Some people think that public health within a country can be improved by government making laws regarding nutritious food. Others, however, think that health is a matter of personal choice and responsibility. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Personal and public health are tightly related to food choices. While some people believe that the government should regulate nutrition to ensure public wellness, others argue that it should be people’s decision whether to pursue a healthy diet or not. This essay will discuss both points of view and explain why the authorities should not control the types of food people can buy. Legislators could impose laws concerning nutritious food in an effort to have a healthier population, hence decreasing public health costs. Even if this could be considered a good idea, it would be very hard to implement. To achieve this target, the officials could impose a levy on unhealthy foods, or reduce their availability on the market. In Italy, for example, products such as carbonated sugary drinks and chips are heavily taxed. As a result, the sales of these items have decreased. However, if the authorities start to take control of what their citizens can or cannot eat, it may be deemed as curtailing customers’ freedom. Personal freedom is seen as an extremely important human right. Therefore, many people think that only they should decide what food and drink they consume, and that it is wrong for governments to interfere with their personal choices. Doing so can indeed lead to public discontent. Alternatively, a better approach would be to launch awareness-raising campaigns about a healthy diet so that people would be able to make better-informed dietary decisions themselves. All in all, authorities can exercise power to limit the selection of foods people have access to, but that would not be without consequences. Instead, governments should invest in education programs to educate people how they can improve their health simply through making wiser decisions about what they eat.