Some people argue that governments should make laws regarding people’s nutrition and food choices to improve public health while others contend that this is the freedom of personal choice and responsibility. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

In

this

day and age, people, particularly children and adolescents are more interested to intake junk

food

, causing many health hazards. Resultantly, whereas some individuals claim that governments ought to impose a draconian code so that citizens could choose only healthy

food

, others contend that enforcing legislation regarding the selection of meal would definitely fringe the

right

to freedom. I, too, wholeheartedly feel that as a human being, every person has the

right

to select what to eat and how to improve his or her fitness. Levying laws pertaining to people’s nutrition and

food

selection is conduce to making healthy residents, resulting in reducing pressure on a country’s healthcare system.

In other words

, if people of a state consume only nutrient-dense items, they do not suffer from any fatal diseases,

such

as cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular disorder, to name but a few, which in turn, reducing the extravagant cost of public well-being. To cite an example, the Japanese are not allowed to eat nutrient-poor

food

openly in public spots since 1995. Now, they are the most salubrious citizens in the world and they spend a very insignificant amount on their treatment. In order to,

therefore

, build a healthy nation, it is imperative to make act regarding individuals nutrition and foodstuff choices. Plausible though it may seem that law can contain a person’s

food

habit, it is worth arguing that governments should not take any strides that would break the human

right

because an individual is solely responsible to improve his or her well-being. To be more precise, a person can choose many other ways, namely, doing workouts, weekly diet, to mention but a few with a view to keeping him or her fit as a fiddle.

Hence

, it is the individual decision in which way one would improve one’s physical strength inasmuch as avoiding fast

food

or other items like

that is

not only the solution to stay salutary. To exemplify, in Britain, people eat more junk

food

but they do not suffer from serious ailments because they do exercise regularly. In conclusion, legislation can limit

food

habit, admittedly, but these laws violate the

right

of human.

Thus

, I unequivocally buttress the stand of not imposing laws about meal selection.