1. Author and major thesis of the Yes side.
The authors of the Yes side are Marion Nestle and Michael F. Jacobson. They argue that a public health approach is needed to encourage Americans to eat a healthy diet.
2. Author and major thesis of the No side.
The author of the No side is Michelle Cottle who argues that the relationship between Americans and food are too complex and nonnutritious foods should not be regulated.
3. State in your own words two facts presented by the Yes side.
Food consumption should be regulated since excess consumption of calories lead to obesity.
ii. Manufacturing industries should be compelled to cut down their unhealthy food production
4. State in your own words two facts presented by the No side.
i. People must eat in order to survive and regulation of food consumption is more difficult that implementing tobacco rules.
Manufacturing industries have no link with the excessive consumption of some foods.
5. State in your own words two opinions presented by the Yes side.
i. Heavily taxing and restricting the sale of junk foods should be done.
ii. Food labeling and advertising should be done in a manner that does not misinform the public.
6. State in your own words two opinions presented by the No side
i. Food industries should be allowed to enjoy their full freedom of production as their main aim is to make profit. There is no clear cut between the industries and the consumption of their products.
Companies and industries should use advertisement as means of improving their sales.
7. What cause and effect relationships were stated on the Yes side?
TV watching and junk food advertisements directly influence children and the public towards the consumption of such stuff.
8. Were any of these cause and effect statements faulty? Why?
There is no evidence that companies give inaccurate labeling on their products. It is also faulty to claim that TV watching and advertisements increase the consumption of junk foods.
9. What cause and effect relationships were stated on the No side.
Need to increase government’s income. The government would try by all means to increase their income, hence, imposing high taxes on the food industries.
10. Were any of these cause and effect statements faulty? Why
It is not correct to say that the Government imposes taxes on commodities like cigarettes so as to increase their income. The reason is to regulate the consumption of such harmful commodities.
11. Did you find evidence of other logical errors on the part of the Yes side? Explain the errors. If no errors are found, add an explanatory paragraph.
a. Distortion of information – food industries makes advertisements to increase their sales, and NOT to encourage obesity.
b. Faulty Analogy or False Comparison – comparing food consumption to cigarette smoking is a false analogy. Fat-tobacco analogy makes no sense.
c. Oversimplification - the issue of energy consumption has been over simplified.
d. Stereotyping -
e. Faulty or Hasty Generalization – the effects of junk foods have been generalized.
f. Either/Or Fallacy
g. Circular Logic
h. Confirmation bias – the arguments and the empirical confirmations about how the government should handle the food industries, is biased towards the achievements of Government’s policies.
i. Other errors
12. Did you find evidence of other logical errors on the part of the No side? Explain the errors. If no errors are found, add an explanatory paragraph.
a. Distortion of information – it is wrong say that the reason behind the government’s increase in the taxes on cigarettes and junky foods is to increase their income rate.
b. Faulty Analogy or False Comparison – comparing the risks involved in consuming junk foods to that in using machines like vehicles is a false comparison.
c. Oversimplification – the slogan “eat less, don’t eat, eat this, don’t eat that,” is too oversimplified.
e. Faulty or Hasty Generalization - the issue of nonnutritious foods and their effects have been generalized.
f. Either/Or Fallacy – several fallacies are used here, like
g. Circular Logic –
h. Confirmation bias – by confirming that food industries do not contribute towards obesity, is biased. This is just to protect the industries.
i. Other errors
13. How credible is the author of the Yes side? (list credentials)
The author of the Yes side is credible enough. Empirical information is given from different sources including facts from AHA, ADA, NIH, NRC, NCI, UDA, among others.
14. How credible is the author of the No side? (list credentials)
This author is less credible. The information given is not from any empirical source; rather, they are people’s opinions. These opinions are, however, put in a very convincing manner.
15. Identify any propaganda techniques used by the Yes side. Explain.
Saying that food industries spend heavily in their advertisements so as to increase the cases of obesity, is propaganda. These industries, like any other industry or business enterprise, makes advertisements to increase their profit margin. It is not their intention to propagate obesity.
Giving false information about the products is also propaganda. There is no proof that industries misguide the public by giving false information about their products.
16. Identify any propaganda techniques used by the No side. Explain.
The technique is the slogan “eat less” or “don’t eat” in foods, which replaces “don’t smoke” in cigarettes. Suing food industries for encouraging obesity is also propaganda. This propaganda aims at attracting public sympathy to food industries.
17. All things considered, which author impressed you as being the most empirical in presenting his or her thesis? Why?
The most empirical author is the Yes team (Marion and Michael). Almost all their arguments are backed by institutional facts that have been researched over a period of time and presented for implementation.
18. Are the writers biased? If so, why do they have these biases?
The writers are biased. The Yes side, being in the public health sector, always tries to support and encourage the government’s efforts like adjusting food prices and increasing taxes on junk foods as this is a direct source of funds to the government. The No side, being in the heavy duty section, tries to support the manufacturing industries. The argument is biased towards maximizing the company’s profits.
19. Which side (Yes or No) do you personally feel is most correct now that you have reviewed the material in these articles? Why?
The Yes side is most correct. The information they give is more empirical and can be proved.