SHOULD GOVERNMENT REGULATE THE FAST FOOD INDUSTRIES IN THE SAME WAY THAT REGULATES THE DRUG, ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO INDUSTRIES?

There is an on going debate on whether fast food should be as restricted as the way how drugs, alcohol, and tobacco are. In my opinion, there are numerous differences between them which keep fast food far from being banned. This essay will show my disapproval of the topic since fast food is in fact more beneficial than the addictive substances. It is undeniable that fast food is a solution for an enormous amount of people. To be more specific, their having overloaded work is the reason why fast food was born. For instance, workers who are occupied until late nights are unable to treat themselves a dinner. Moreover, students whose schools start early are only in need of getting a quick breakfast with an enough amount of nutrition instead of a fully-prepared meal. Therefore, its existence is a contribution to people’s productivity. ⇒ On the other hand, substances like drugs, alcohol, and tobacco bring harm to society. Unlike fast food, the main targeted consumers are those who need a quick fix for their reality. Most of the substances cause illusion and offer their users an ease and an escape. For example, when people are sad, they will drink alcohol until being fainted despite knowing it is killing them gradually. This addiction takes away their chance to fix the reality and creates a false hope about their future. Thus, if those addictive industries were not detrimental for both one’s health and society development, they would not be regulated. In conclusion, the differences of fast food draw a line from its being banned. Fast food is a solution for a balanced life whereas drugs, alcohol, and tobacco are the signs of one’s fall.