk Food Can End Obesity" is a good example of an article on health. The human-eatery habits are leading to a lot of consequences; the leading being obesity amongst others such as ailments linked to the poor choice of foods. Regarding the rising cases every day, there have been scholars who have come up with different material facts to result in a solution; How junk food can end obesity by David Freedman and Don’ t blame the eater by David Zinczenko. The articles lay out their arguments; Freedman’ s approach and tone leading his article more relevant.
In How junk food can end obesity, Freedman notes the opening of new health-joint eatery had purposed to be selling wholesome beverages at a reasonable calorie intake at a go. He marks that the healthy smoothies cost a little bit more expensive and for the preparation, it consumed more time, unlike the smoothies at McDonald's that were quite cheap, sweet and took less time in making. His stand is clear; to create awareness to his readers with the effect of the human food culture with the danger of addictions to fat, sugar and salt and uphold junk rather than demonizing. Freedman accomplishes his goal by the way he sets his tone, much like Zinczenko, Freedman has a somewhat frustrated tone not with the people but with the wholesome joints.
He argues that the joints nutritional facts on how they make their products is compromised. He asserts, “ Rather than manipulating the food processing technology, we should turn our backs back to it to achieve a genuine food revolution. ” The quote illustrates Freedman frustration with the influential voices lack of intervention and they're turning their backs on food processing and dupe it as not healthy compared to the wholesome foods.
Nevertheless, his tone is motivational rather than frustrated. He states that the growing sway of over health-conscious and policymakers, the wholesome movement is inhibiting the growth of a segment of the food world that is positioned to reverse the issue of obesity. Additionally, he emphasized on the application of technological tricks by the fast food chains, which is creating a deficit of calories and are more satiating products of the junk, which could do better in the public health compared to the ‘ wholesome’ foods.
It is clear that Freedman wants Americans to uphold the efforts by the junk industries other than the wholesome movement who are duping products that are not whole and organic as healthy. Additionally, what makes him stand out in his argument is the arrangement of his writing. Freedman includes references to real-life situations and events rather than narrating scenarios that are not up-to-date. In contrast, Zinczenko in Don’ t blame the Eater expresses his opinion about the lack of adequate information on nutrition by the Americans pertaining to fast foods.
He states that healthy options are hard to find while the fast foods are located in nearly every street of America if not every corner. This quote shows his purpose; to victimize the fast foods other than the consumers on the responsibility of eating healthy. To accomplish his agenda, he uses a disgusted tone throughout his writing, which causes him to saturate his essay with misleading nutrition facts that are not provided explicitly by the fast food firms.
He exemplifies his frustration tone by using rhetorical questions in the article. For instance, he asks, “ Shouldn't we know better than to eat two meals a day in fast-food restaurants? ” The question is supposed to prove to his readers that indeed the wrong choices are consequences of lack of health stores in the vicinity. Additionally, he warns his readers of likely results from the teenagers who might file lawsuits on the fast food joints in future. The ultimate objective of the warning is to aid the leaders to make a connection and have a conviction amongst themselves.
Likewise, by ensuring that the readers have connected with their unhealthy choices will lead them to agree with his frustration. Besides, it is clear Zinczenko’ s arrangement of ideas is supposed to stir the readers with angry reactions concerning the fast food joints on the health consequences. Nevertheless, his organization of ideas is well put and constructed in such a way that it acts as a foundation of his argument in the essay. However, although both authors have convincing observations and arguments, Freedman’ s case is better compared to Zinczenko's.
It is well laid out by the fact that Freedman's objective is more precise throughout the article. Freedman restates in his thesis “ … .Everyone's mother and brother have been telling them to eat more fruit and vegetables forever, and the numbers are only getting worse, ” … "We do not solve the problem by telling people to eat unprocessed food. " Additionally, he asserts, “ Processed food is a key part of our environment, and it needs to be part of the equation, ” … "If you reduce fat and calories by only a minute amount in a Big Mac, it still will not be a health food choice, but it wouldn't be as bad, and that could have a huge impact on us. " The two statements demonstrate Freedman's purpose of encouraging Americans to emulate processed foods.
Freedman's intent is apparent in every part of the article, unlike Zinczenko who has different agendas ranging from lack of healthy options to misleading nutritional facts by the fast foods. Nevertheless, despite both authors starting with frustration tones, they have different conclusions, Freedman leaving the readers with a motivating tone which leaves the audience more rejuvenated, unlike Zinczenko who concludes with a frustrated and carefree tone that leaves the audience with a conclusion that has anger and no call for action.