2011

Health Anthology

Collin Esmay, Cassondra Curtis, Kelsey Artz,

Anthony LaVoy, Anthony Engelstad
English 120
5/6/2011
Table of contents
Introduction 3

Obama care is wrong 10

Stem Cell Research: a misunderstanding 17

American Epidemic: Underage Drinking 23

Problems with Lowering the

Legal Drinking Age in the United States 27

Who should combat Childhood Obesity? 34

Conclusion 39
 Health Controversies in America

At each stage in our lives we are faced with different choices or problems. Many of them

are easy to fix; however, some of them may be more complicated. Making decisions regarding

your health or the health of your loved ones is one of the most difficult choices there is to make.

As infants and young children, our parents are the individuals who are responsible for these

decisions, but as we get older we ourselves become the ones who make those choices, and as we

become parents we will make those decisions for our children. This never ending cycle is what

makes our lives keep going, but have you ever thought, “what if I make the wrong choice?”

To many of us health controversies seem to be unimportant to our everyday lives, but

when faced with a health issue ones has to think about what the right decision is for them. In this

anthology we have gathered a great deal of information regarding many of America’s health

controversies. Through many hours of research and writing we have developed this anthology

providing you with adequate information about a few of the most recent health controversies in

America. Our research spans the entire life of a human being, including: birth, infancy,

childhood, adolescence, and adulthood. In this anthology we will tell the story of an unborn

infant and its journey through life.

Our first controversy starts before birth. If a fertilized egg is merely an embryo and not

yet a fetus, is it morally wrong to use it for stem cell research? Tony Engelstad tackled this

controversy by showing that stem cell research does not have to be done on embryos and instead

can be done with bone marrow. He gives many solutions to different ways this research can be

conducted without destroying embryos. His focus is more on the positive aspects of this research

instead of the negative. Advancing our medical knowledge and finding cures for cell related
diseases and disorders are a couple of areas in which explains. Through his research Engelstad

shows us that if fertility clinics can throw away unused embryos, stem cell research should not

be looked down upon either.

Moving on through our journey of life, we will now look farther on into a child’s life.

Cassi Curtis has focused her research on childhood obesity. This controversy is fairly new but is

still a very hot topic. Curtis found that the United States government has already taken actions to

stop the cycle of childhood obesity, but they can only do so much. It is now the American

parents’ job to start taking action against this growing epidemic. She found many research

studies that showed how parents are the individuals that are most effective in stopping childhood

obesity. Curtis offers many solutions and actions that can be taken by parents to both prevent and

treat childhood obesity.

As a child grows into an adolescent and becomes more independent they will now want

to start making decisions for themselves. Anthony LaVoy looked at the controversy that is

encountered by most teens and their parents: underage drinking. After doing research LaVoy

took the stance that the drinking age should not be lowered. He gave many scenarios and reasons

why it should not be lowered. LaVoy shows that more action should be taken to stop underage

drinking. He talks about the many risks of being an underage drinker. Things like binge drinking

and its affect on a growing adolescent body and mind. LaVoy shows us that lowering the

drinking age would not fix the problem but only make the problem worse.

Kelsey Artz looked at yet another aspect of the underage drinking epidemic. She focused

her research more on the prevention of underage drinking. She showed that punishments for

underage drinkers are not harsh enough and that if they didn’t get off so easily underage drinking
might not be as big of a problem as it currently is. Artz also looked at how kids are getting

alcohol, and found that there should also be stricter punishments for adults who enable children

to drink illegally. She came to the consensus that if everyone involved had harsher consequences

for their actions in allowing underage drinking, it would be less of a problem.

The last stop in our journey through life ends with adulthood. Colin Esmay researched

the very controversial Obama Care bill. He gave us information regarding the bill itself and

showed us that although something does need to be done to reform health care, Obama Care is

not an effective way to do it. Throughout his writing we find many scenarios in which having

health care insurance is very beneficial, and that at some point we will all need or wish that we

had insurance; however, the way in which Obama Care would allow us to have it is not

beneficial for everyone. He informs us of the negative affects this bill would have on our health

care system. Things such as lowering the standard of health care, longer waiting periods to see a

doctor and no write offs on prescription drugs. With all this research Esmay strongly concluded

that health care reform is necessary just in a different way than Obama Care.

Now that we’ve made it through our life long journey of health controversies, I

encourage you to take this opportunity to use our anthology to benefit your health. Use our

research to make healthier lifestyle choices and to better educate yourself on today’s health

controversies in America.
Who should combat childhood obesity?

This commentary is about the overweight youth in America. It is raising the question who needs to take

a stance. Is it the government’s job? Or is it the parents’ job. It starts out with what the government

has done and how they are taking a stance against it. Explaining that a lot of bills and resolutions have

been passed that are directly related to child hood obesity. From helping them learn how to eat right to

showing them what a healthy life style is. You then here about the other side and how the parents need

to take action as well. Explaining how with research how if the parents change their life style for the

better that the kids will most likely live a healthy and complete life. Telling you how much the parents

play a role on child hood obesity. After she makes these points it goes into the side affects of child hood

obesity. From depression and how it effects them their whole lives, to how it prohibits them to create

social skills and developing relationships with others. We put this article here because………….

Stem Cell Research

This commentary is about Stem cell research. It is trying to enlighten you on the positive effects stem

cell research can have. Explaining how almost any cell related disorder such as cancer or paralysis could

be cured with stem cell therapy. With a list of many more issues it could help resolve for people. It then

goes into trying to diminish the miss understanding most people have with stem cell research. Tell you

that there is other ways to get stem cells then from unborn fetuses. It gives you one point about how

you can get it from bone marrow. Talking about with more research we can find better ways to get

stem cells to avoid getting them from fetuses. Then bringing up the point about fertility clinics and how

if the women do not get pregnant the first time the eggs are degraded but they are not looked down

upon. We put this article here because it is where it makes the most sense.
 The debate over alcohol is an ever increasing one. What age should, if at all, should

alcohol be legal? In Anthony LaVoy’s article Problems with Lowering the Leal Drinking Age in the

United States the topic is looked at from all aspects and many of the pros and cons of lowering

or raising the drinking age.

The article starts out with a brief summary of the issues at hand, then moves on to the

more core issues. LaVoy talks about core health issues like binge drinking, and the dangers they

present. He outlines how these problems exist even though we are doing a lot to stop

problems he says we are not doing enough.

There are so many variables and complications to this debate and each are broken down

and talked about in this paper. From punishment to prevention and health issues to the

dangers of binge drinking each topic is talked about and covered.

The article orchestrates a stance that the drinking age is in the correct place and

lowering it will not make this problem go away, if not make it worse.

Review on Kelsey’s Commentary

Underage drinking is an ongoing problem in our local area and needs to be brought to an

end quickly and painless. Many underage kids are experimenting with alcohol for many

different reasons such as, their friends are doing it, totally stressed out, and they may have a

family history with alcohol. Kelsey stated many ways of taking care of this problem and the best

way she thought was possible for resolving the issue.

 When it comes to underage drinking I think of a house party and a bunch of drunken kids

acting immature and throwing up all over themselves, but it has gotten worse than this. Kids are

fearless approaching complete strangers to buy them alcohol for a small cash tip. The reason

they do this so willing is because there is no one pushing for these “buyers” to be punished, and

they punishment for those that are being charged with underage drinking are getting off Farley

easy as well.

The big reason that something needs to be done about underage drinking is because they

are harming themselves and others with their problems. Kids are dying in automobile accidents

and in some cases even dying from alcohol poisoning. There needs to be more strict laws and

consequences given to these teens and then we will not have to worry so much about what

happens next.

Obama’s Health Care

Obama’s health care reform is leading American’s down the wrong path and needs to be fixed

as soon as possible. Many of us today that do not carry insurance and are in complete denial that a

situation like the one in the beginning of Collin’s will actually happen to us, but in the end what we all

need to realize is that it can happen to us just as fast as it can happen to anyone. And it’s not that

society is picking on us when it does happen, the reason that there are insurance plans is for us to

purchase them and use them when needed.

There are many flaws to the much pushed bill, such as the loss of write offs on over the counter

drugs with your insurance provider, and the waits that we will endure at public hospitals. Also the

quality of doctor is going to fall as well, because no high class doctor is going to want to work with the

lowest class of people possible, they will begin opening private cash only clinics. People that can afford
insurance or on the higher side of society will no longer go to public hospitals, because of the waits and

more than likely the quality of care will down grade tremendously. I would not consider myself to be

high class, but I know that I’m in a higher class than some bum off the street who would be able to

receive the same health care as me from the same physicians. This bill is going to change and may

wreck the American medical field.

Then on the other hand I would have to agree with some aspects of the bill, such as all people

should be treated equally. This I agree with, but if you’re an addict and do not have a job and are not

even trying then why should you be entitled to the same care as I’m? I think you should have to show

some proof that you are working at least part time and that you are actually trying to earn some sort of

money. But in the end I think there should be some assistance for health care, but it should not just be

given to you without you actually trying to earn it on your own.

 Collin Esmay

English 120

Sean Burt

4/5/2011

Obama’s health care plan is wrong

A young girl about 12 is getting sick but her parents do not have health care, so they avoid

taking her to see a doctor. They are a young, lower middle class couple trying to live beyond their

means. They provide for each other but have no extra money for a health insurance plan because they

spent all the extra cash on un needed amenities. The parents just never thought anything would happen

to them that they couldn’t handle. But their daughter is getting to a point where they are forced to take

their young girl in to see a doctor. She was vomiting and seemed to always be running a fever. So they

pack up the car and go to the cheap health care clinic where it feels like the nurses and doctors don’t

really care and don’t want to see anyone come in through the doors. They wait for 40 minutes to see

the doctor, he finally comes to their room and after a while says he is going to run a few test on their

daughter. After many tests have been run, which felt like a million, the couple looks at each other with

despair. There is no way they will be able to afford these tests and they know it. While not truly

wanting to, the father says yes to the doctor and says whatever is going to make my little girl feel better.

Time rolls by as they are sitting in the waiting room to hear some sort of news. The doctor finally comes

through the pair of twin doors that look like right out of a 60’s doctor movie. He comes up to them sits

down next to them and in a soft voice says “Were not one hundred percent sure, but the test are

indicating you daughter has Leukemia. It seems to be a lethal form of blood cancer”. The parents look

at each other with looks of horror, now what?

 This is a situation we all hope never to find ourselves in. We can only imagine how the young

couple must be feeling. On the one hand they would do anything for their daughter, but then on the

other hand they don’t have insurance. They didn’t even have enough money for the diagnostic test, let

alone for any sort of treatment. Health care has been a hot topic for years, long before President Obama

came into office and forced a bill to get passed. I do agree that something needs to be done about the

outrageous cost of health care in this country, yet I do not think that Obama Care is the right way to go

about it. It is ridiculously expensive at just about $1.2 trillion (Anderson, Jeffery) and is just adding to

the already gargantuan sized national debt of $14,228,202,153,642 (US Debt Clock). I will be the first to

admit that we need real reform, but President Obama’s Health care bill is not the way to go.

We can start out with the question of whether the bill even constitutional or not. The argument

is whether the government has the power require all of the citizens to purchase a health care plan from

a private company or face consequences such as fees? People all around the country are yelling at

Washington about the passage of this bill and the requirement that you would have to drop your old

plan and join in on the one size fits all plan that this bill is proposing. Virginia, South Carolina, and

Florida’s attorney generals all stated before the bill was passed that they would file lawsuits against it.

Virginias Attorney General, Ken Cuccinelli II stated against the health care reform “violate[s] the plain

text of both the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.” (Barnett, Randy ) At least 36 states are passing

legislation against this new bill. They are arguing that it infringes on state rights requiring everyone to

buy the health care plan. (Patten, David) The federal government is getting away with this buy using

the commerce clause. This clause allows the federal government to regulate interstate commerce.

While to most people this would mean solid things such as items one would purchase at a store and be

able to physically touch. But the Supreme Court for a long time now has been letting congress get

around things like this and allowing them to prohibit certain economic activities that cannot be classified

as commerce or not i.e. now health insurance. When you buy a car it makes sense that you have
insurance before you can drive it on government roads. But the federal government requiring you to

buy something just because you’re alive is ludicrous. The family in the story cannot afford health

insurance and forcing others like them to get it might put them on the street or add more stress to

people just trying to get by. Frankly our forefathers are turning in their graves. The King and his Court

are sitting looking over us with their view of the national mall. They are watching us peasants live our

lives with their noses up high forgetting who put them there. The states are fighting back with lawsuits

and raising obvious constitutional issues against the Federal plan.

The next reason Obama-care is flawed is there is a shortage of doctors and especially primary

care doctors. A primary care physician is more commonly known as a family doctor. Under Obama

Care, these would become the most commonly used doctors. One of the main problems is the growing

number of medical students specializing in surgical fields. Fifty years ago about fifty percent of all

doctors were family care physicians. But as of 2000 that number has dwindled to around 31 percent

and of the medical school graduates that year only 14 percent went in to the family doctor practices.

(Tobler, Laura). It’s easy to see why a person in medical school would want to choose a field other than

a primary care physician because the money way better. This new government healthcare assumes an

increase in the use of primary care doctors to keep us healthy or preventive care. This is a nice theory,

but is in conflict with reality. In addition, because prices are scheduled by a central board and the plan is

to reduce costs, there certainly will be reductions in the rate that physicians will be paid for their

services. Fewer doctors in the field, and less pay is a recipe for disaster. This shortage of doctors and

the soon to be long lines at the door will lead to one thing; long waits. To make a reform bill pass we

will need a balance between the specialty doctors and the primary care ones. Because they both serve a

place we need the primary care doctors for small things basically stuff to keep us healthy. The obvious

method to increase these is to pay more, but that will not happen with Obama Care as written. We

need the specialty doctors to help us when we do get something that takes a long time to understand.
 The next issue with Obama-care is that you can no longer purchase over the counter drugs with;

HSAs (health savings accounts), FSAs (flexible savings accounts), or HRAs (health reimbursement

accounts. All of these accounts are plans that allow for reimbursement- for health care cost they are

accounts in which you pay into and get tax breaks to offset the medical costs. In the past these accounts

were tax exempt, but Obama Care removes this as of January 1st. (Crouch, Margot) This change is

leading to an extreme raise in the amount of prescriptions being filled out to beat the deadline. This

was put into the bill to help pay for Obama Care through tax revenue. People have been getting around

by getting prescriptions for such things as cough medicine something you can buy at the super market.

“In the United States, there are about 33 million people who carry FSAs, and according to a survey about

one half of them will now be asking their doctor for prescriptions for basic over the counter drugs to

avoid new taxes” (Crouch, Margot). This is adding tons of paperwork for doctors and pharmacists alike,

increasing their costs without getting paid. Only adding to the long lines in clinics and hospitals like the

one the young family had to wait in. As well as adding the possibility for more malpractice suits against

doctors because they are now responsible for the over the counter drugs they prescribe. With this

bureaucratic nightmare the federal government is adding on the backs of the doctors can we really see

any tax revenue from it?

Now I keep bringing up reasons why this is a negative bill, but have not offered any ways of

fixing it. One of the first things we need to do is to try and bring the pay gap between primary care

physicians and specialty care physicians closer together. If we would do this I strongly believe that the

percentage of med students that would go into primary care would increase. We also need to

emphasize the use of primary care doctors first. This will not happen under with Obama care because

the rich will still go to cash only clinics and the gap will continue to remain. Going to a specialty doctor

should only be used if it is recommend first otherwise it leads to higher costing test and continues the
gap between primary and specialty care doctors increasing cost for the consumers and keeping those

with less money from really getting the help they need.

The next thing we need to do is to cut down on malpractice suits. Not only are there the direct

costs of insurance and settlements, but doctors must order every single test. They do this even if they

believe the tests are useless, just so it would look good to a jury. The high cost of these suits gets

passed down to the patient through the insurance the doctor has to take out to protect from the

parasitic lawyers that feed off of them. A simple change would be to add to the law that the loser in a

malpractice suit would have to pay for all of the expenses of the victor. This would stop the frivolous

law suits that get tried against the doctors that have as much of a chance of winning as I would fighting

Brock Lesner in a MMA fight. I would need to get one heck of a lucky shot just to survive. Another

simple and easy fix would be to have most of the suits settled in arbitration where there is a non-biased

third party lawyer that reads over the case and acts as the judge. These simple but effective fixes would

bring down the cost of health care by stopping doctors from having to do defensive medicine ordering

test that might not be needed.

The next step would be to get the drug prices under control. Just a couple pharmaceutical

companies have a near monopoly of the drug market. This allows them to charge just about any

amount they choose for their drugs here in the United States. In other countries, like Canada, the

government negotiates a lower price with the pharmaceutical companies. One reasonable and simple

fix would be to allow re-importation of American drugs here from Canada. This would easily save

millions in health care costs and would force the pharmaceutical companies to get their act together

and start setting the drug prices at a more reasonable level for American consumers.

The healthcare debate has centered on the amount of uninsured people. But, can we forget

about the people that do have the money for a health insurance plan but choose not to have one? Can
we really force these people to purchase insurance? The little girl and her family in the story could

really have used a cheaper way of getting some just in case health insurance because after her

treatment you know they will be in debt for the rest of their life. But they chose not to so they could

spend their limited funds on cable TV or other things. We do need to do something about this issue but

President Obama’s health care plan is flawed and will only lead to longer lines and more hardship in the

future. The president and his followers argue that the current system is not equal for all. We all agree

that Obama Care will make healthcare equal for all citizens; equally bad. The rich will purchase

supplements or go to cash only clinics. The people who will get the shaft in this is the working middle

class. Today these people get pretty good healthcare. Tomorrow they will get the same healthcare that

a homeless drunk gets. While the King and his court argue about whose fault this is and think of nothing

but brilliant they all are, we peasants will soon suffer under their utopian failure. Changes certainly

need to be made and we as a nation of free people need to do something and we need to do it soon,

but this plan will make our healthcare worse while simultaneously increasing cost. That is what

government does best.

Work Cited Page

“A Doctor's Prognosis for Obamacare -- The Four Essential Problems With the Patient”
Foxnews.com. August 10 2010

Anderson, Jeffery. “Obamacare Would Cost Over $2 Trillion” WeeklyStandard.com. March 18

2010.

Barnett, Randy. “Is health care reform constitutional?” 21 March. 2010. Web. 12 April. 2011.

Crouch, Margot. “Side Effects: Obamacare Creates More Unnecessary Work for Already
Swamped Doctors.” The Foundry. The Heritage Foundation, 11 March. 2011. Web. 12
April. 2011.

Gaby, Alan R. "Can We Save Obama Care?." Townsend Letter Nov. 2009: 120+. Alt
HealthWatch. EBSCO. Web. 24 Mar. 2011

Patten, David. “Massive State-Level Revolt Brewing Against Obamacare” Newsmax.com.

March 18 2010.

Tobler, Laura. "A primary problem: more patients under federal health reform with fewer
primary care doctors spell trouble."
State Legislatures 36.10 (2010): 20-24. MEDLINE. EBSCO. Web. 24 Mar. 2011

“USDebtClock.org” 14 April 2011. Web 14 April. 2011.

Tony Engelstad

English 120

April 15th 2011

Stem Cell Research: a Misunderstanding

Stem cell research first came about in the 1950’s, and it came with great promise and
misunderstanding. Many ideas of stem cell use are incorrect or people focus too much on the
misunderstood inhumane aspect that can be averted. Modern medicine can solve only so many
problems we face today, stem cells can go so much further.(1, Hall, Watt)

A brief simplified overview of the stem cell process goes as follows. Stem cells are extracted and
then used to repair damaged tissue by simply applying them to the desired area. The stem cells then
adapt and become cells of whatever type they were applied to. Stem cells can become any cells in the
human body, they are cells that have yet to make up their minds what type they are going to become.
(Watts, 1) This is where most of the misunderstanding comes into effect. Most people think that the
only way to extract stem cells for treatment is from fetuses. This however is partially, but not entirely
true.

In the past, stem cells could only be obtained from fetuses as a result of a stillborn. This has
been deemed inhumane by many people, governments, and organizations. This is a valid argument and
should not be overlooked. To make very clear this argument is for stem cell therapy but not for the
extraction of stem cells from fetuses or to promote the use of growing fetuses for harvest. I do feel the
preceding procedures and practices are inhumane, even though they have great medical benefits. The
largest argument against stem cell use is the inhume extraction process; this paper will cover the
benefits of research and the process of extraction to become humane and ethical. I argue that stem cell
research has only one main downside, and because of it we are dampening the research to creating a
solution to this problem. If we can solve the ethical debate behind stem cells then we will solve many
problems medicine faces today.

Many people ask the question; what can stem cells do to aid in today’s medical procedures,
when they should be asking; what cant stem cells do to aid in today’s medical procedures. There are so
many pros to stem cell therapy we shouldn’t neglect it completely because of a singular con, even
though of great importance. A short list of diseases and ailments that stem cells have the capacity to
cure are as follows: cancer, heart disease,paralysis, severe muscle damage and many more. Simply put
any disease that is caused by the depletion or damage of cells, in any organ or part of the body, can be
cured with stem cell therapy. How can we not pass this opportunity up? The quality of life that could
improve for so many people who have these ailments, injuries, and diseases should be reason enough to
research stem cells further. (Burdon, Paul, Noiseux, Prakash, Shum-Tim, 1,2,3) (Watts, 1) (Nevins, 1)

New research has shown evidence of providing stem cells by other means than from fetuses.
This is the largest advancement to the medicine and would solve the inhumane issue at hand. The
method is to extract stem cells from the marrow of ones bones. These stem cells are referred to as
BMSCs (Bone Marrow Stem Cells) these stem cells are of the highest quality for use in treatment. They
are virtually immune to rejection upon application in therapy. This new technology is under investigated
but early signs are extremely promising with a few drawbacks including inflammation that need to be
researched further. The main problem with this method is the transportation of stem cells into the
infected area; however a new system of using polymeric microcapsules is a promising lead.(Burdon,
Paul, Noiseux, Prakash, Shum-Tim, 2)

A very interesting new aspect of introducing stem cells into an affected area, a heart in this
example, occurs when a small number of BMSCs are planted. It appears the stem cell secretes a repair
signal for the other cells around the newly inserted stem cells. They act as leaders and give direction to
the damaged cell providing therapeutic benefits with little cells required. This was found in a very
recent study done by a group of researchers supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering
Research Council (NSERC) and published by Hindawi Publishing. They tested the experiment on rats and
have produced new and promising technologies and therapeutic methods. The new results they have
found have caused even more possible benefits from this promising medicine. For example, they found
that stem cells repair at a much faster rate than originally expected; as soon as 72 hours after the
application of stem cells results can be observed. Also, using stem cells they are able to control
inflammation to an extreme level. They found that stem cells could be used to treat MS, colitis,
rheumoid arthritis and others. As a conclusion to their study they noted the following: “…research into
paracrine factors and mechanisms has shown that stem cell therapy is much more complicated and
greatly enhances the potential and variety of therapeutic applications.” (Burdon, Paul, Noiseux, Prakash,
Shum-Tim, 1,2,3,4,7,9)
 With all this promise how can anyone think otherwise of studying the process? An important
argument could be made that if we have the process we could prolong life too much and essentially
“play god”. While the argument has valid points, the main focus of stem cells is not to prolong life to an
unnatural level but to increase the quality of life. One important thing to think about is that stem cells
aren’t without fault; they will not make us immune to death. However we can promote higher quality of
living, lower pain for the suffering, and give more mobility to paralysis sufferers. Also, being a recipient
of stem cell treatment would always be voluntary; if you object it then you don’t have to receive it.

While research is being carried out we must keep in mindreligious arguments as well. For
example many people believe that an embryo is a person, or that an embryo has a soul. However Dr.
Sandel of Harvard University points out why this isn’t entirely true “Consider an analogy: although every
oak tree was once an acorn, it does not follow that acorns are oak trees, or that I should treat the loss of
an acorn eaten by a squirrel in my front yard as the same kind of loss as the death of an oak tree felled
by a storm.” I think this an excellent example and clear outlines the other side of the argument.
However an analogy that makes a more sustained impact might be that of a salmon; who can lay up to
5,000 eggs and it is estimated that only 10% survive. 4,500 salmon were lost but 500 managed to
survive, should we be concerned about the 4,500 as much as we should be grateful that 500 managed to
live.Another example is that of a starfish that can reproduce by propagation. If you just one part of a
starfish off it will regenerate into two starfish. Where do you draw the line as to what amount of starfish
is considered to be a separate entity, an individual organism? An animal embryo is just basic
underdeveloped cells, these are the stem cells. The embryo starts as one cell, it divides and creates
another, if we could separate these two cells and keep them structurally intact the result with be two
embryos. Analyzing this example one must realize that you cannot give an embryo a start or end point.
Upon conception you are not a person yet, and it is very hard to draw the line of when you should be
classified as one.(Sandel, 1)(McGrath,1)

Common practices in today’s fertility clinics, which aim to help women get pregnant, create
more fertilized eggs then are needed. If a woman gets pregnant on the first attempt the additional are
discarded, why are fertility treatments not looked down upon as stem cell research is? If one would
counter that by saying prolonging life of one is different than creating another you are still destroying
embryos either way and both are immoral by the same standard.(Sandel,1)

While opposition exists and countless articles aimed at persuasion and information are created,
many people will keep their original opposition. This is fair and just to those who hold those positions
but they are decreasing research through cut funding. Presently all funding has been cut to stem cell
research by the government; it is still allowed to be studied by private organizations. If it is so inhumane
why then is it not illegal instead of unfunded? (Sandel,1)

The need of cures for heart disease and cancer is high and on an escalating level, stem cell
therapy could be the answer to all of this.However, the bad reputation that stem cells are associated
with have led to decreased funding as no organization wants to be looked at as a funder of research that
is controversial. We need to support the humane research and develop of this medicine if we wish to
see any benefits.

In 2001 a study was funded by the Huddinge University Hospital in Stockholm, Sweden about
the availability of aborted fetuses for stem cell research. They asked in a professional manner and the
couples asked were aware of situation. As a surprising result they found that 92% of couples said they
would prefer to have their embryos used for stem cell research rather than having them discarded. This
shows there are actual available stem cells for research and use. While some may consider this to be
inhumane, why discard stem cells if they have a useful healing application? However I am not
suggesting that we should be mandating or implementing anything of this nature but rather pointing out
that embryos don’t need to be grown, farmed, harvest or any other vulgar term that may
arise.(Bjuresten, Hovatta, 1,2)

Modern advancements have changed stem cell research greatly. We can extract stem cells from
bone marrow instead of from embryos or fetuses. The application of medicine is much greater and has
been shown to be even more promising than originally expected. However still opposition remains and
dampers the funding of research and study to bring this theory into practice and actual usable medicine.
We need to change our attitudes about stem cell research if we really do wish to find cures to ailments
that affect the quality of life for millions of people. If the mainstream idea of fertility clinics is
acceptable than stem cell research should be under the same principal. More research, more study, and
more collaboration from scientists will be needed to further this miracle-medicine. If scientists and
researchers are hesitant to partake in this research because they fear they will get labeled as an
unreliant figure than nothing will get accomplished. In the end we need to further study to make stem
cell research completely humane and acceptable by society. To do this research needs funding and
backing by the public for this to go anywhere. We have a possible cure to many devastating diseases
right here we are just too afraid to reach out and grab it.
Works Cited Accurate up to April 15th
2011

Bjureste, Kerstin, and OutiHovatta. "Donation of Embryos for Stem Cell Research—how Many Couples
Consent?" Oxford Journals | Medicine | Human Reproduction. 1 Nov. 2001. Web. 10 Mar. 2011.

Hall, Peter A., and Fiona M. Watt. "Stem Cells: the Generation and Maintenance of Cellular
Division." Dev.biologists.org. Morpholinos. Web. 1989.
<http://dev.biologists.org/content/106/4/619.short>.

Bourdon, Tom, Arghya, Paul, Noiseux, Nicolas, Prakash, Satya, Shum-Tim, Dominique. “Bone Marrow

Stem Cell Derived Paracrine Factors for Regenerative Medicine: Current Prerspectives and

Therapeutic Potential” Hindawi Publishing Corporation, 2011. Web. 10 Mar. 2011

Sandel,, Michael J. "Embryo Ethics - The Moral Logic of Stem Cell Research." Embryo Ethics. July 2004.
Web. 10 Mar. 2011.

Watts, Ashlee E. "Fetal Derived Embryonic-like Stem Cells Improve Healing in a Large Animal Flexor

Tendonitis Model." Stem Cell Research & Therapy. Stem Cell Research & Therapy, 2011. Web. 10

Mar. 2011.

Nevins, Joseph R. "Using a Stem Cell–Based Signature to Guide Therapeutic Selection in Cancer —

Cancer Res." Cancer Research. 23 Nov. 2010. Web. 10 Mar. 2011.

McGrath, Susan. "Fish Conservation - Spawning Hope."Audubon Magazine.Web. 06 Apr. 2011.

<http://www.audubonmagazine.org/features0309/hope.html>.
 Works Cited
“Facts About Alcohol.” tooSMARTtoSTART.samhsa.gov. 19 Jan. 2011. Web. 15 April 2011.

Henault, Bob. “What Would You Do if Confronted by a Minor in Front of a Liquor Store?”.
AbcNews. ABC News Internet Ventures, 18 Feb. 2011. 11 Mar. 2011.

“The Surgeon General’s Call To Action To Prevent and Reduce Underage Drinking.”
Surgeongeneral.gov. Web. 11 Mar. 2011.
United States. Department of Health and Human Services. National Institute on Alcohol Abuse
and Alcoholism. Underage Drinking: A Major Public Health Challenge. April 2003. Alcohol
Alert 59. Web. 24 Mar. 2011.

United States. Department of Health and Human Services. National Institute on Alcohol Abuse
and Alcoholism. Young Adult Drinking. Alcohol Alert 68. April 2006. Web. 24 Mar.2011.

“Wasting the College Years: College Student Drug Abuse and Binge Drinking.”
Collegebingedrinking.net. 2009-2011. Web. 15 April 2011.
 Kelsey Artz

English 120

Sean Burt

04/14/11

American Epidemic: Underage Drinking

Imagine that you have friends who got into some serious trouble on a Friday night.
Some teenagers were underage drinking at a party and received minors from the local cops.
They are told they need to go to court to receive their punishment from the judge. The minors
appear in court and later on do what the judge tells them to do. They might receive a
punishment like community service and a fine of a couple hundred dollars. A few weeks pass
by and what do you see? You see the same people drinking uncontrollably at a friend’s house
waiting in line for the next keg stand. Reality is that you probably didn’t have to imagine this
too much because you’ve probably witnessed it yourself. People don’t take their first crime as
a minor seriously and are out and about at the raging parties before you know it. I blame the
law. I don’t feel as though the rules are strict enough. I believe that if you are caught in the act
of drinking underage that you should be punished more severely for your actions the first time.
Now, I don’t mean that you should go to jail on your first offense, but I believe that a more
aggressive form of punishment would serve the minors right. The truth is not that officials are
trying to take their anger out on you; they are trying to protect you from all of the harms that
come along with drinking underage. I also believe that the suppliers of alcohol to these minors
should be punished more severely. Punishing both sides will create more promising results in
the end. I propose that all involved in the act should pay the consequence of this widely spread
problem in America.

You may ask why I chose to put the word epidemic in the title. The number of college
students binge drinking and abusing drugs has only gotten worse over the past decade
(collegebingedrinking.net). I feel as though that is a bold enough statement to use the word
epidemic. In fact, studies have shown that by age eighteen about seventy percent of teenagers
have had at least one drink in their lifetime. The truth is that when people reflect on college
years, a party may come to memory. There are countless numbers of parties every night with
some getting busted and some never getting caught. At these parties are many minors who
unaware of what they are doing to themselves. Underage drinking can lead to things like drug
use or binge drinking. Even though drinking underage is more popular than smoking or doing
illegal drugs, drinking makes you more likely to trying new things like drugs and binge drinking.
Teens drink less often than adults. But when teens do drink, they drink more than adults
(surgeongeneral.gov). This is what is known as binge drinking. It is one of the most popular
forms of substance abuse. I believe one way to fix the problem of binge drinking is by
informing young adults, and even children, of what an actual drink is. Giving teenagers
examples of how much alcohol a drink actually consists of might make some reconsider how
much they are actually going to drink at an event. They might not know beforehand just how
horrible the effects can be on your body. A standard drink contains about 14 grams of pure
alcohol, also according to surgeongeneral.gov. Fourteen grams of alcohol is usually found in a
twelve ounce beer, a four to five ounce glass of wine, or a one and half ounce shot of eighty
proof liquor. When you participate in binge drinking, it means that you exceed five drinks on
the same occasion. (National Survey on Drug Use and Health [NSDUH]). Heavy drinking is
defined as binge drinking on at least 5 days in the past month. Approximately 9.7 percent of
Americans ages 12-20 reported binge drinking in the past month. (toosmarttostart.samhsa.gov)
Underage drinkers and even drinkers of the age participate in binge drinking every year. The
outcomes are sometimes fatal. Drinking so much in so little time can cause things like alcohol
poisoning, blackouts, and even death. (collegebingedrinking.net)

Underage drinking can cause many dangers to the human body. Underage drinking can
lead to suicide/homicides (about 300 and 1,600 a year, respectively, according to
surgeongeneral.gov), drinking and driving, sexual assault, high-risk sex, and damage to the
brain. Mixing alcohol with all of the emotions and hormones that a teenage goes through is a
horrible idea. I’m not trying to say that only underage drinkers are prone to bad results, but it
is more likely to occur in minors. In your adolescence, the brain is still going through significant
changes. Your brain does not quit developing until you are in your early to mid-twenties.
Drinking during this time can harm your overall development. (Alcohol Alert 68) Going back to
review the other harms that associate with underage drinking, I found that motor vehicle
accidents are the number one cause of death in people 15-20 years of age; about 1,900 people
a year. (surgeongeneral.gov). That is one statistic that I did not know. When you mix alcohol in
with the lack of experience that most drivers that age would have, the results can be deadly.
When you think about it, it makes perfect sense. I think we’ve all seen how horrible some of
our friends in high school were at driving and then you see them pull up to a party and you just
know it is going to turn out badly. I have had countless experiences with many of my peers in
my hometown who have been involved in an accident due to drinking. I have been lucky in the
fact that there have been no funerals involved. Also, drinking heavy amounts of alcohol can
impair your judgment to the point where having high-risk sex comes into play. At a high blood
alcohol level, you aren’t thinking twice about your actions. Drunken people are more likely to
having unprotected and unwanted sex which can lead to things like pregnancy and STD’s.
(Alcohol Alert No. 59) A condom or even just having sex will seem like silly things to worry
about at them time and before you know it you are placed in a very vulnerable stage. Again, I
don’t know how many friends have paid the price for this consequence as well. You could say
that it looks normal for a teenage girl in my hometown to have a baby on her hip.

The United States has passed some laws in the past that have helped reduce the
dangers involved with underage drinking. Things like raising the drinking age up to 21 and
establishing the zero-tolerance law has resulted in a 20% decline in fatal crashes in the United
States in the past 25 years. (Alcohol Alert 59) Now even though that is quite the huge
accomplishment on its own, I feel as though even more needs to be done. I believe that the
next step is to create a new law in which all people involved in underage drinking are punished
more severely than they were before. I have just seen more bad than good come from
underage drinking and I think that something needs to be done fast. Too many lives are
affected for the worse every year.
Alcohol dependence is another result of drinking under the age that needs to be looked
at more seriously. Drinking at such a young age can affect the rest of your life. Alcohol
dependence rates are highest among young people between ages 18 and 20. And they’re not
even old enough to drink legally. Of adults who started drinking before age 15, 40% say they
have the signs of alcohol dependence. That rate is four times higher than for adults who didn’t
drink until they were age 21. (surgeongeneral.gov) I myself have witnessed close friends come
in contact with alcohol and at a young age and I can honestly say that 40% of those who did,
now show signs of alcohol dependence.
So what exactly causes underage drinking? Things like race/ethnicity, gender, college,
employment, peer influences, marriage, personality, parenthood, family influences, and
genetics all seem to go into play of why minors drink. So how do you actually go about trying to
prevent underage drinking? After researching this particular subject, I believe that the best way
to go about preventing minors from drinking is to take it step by step. What do I mean by this?
I mean that there are strategic ways to prevent your loved one or even yourself from underage
drinking. First off, I believe it is very important to have a great relationship with your parents
and your family. Setting ground rules in a household is thing to administer. I know my parents
did and I feel as though I have taken these ground rules with me to college. You should be able
to go to your parents for anything. It also makes it easier for your guardians to address the
topic of underage drinking when the time comes. Also, I think it is important that a teenager is
involved with their school whether it is in college or high school and whether it be sports,
academics or extracurricular activities. Being involved in something makes you set standards
for yourself and for everyone else involved. You know that drinking could penalize you and
prevent you from being so involved; therefore, you keep yourself away from the scenes and
focus on the importance of your future. Preventing alcohol abuse involves effort from both the
parents and teenagers.
After reading “What Would You Do If Approached By a Minor In Front of a Liquor
Store?” I thought about where the majority of minors were getting their alcohol. The answer is
adults, twenty-one year old men and women, or older to be exact. The article talks about a
study that was created in order to demonstrate just how easy it can be for a minor to receive
alcohol from an estranged buyer. In that article it stated that one-fifth of people are willing to
buy alcohol for complete strangers. I don’t know about you, but I think every person of age
would be very uncomfortable if some stranger approached them in need of a little booze. I
believe that making the law of higher punishment to the supplier of alcohol would benefit them
in the fact that they wouldn’t have to bother with minors calling them up and begging them to
do them an “alcoholic favor”. Sure it would really be an inconvenience to be caught in the act,
but that is the point. Reducing the supply to underage drinkers would show great
improvements in death rates, injuries, pregnancies, STD’s, and etc.
The treatment for an alcoholic can be a long process. I myself have an alcoholic and
drugged-up uncle and we as a family are still trying to convince him that he needs to seek help.
I know this sounds so cliché but the first step really is addressing to yourself that you have a
problem. This is the first step and the hardest step. It can takes years for the healing to
actually take place and for one to become sober. Alcoholics just don’t see why their drinking
habits are so awful until they are cured from their dependence to alcohol.
In conclusion, many would ask what I would do in order to stop this chaos and help
teenagers understand the consequences of their decisions. I would inform and prevent. Like I
talked about before, starting to educate minors at a young age can be very useful. In order to
prevent I would stop those newly busted minors in line for the keg stand. I would sit down and
talk to my friend, my sibling, or whoever it may be about their drinking problem or even about
why they shouldn’t start drinking. But most of all I would make consequences. When I think
about it, a $300 or more fine is enough to stop me from drinking but it isn’t enough for some.
There are too many bad outcomes for me to continue to watch people I care about make
horrible decisions. Higher fines and penalties should be set in place for the minor and the
supplier of alcohol. More community service time, a fine of $400, and jail time on the second
offense should be put in place. It is for the better and that is what America needs to realize
about stopping this epidemic. All of those involved with underage drinking, whether it be the
minor, supplier, or the host of a house party, should be penalized for their actions.
 Anthony LaVoy

English 120

Problems with Lowering the Legal Drinking Age in the United States

Underage drinking in the United States of America has been an ongoing problem for

many years, but has gotten increasingly worse in the past decade with stricter laws and

regulations against minors. Many people across the nation would argue that a drinking age of

twenty-one is unfair, and of those people many of them are under the age of twenty-one and are

desperately trying to get in the party scene that maybe their older friends might partake in. There

are many organizations that put forth much time and effort to try and keep the legal drinking age

at twenty-one. One of the biggest problems with underage drinking happens on and around

college campuses across the U.S., but there are many ways to stop these issues. Also medical

research has been done, that states the teenage brain is under developed as to the brain of a

twenty-one year old adult. But then there are many people in this fine country we call home that

would argue, if an eighteen year old is old enough to go overseas and die for his or her country

then they should be old enough to sit down and have a drink at a bar in America. These are just

a few of the issues that come along with underage drinking, but these three have the strongest

impact in my eyes.

As I stated before a very large problem in the underage drinking war today is parties on

and around college campuses all around the United States. I myself am a college student and I

admit that I have attended parties on and many around campus. A very big problem with this is

that college kids tend to binge drink and completely overdo it, because they feel rebellious and

dangerous because it is against the law and also they are not scared of the consequences one bit
and this is a major problem. They are so easy to find and attend, and when you arrive they are

usually all a very good time, and I believe that’s just about what every college student is looking

to get out of his or her experience is a good time. There are many ways to stop these parties

from happening, but first someone needs to take action. A good way to control on campus

partying would be to have more patrolling on and in campus buildings, having rooms checks on

certain nights without letting the students know about hey so they cannot get ahead of the game.

Also have to consequences be a little more harsh if you are caught on campus, punishments like

being kicked out of school housing on your first offense, and being kicked out of the school all

together on your second offense. Some would say these are very harsh and unfair, but when you

break a law does the judge give you a break in court. Not only are the problems on campus the

larger problems are occurring off campus at house parties and also bars that are not strict with

the age of the people they are letting in. There are many ways that these can be prevented such

as; have party busts all around college campuses, and sobriety checks on all streets that lead in

and out of campus. Then comes the question, how do we punish them if they are not on school

property? Well if they are misrepresenting your University you have the right to do whatever

you please. First offense is a warning, but the second offense should be a suspension or

probation of some sort from your university, and also some kind of community work around

campus. We cannot just punish these kids in some instances though either, they need to be

educated on the topic and be taught what is right from wrong. They should offer classes to the

younger students who do not meet the legal drinking age so that they can decide what they

should do and not have their friends coax them into it. With this will come many arguments that

students should be able to do whatever they please once they are off campus. Even though it

may break the law, they believe that it is none of the university’s business what happens off-
campus, although they have made a promise to represent their university with honor and pride. I

don’t believe that having your name in the newspaper or on television for breaking a law is a

very good way to represent one’s university.

Not only is drinking on and around college campuses a problem, but another problem is

that doctors don’t believe that teenagers are ready or mature enough to consume alcoholic

beverages. They say that the brain development in those last three years before you turn twenty-

one is unbelievable in change.

Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) has formed a group called Why 21?

And this group basically teaches people all about why the legal drinking age should resume

twenty-one. They have had scientific researchers do tests on teenage college students and also

twenty-one year old college students as well. They have conducted everything from brain

analysis to motor skills and also physical development. They hope that people will follow this

research and realize that the choices they are making are the wrong ones and that they will start

to go down the right path and abide by the law.

Many teenagers are not yet mature physically as well, they may lack in body size and

just all around maturity, which means they would try to drink as much as their friends and the

result would be much different because of their bodies’ maturity level. This is the instance in

which alcohol poisoning happens most often, a lot of the times happening in teenage girls.

Although this is not entirely true for every teen, but a large portion fall under this category.

Many teens are mature enough and would be just fine drinking and acting mature in public,

researchers say, but it’s the ones who cannot do these things that make law makers weary about

changing the legal drinking age back to nineteen.

 Studies show that over three quarters of college students ranging in ages eighteen to

twenty have engaged in some form of binge drinking and are more likely to drink heavily

compared to their peers who do not attend college (Nelson and Wechsler). Also it states that

these students were more than likely heavy drinkers in high school. Another study shows that in

the past decade binge drinking in the age group of twenty-one to twenty-four has increased

drastically compared to that of the eighteen to twenty year old age group (Nelson and Wechsler).

These studies are just a way to show that it is not just the teens who are giving alcohol use a bad

name; it is anyone and everyone who is using it. I bartend during the summer months at a resort,

and yes I have had my fair share of problems with younger partiers, but I have probably had

more problems with men in the age group of thirty to forty. The reasoning for this is because no

grown man wants to be told what to do by a “kid”, that being me in the situation, but when

people drink they do not understand what they are doing or saying alcohol totally alters the brain.

I cannot count how many times I have had people come up and personally apologize to me for

the way they had acted in the bar the night before. Therefore after the research I have read I do

agree that the maturity level is not as high as it would be when they finally turn twenty-one, but I

do believe that it’s not only the younger crowd that is drawing attention to the situation.

I did research on twenty-one year olds who have made dangerous decisions with alcohol

as well and I found a nice article on a man that died of alcohol poisoning on his twenty first

birthday. A young man by the name of Alberto went out with his buddies on his twenty first

birthday in Kansas City, Missouri, at first his friends said they were taking it pretty easy. Then

they wanted to do a power hour, which is where a person drinks as much as possible in one hour

on their birthday says Kenneth Sher a professor of psychological science at the University of

Missouri who has studied extreme 21st-birthday drinking(Bradley and Bauer). His friends
thought he went outside to get some air but really he was not functioning and was unconscious

on the side walk and that is where they left him lay until they found him a couple hours later and

he had already passed. This just goes to prove that if people who are of age are making mistakes

like these, what do you think will happen with teenagers who brains are not yet fully developed

in the maturity stage. Then there is the argument that an eighteen year old is considered an adult

in almost every other category in this country except the legal drinking age.

Now there is a big argument that comes up very often in this country, if a young person

can go overseas and die for their country why are they not allowed to drink in public

establishments in their country. This is the issue that gets many people’s eyes to open up and to

see what is really going on. But when you join the military it is a personal choice and no one is

actually making you do this. You are doing it because you want to serve your country proud and

keep all of us here safe and protected. Another big issue is that if you can vote and partake in

choosing our leaders why can’t you go to a public place and enjoy a cocktail. Well those leaders

that you are voting for are choosing the laws this way for a reason; they want to keep you safe.

With all of the research that has been done in the last couple of years and all of the alcohol

related deaths I think that it is very clear that the drinking age should stay at the legal age of

twenty-one years of age, because it has been that way for twenty plus years and seems to be

working better than the previous drinking ages.

I am not trying to say that the only way to go is to stick with a drinking age of twenty-

one, but I am stating that the research shows the drastic difference if it were to be lowered. I

believe personally that the legal drinking age should remain twenty-one and that alcohol is not

that important in a person’s life and if they want it that bad they will wait until their day finally

comes. It’s just like if a thirteen year old wanted his licenses early because he hated walking to
school, no one would even pay any attention to him what so ever. There are many problems that

would come with a lowered drinking age that could jeopardize many people’s schooling, work

and in some cases their lives.

There are many problems with lowering the legal drinking age in the United States, and

the ones I have stated above are just a small fraction of what is really going on behind the scenes.

The same questions will continue to be asked over and over again until someone finally gets the

answer he or she actually wants, whether it is for better or for worse. There were many different

points of view to look at this piece and try to analyze what is actually going on. Lowering the

drinking age in my eyes would be the wrong thing to do because research shows that these young

adults are just not ready to be given this incentive yet. They need to mature more and realize

what they are actually doing before their friend’s just say, hey try this and everything will be all

good. With this being said the legal drinking age should remain the age of twenty-one and

should not be change until farther research can prove these facts are wrong.
 Works Cited

Bradley and Bauer. “21 shots at 21: Man’s Celebration Turned To Tragedy On Fateful
Night.”The Fargo Forum. InForum. Print. 10 May. 2010.

http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/278178/publisher_ID/1/

Nelson and Wechsler. Will Increasing Alcohol Availability By Lowering the Minimum Legal
Drinking Age Decrease Drinking and Related Consequences Among Youths? American Journal
of Public Health. Web. Jun. 2010.

http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.ndsu.edu/ehost/detail?hid=15&sid=b9fdd2d7-99ed-44ba-

a015-

06ecf43eb6f4%40sessionmgr12&vid=4&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaX

Rl#db=aph&AN=50616981

“21”. 21 “Minimum Drinking Age.” Governor’s Highway Safety Association Policies and
Priorities. Print 2011.

http://www.ghsa.org/html/issues/why21.html
 Who should combat Childhood Obesity?

A two-hundred pound twelve year old. She can’t bend down to tie her shoes, she gets
winded walking up the stairs to go to bed, she can’t buy clothes that most children her age can
buy: does this sound healthy to you? Most people would probably agree with me when I say that
this is an awful predicament for a twelve year old to be in, and that it is most certainly an
unhealthy way to live one’s life. This is a growing scenario for many of America’s youth and
something needs to be done about it. Should the government step in and take action? What about
the children, should they be the ones taking action, or is it a parent’s job to take care of this
problem? Although there may be many different groups that can take action to both prevent and
treat childhood obesity the question still remains: who will take a stand?

One particular group who has taken a stand on this issue is the government. Across the
United States, several state governments have created legislature to combat this growing
epidemic. Many of these states feel that the issue of childhood obesity is a huge problem and that
actions need to be taken to fix it. They feel that if they take actions maybe others will join them
as well. The way in which government is able to address the problem is by proposing bills and
resolutions that will help to encourage healthy lifestyles and help prevent childhood obesity.
When looking at all fifty states between the years 2003-2005, there were 717 proposed bills and
134 resolutions involving childhood obesity (Boehmer, Brownson, Haire-Joshu, and Dreisinger).
Of those bill 17% of them were passed and 53% of the resolutions were adopted (Boehmer et al).
Types of legislation varied from creating bike and walking paths in cities to posting nutrition
facts on food labels. Some bills included things like nutrition standards in school, offering
healthy alternatives in vending machines, and having physical education and activities during
school (Boehmer et al).

Each of these different types of legislation are very crucial in helping kids develop into
healthy adults. By giving kids healthy and nutritional choices for lunch and/or snacks, they will
learn how to make good meal choices and it will teach them which types of foods are good for
them. Healthy alternatives to chips candy, and soda in school vending machines will also aide in
helping children learn how to make healthy food choices. Learning to make these good decisions
at a young age will help them continue to make those same good decisions as they grow up and
become adults. It is important for kids to understand how what they eat affects their body.
Students can learn this by attending a health class in school. They’ll learn how to count calories,
determine their BMI (body mass index), and how to find foods that are healthy. The physical part
of being healthy is also very important for children to learn about. They can learn proper ways to
exercise and how to avoid injuries while exercising in a physical education course. These are
skills students can learn in most school systems nowadays. This helps prevent childhood obesity
enormously by showing kids the skills they need to avoid being obese.
 Learning skills that will help you lead a healthy lifestyle is extremely important;
however, some people question where you should be learning these skills. Some people believe
that the government and schools should have programs in which children can learn these life
skills. Others believe that children learn best from their parents. They feel that the government
and the public school system should not teach children basic life skills but rather they should
focus on educating kids on a more academic premise. These people may think that children learn
these particular skills better from their parents than they do from teachers and other officials that
are currently teaching them in schools.

I have found a great amount of research that supports this claim. One study showed that
children simulate their parents when making eating and exercising choices (Golan, Wiezman,
Apter, and Fainaru). The goal of the study was to show that if parents of obese children changed
their eating and exercising habit their children would follow suit and become healthier as well
(Golan et al). There were two groups in the study. In one group the children were specifically
asked to change their habits to lead healthier lives, and in the other group the parents of the obese
children were asked to change their habits (Golan et al). The results of the study were
astounding. The dropout rate in the group where children were asked to change was nine times
higher than in the group where parents were asked to change (Golan et al). Weight reduction also
drastically varied. Children in the group where children were asked to change their behavior had
an 8.1% weight reduction while children in the group where parents were asked to change their
behavior had a 14.6% weight reduction (Golan et al).

Another instance where it is believed that parents hold the power to prevent or treat
childhood obesity is found in an article published in the International Journal of Obesity. The
authors found that if parents show their children early and often how to make healthy decisions
the more likely the children are to obtain a healthy weight (Birch and Ventura). If parents make
healthy food choices for their children from the day they are born and continue to do that as well
as show their children how to make those decisions, they are far less likely to become obese
(Birch and Ventura). This yet again shows that if parents have healthy habits their children will
too.

Childhood obesity is not just something that affects kids’ physical health but also can
greatly influence their emotional health as well. The book Understanding Childhood Obesity
takes a deeper look into the emotional aspect of obesity. Obese children are more likely to be
bullied at school (Smith). They are not only bullied by other children but they may feel bullied
by teachers or other adults who tell them that they don’t have enough discipline of focus to lose
weight and become healthier (Smith). These same obese children are also more likely to develop
depression (Smith). Obese children become very discouraged when they cannot wear clothes that
other children can wear or do certain activities that their peers do (Smith). These are just a few of
the reasons that may cause obese children to become depressed.
 Children who struggle with obesity and depression are affected by this all throughout
their life. When obese children get older and should be developing social relationships with other
people their age, they sometimes aren’t given that chance. Obese teens are less likely to go on
dates, participate in school functions, or simply create normal relationships with other people
their age (Smith). Not developing these types of relationships can cause problems in the future
for obese teens as they haven’t developed necessary social life skills needed to lead normal lives
because of their weight struggles (Smith). For instance, they may be less likely to be accepted by
a college because of their unwillingness to be social with their peers (Smith). Their obesity can
cause them to not be able to find a stable job and may also create trust and intimacy issues with
significant others in they are even able to be in a healthy relationship with a significant other
(Smith). Obesity is more than just a health issue for a lot of children especially as they grow up.

The evidence provided by these examples should alarm parents, and make them realize
that their eating behaviors and exercise regimens greatly impact their children’s lives as well as
theirs. This should make parents want to step up and start to change to improve the lives of their
children. The change needs to start at home. It has been proven that parents should be the ones
that take actions to prevent childhood obesity. The government should not have to step in to do a
parents job. Parents should be responsible enough to take control of their children and teach them
how to be successful adults, and it starts from the moment they are born. If parents make healthy
choices a habit and natural part of a child’s life the child won’t know any better and will continue
to use those good habits throughout their lives. Most parents want their children to lead a healthy
life, which means that they need to teach their kids how to make healthy food choices and show
them how to exercise properly. By doing this parents can give their children the skills needed to
prevent becoming obese. Keeping their children from becoming obese will help them in all
aspects of their lives.

Prevention is the best way to combat childhood obesity, and there are many health
professionals that can help parents with this process if they are unable to do so themselves. These
same health officials can also help children who have already become obese. They can help by
intervening and correcting the problems that are causing the child to make bad eating and
exercising habits and show them how to make better decisions. Whether the child is obese or not
it may be helpful for the parents to talk to health professionals to learn more about obesity and
different ways in particular that would help them better prevent childhood obesity.

Speaking with a dietitian or nutritionist can be very helpful for both parents and children.
A dietitian can tell parents what types of foods children should be eating and how much they
should be eating (Brown). They can explain to parents how certain foods are absorbed in the
body and how they affect an individual’s health (Brown). Nutritionists may be a little more
helpful for parents and children. A child or parent would meet with a nutritionist to develop an
eating plan (Brown). With a nutritionist a parent can get as much helps as they need. Anywhere
from simply planning a meal schedule together to actually going to the grocery store to shop for
groceries, nutritionists can help with all aspects of eating habits and are great assets for parents
(Brown).

Parents can also get help with the exercise and physical part of teaching their kids how to
make healthy decisions. A personal trainer is a great health professional to seek for answers on
how to exercise properly. Personal trainers can show you exercise routines in which you can
bring home to share with your entire family (Brown). Children could also meet at a gym to work
out with a personal trainer on a regular basis. When people are on a specific schedule and are
made accountable for meeting with another person it helps to keep them on track. This also
works great for children. Being on a regular schedule and having them work out with a trainer is
a fantastic way to get them exercising (Brown). This also ensures that the child is getting
exercise, and if the child doesn’t exercise when they are supposed to both the parents and the
trainer can express the importance of exercise to the child. If parents are unable to afford a
personal trainer they can ask a family doctor or physical education teacher about ways in which
they can get their child exercising.

There are an unlimited amount of resources for parents who wish to seek help in
preventing or treating childhood obesity. Resources exist for learning good dieting habits as well
as good exercising habits. The biggest issue is that parents need to admit that childhood obesity
is a problem and realize that they may need to seek help. If parents take responsibility right away
and take actions to prevent their child from becoming obese, it wouldn’t be such a big problem. I
believe that parents are the ones who need to take a stand to both prevent and treat childhood
obesity, and if that happens both children and parents will be much better off. Creating a healthy
lifestyle for a child will also create a healthy lifestyle for parents too. I think that if actions are
taken at home now it will greatly decrease the number of obese children and adults in the United
States. Childhood obesity will always be a problem but if parents are willing to get involved they
can make children both happier and healthier individuals throughout their lives, and drastically
decrease the number of obese children in our country.
 Works Cited

Birch, L. and A. Venutra. “Preventing childhood obesity: what works?”

International Journal of Obesity. 33 (2009): 74-81. EBSCO. Web. 24 March 2011.

Boehmer, Tegan K., Ross C. Brownson, Debra Haire-Joshu, and Mariah L. Dreisinger.

“Patterns of Childhood Obesity Prevention Legislation in the United States”

Preventing Chronic Disease. 4.3 (2007):1-11. Web. 24 March 2011.

Brown, Stanley P. Introduction to Exercise Science. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins,

2001. Print.

Golan, Moria, Abraham Weizman, Alan Apter, and Menahem Fainaru.

“Parents as the exclusive agents of change in the treatment of childhood obesity.”

American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 67.6 (1998): 1130-1135. Web. 22 March 2011.

Smith, J. Clinton. Understanding Childhood Obesity. Mississippi: University Press, 1999.

Web. 23 March 2011.

 Conclusion- Kelsey Artz

In conclusion, these articles all relate to one another for one obvious fact; they all deal with

health. The health world is a continuously changing thing. Many new problems arise every year and we

as Americans try to deal with it in the best way that we can. Through our lives we will see many

different obstacles. For example, right now we are dealing with Obama’s health care reform. In twenty

years, it is likely that the next generation will never see or even hear of how this reform restructured the

United States. It is during these obstacles that we need to remember what is best for our country right

now and for in the future.

Part of being an American citizen is having freedom. In this freedom you have a right to speak

your mind about almost anything. This is the reason that things like the health care reform and laws

take such a long time to go in to action. Pros and cons are reported to the public and ultimately end in a

decision by voting. People may not agree with the decision in the end but overall, majority are in favor

of it. I myself do not disagree with any of the points above. I do believe however, that some people do.

For example, in LaVoy and Artz’s commentaries, they both mainly summarize that 21 is the drinking age

and should be kept that way. Many people may voice their opinion and ask why it is OK for an 18 year

old to go overseas and fight for our country but yet, it is denied a request for a glass of alcohol. I do

think that is a fair argument, but I also think that people should research as to why Americans must wait

until they are 21. As Artz stated, the brain isn’t developed enough to handle the effects that alcohol

brings.

In Curtis’ commentary, she talks about whose job it is to prevent childhood obesity. I know that

a few American’s are upset that the law is trying to get involved with what our children are eating. They

believe that it should be up to the household to feed them whatever they choose to. I think that

whoever argues Curtis’ point should take a look at an elementary school classroom setting and then
reevaluate their opinion. America can no longer hide it. Childhood obesity is now our own problem to

fix.

I encourage all readers of this anthology to be inspired to do research and take action in the

American health controversies. This anthology could be just the start of something great for future

health in America. For those who aren’t interested in even reading the anthology by just reading the

title and being turned off, I ask that they give it a chance. They might end up becoming interested in it

after all and maybe even changing their first opinions on the subject. They might even end up looking

into a certain subject even further.

This Anthology on Health controversies in America will benefit your health if you just take the

time to read all it has to offer. It will lead you to make better life decisions for you and for those around

you that you care for. It might even inspire you to take matters into your own hands and try to make a

difference in American health. Whether it be a matter on stem cell research, obesity, the health care

reform, drinking, or anything else, you can make a difference in your life and others’ too if you just take

the time.
Work Cited

Bush's parting gift: no morning-after pill for you!. Web. 2 May

2011.
<http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2008/12/bushs_parting_g.
php>.