Should the government regulate fast food industry?

ESSAY QUESTION:

The following appeared in an article in a medical journal: "The major increase in new cases of adult-onset diabetes during the past decade is the result of poor nutrition, which is itself the result of a lack of government control over the quality of foods available at low prices. If the government placed more emphasis on proper nutrition by requiring that food manufacturers include more vitamins and minerals in their products, the rate of adult-onset diabetes would be reduced significantly." Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.

MY RESPONSE:

The article in medical journal includes a statement which claims that the rate of adult-onset diabetes would be reduced if the government took control over the quality of the cheap food. I have to notice that this argument contains several flows. The first flow I would like to stress is the fact that the author wrote that poor nutrition is "itself the result of a lack of government control over the industry". There is no evident logical connection between cheap food available for sale and existing eating habits. It can be that adults like to eat cheap and unhealthy food instead of cheap and nutritious. For example, they prefer to buy a hamburger instead of cereals. In this case even if government controls the food industry people still will try to select the food which tastes better. For example, they can choose only limited number of even healthy products, which will also lead to unbalanced diet and diabetes in a consequence. Also, the author of the statement did not specify the source of financing of the "healthy enriched food". It is understandable that adding of more vitamins and minerals in food will lead to raise of prices. This means that food won't be cheap anymore. And some people cannot allow to purchase expensive food. What will they do? Probably they will eat less. But we know that the major reason of adult-onset diabetes is poor nutrition. So, at some point it can happen that the control over the food industry will lead to increase of number of people suffering from diabetes. I would advise the author to be more careful with inferences. It can be that he did not provide all the available assumptions. Maybe he missed some points which are necessary for the inferences he did. If so, he should add the details in the article. Also instead of blaming the government for not executing control over the industry he could write a business plan. Statements without any solid background cannot be taken seriously. Statistical data would help to understand and estimate the level of the problem. Does the rate of adult-onset diabetes increase during the past decade? If it did, what changes occurred in the industry? Was the industry regulated before? If there are any other solutions of the problem? Also a economically developed model with estimations based on the verified data would be useful for estimation of the government project proposed. So, I think that the author of the article should make his argument more complete adding all the relevant facts and intermediate inferences. It will make the article more scientific and give the reader a chance to evaluate the information.