100 Debate Challenge 16: This house would ban junk food from schools.
Debate Rounds (4)
Pro argues in first round and passes in the final round. No semantic and trolling.
First of all, let me define the word "junk food". Junk foods are defined as "prepackaged snack foods high in calories but low in nutritional value" in the The American Heritage Medical Dictionary (2007) or "any food low in essential nutrients and high in salt"eg, potato chips/crisps, pretzels, refined carbohydrates"eg, candy, soft drinks, or saturated fats"eg, cake, chocolates" in the McGraw-Hill Concise Dictionary of Modern Medicine (2002).
Junk foods should definitely be banned from schools, and I have three arguements.
Firstly, junk food is very unhealthy. As mentioned in the definition, junk food has high calories, salt, refined carbohydrates and saturated fats. These will lead to diseases such as diabetes, heart diseases, dental problems and obesity. Some of the junk foods even contain artificial flavor and chemicals, which are not good to human's health, not to mention the children's health since they are growing and developing their body. There are also some researches claiming that eating junk foods shorten our life span by 5-10 years.
Secondly, junk food doesn't have enough nutrients for children to absorb. According to the definitions, junk food is "low in nuitrients value" or "low in essential nutrients". Junk food doesn't provide enough nutrients for the children. For instance, junk foods are lack of nutrients required for the brain development, leading to a poor concentration span and become more sleepy. Junk foods are also lack of fibre, which cause constipation.
Last but not least, junk food is addictive. Many people claimed that they only eat junk foods when they feel stressful or when they are busy. And many of them said they would stop eating them. But the fact is that junk food is addictive. There are researches showing that wheat and sugar have an effect on our brain and is very similar to drug addiction. (Check http://www.kriskris.com... out!) It is very hard to control ourselves and stop eating junk foods, not to mention children, who can hardly control themselves.
Due to the above reasons, schools should definitely ban junk foods.
In addition, I would suggest the schools to replace junk foods by heathly snacks, such as fruits, yogurts, salads and healthy drinks, such as tea or fresh juice :D
Ineffective- One researcher has written
"Our findings suggest that no single approach, such as just having access to fresh fruits and veggies, might be effective in changing the way people eat. We really need to look at numerous ways of changing diet behaviors. There are likely more effective ways to influence what people eat.”
Most of a kid's time is spent at home and this is where eating habits are typically learned. If a ban of junk food is implemented in school kids will still likely bring it from home. 
Another problem with banning junk food is the underground market for junk food that will open up in schools. I remember kids in school making a fortune selling skittles out of their back packs. This is money that could go into school vending machines to help with education.
Reduced Funding- With a ban in junk food schools will have to spend a lot more money to provide alternate healthy foods for kids. On top of that a lot of schools have vending machines which pull in money for discretionary spending. 
With all this spending cut and now the schools providing more healthy food the first logical cuts to the budget will be health and physical education classes which are paramount to teaching kids how to make healthy choices. 
conclusion- A ban on junk foods not only does very little to prevent obesity but in fact could be harmful to a kid's chances of leading a healthy lifestyle. Vote con
Firstly, the con side claimed that "Most of a kid's time is spent at home and this is where eating habits are typically learned. If a ban of junk food is implemented in school kids will still likely bring it from home." However, every child spends time at school, where they have their social life. There"re recesses and lunch for children to play or buy lunch or snacks with their peers. If a ban of junk food is implemented at school, it means a lesser chance for children to eat junk food, for at least approximately 8 hours (8am to 4pm I assume).
Of course, as the con side has mentioned, no single approach can be effective in changing diet behaviors. I agree that other measures, such as talks about correct choice of food, should also be taken. But then, at least banning junk food at school can move away the temptation of eating those unhealthy foods, and thus reduce the chance of diseases such as diabetes, heart diseases, dental problems and obesity, constipation and a poor concentration span, as I had talked about in the first round. It"s better than not banning junk foods at school.
Also, the con side said that banning junk food would lead to "underground market for junk food". It seems that you are quite worried about junk food spreading around the school. But the problem is that if the school doesn't ban junk food, then the children can still buy junk food from the tuck shop. I know that underground market for junk food is not good for children, but we shouldn't use selling junk food at school to stop junk foods" underground selling. This isn't the right way to stop the issue.
Another point the con side considered is that banning junk food plus the money needed for healthy foods will cost extra spending, and he suddenly jumped to an interesting conclusion that "the first logical cuts to the budget will be health and physical education classes which are paramount to teaching kids how to make healthy choices". I think banning junk food and selling healthy food won"t cause the health and physical education classes to stop teaching kids how to make healthy choices. Also, I am very sure that if any school asks the students" parent to donate some money for improving the food quality of the tuck shop or canteen, there would be a fund very quickly. After all, they want their children to eat healthy food instead of junk food.
Banning junk food prevent obesity, heart diseases, dental problems, poor concentration span and many others I've mentioned in round 1. Replacing it with healthy food might need more money, but concerning about the nutrients children and hence their health, it's obviously worthy.
Therefore, junk food should be banned at school.
1. A junk food ban is ineffective because kids learn their eating habits at home.
2. The underground junk food economy shows that a banng is ineffective.
3. Health and fitness will t budget cuts to offset this other health program.
Firstly, the con side claimed that "a junk food ban is ineffective because kids learn their eating habits at home". But is it true that all eating habits are learnt at home? Won't you want to try some food you haven't eaten before in the school tuck school / canteen? Kids doesn't only learn their eating habits at home, but also at school with their friends. Therefore, you argument is incorrect.
Secondly, the con side said that "underground junk food economy shows that a banning is ineffective". You are concerned with the kids eating junk food from other resources, but as I've mentioned in Round 2, the problem is that if the school doesn't ban junk food, then the children can still buy junk food from the tuck shop / canteen. Underground junk food is not good for children obviously, but it doesn't mean that banning junk food is ineffective. At least children will be unable to buy junk food and buy healthy snacks instead. Also, the con side thinks underground junk food economy will emerges because some junk foods are much cheaper than healthy snacks. However, eating healthy food is cheaper than eating junk food according to a new USDA study. (referring to http://www.globalpost.com...)
Furthermore, the con side said "Health and fitness will t budget cuts to offset this other health program". But as I've said, healthy food is actually cheaper that junk food. For example, an orange in Hong Kong is approximately hkd3, while a bag of Lays Barbecue-Sauces Chip is hkd6.5. In fact, selling healthy snacks instead of junk food might save money for the canteen and health program.
Lastly, let me sum up my arguments. Schools should ban junk foods, because they are unhealthy and lead to various disease, they don't have enough nutrients for children, and they are addictive. Eating junk food brings a lot of disadvantages, and therefore, junk food should definitely be banned at schools. Thank you :)
Plz vote PRO!!! :D (sorry I failed to make it short :p but it's an enjoyable debate afterall)
I've shown funding for other health programs will probably be cut. The obvious rationale is that they're already spending this money on health, why would they cut the arts or math or anything else?
(just vote pro please :D)
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.