The Instigator
jscutaro
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
justinegiani
Pro (for)
Winning
5 Points

Should children under the age of 10 be allowed to drink soda

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
justinegiani
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/23/2012 Category: Health
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 5,127 times Debate No: 23112
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

jscutaro

Con

Though delicious, refreshing, and a nice treat from time to time, soda (such as coca cola, Pepsi, etc.) is not an appropriate drink for young children. I feel that soda products are one of the main causes of obesity, and more importantly, childhood obesity in America today. Also, the ingredients alone prove that it is incredibly unhealthy, and will have adverse effects on young children. For example, you wouldn't let your 8 year old have coffee in the morning, but a glass of coke is ok? SO many parents in today's day and age say that their kid is hyperactive, or has ADHD, but how can they be sure its not due to the amount of sugar and caffeine in their diet? Also, I've heard of studies in which a human tooth was put into a glass of coke for a few days, and when the study was completed, the tooth was barley recognizable. The amount of sugar and artificial flavorings added also make it unhealthy enough, even without the other ingredients. To sum up, I feel that soda causes children to be hyperactive, unhealthy, and should be banned for children under 10 years old.
justinegiani

Pro

I believe that children should be allowed to drink soda and other sugary drinks under the age of 10. I believe that soda, iced tea and other sugary drinks are too much apart of the American society to be ignored. I believe it is impossible to deny a child a substance that is prevalent within many if not all areas of everyday life; such areas include school, amusement parks, home, movie theaters, ect. I believe soda needs to be taken out of everyday life before you can deny it to a child.
Debate Round No. 1
jscutaro

Con

With all of the childhood problems in this country, (ADHD, ADD, obesity), products like soda need to be taken away from young children. Its not unlike our nation to ban some things from certain age brackets, such as cigarettes, alcohol, etc. I feel that the combination of poor nutrition, and unhealthy ingredients in soda, cause parents to run to the doctor to get a prescription for a hyperactive child. If young adults up to the age of 20 cannot drink alcohol, what is wrong with banning soft drinks and energy drinks from young children?
justinegiani

Pro

Considering my earlier argument, I believe that a child will be exposed to soda at one part of their life. If a parent is denying soda at home, that could create a psychological desire to have the substance more. Considering the typical hormonal changes that children undergo, I believe that denying a substance could create the urge to have that substance more especially during the rebellious times of their lives.
Debate Round No. 2
jscutaro

Con

I agree, however, that is the same scenario with alcohol and cigarettes. Young adults under certain ages are banned from having these substances, which make their desire for them even more. The only different, however, is that young children will not be subjected to soda from peer pressuring, such as they would with the other substances mentioned. Children that age are almost always under the supervision of a parent, so even if they desire soda, it is much easier to keep it away from them. children 10 years and younger aren't allowed to do a lot of activities, denying one more wont be an issue. And also, the other activities that are denied, (being unsupervised, driving, etc) are set as rules to keep them safe and healthy, therefore keeping soda away will in no way cause psychological problems with these children.
justinegiani

Pro

Although you are valid on your thoughts, you are not seeing the big picture. I do not believe banning soda from children will solve any problems. If a parent is (unlikely) able to keep a child from having soda, they will be exposed to it later on in life because of its prevalence in society. I believe the only way to take the problems of soda out of the picture is to take soda out of American society. Overall, I believe denying soda to a toddler does not avoid any life long problems.
Debate Round No. 3
jscutaro

Con

As long as it is in moderation, I don't think adults having soda is a bad thing. Just because these children will have it when they are older, doesn't mean it is ok to have while they are young. When a child has soda, he will most likely be "bouncing off the walls' for the next couple of hours, which can essentially consider it a drug to young children. It alters there mood and state of mind, which honestly isn't even the worst part. As parents, our job is to keep our children healthy, and soda is a substance which will make that difficult. I obviously feel that a parent should love a child even if he is hyperactive or obese, but if they have the chance to stop that, they should be more then willing.
justinegiani

Pro

Cigarettes can be used to prove my point as well. We see teens smoking cigarettes which is a banned substance. Considering children hit a rebellious period in their life, children may use soda as their rebellious obsessions just as some teens use cigarettes as there. Overall, exposing children to an this addictive substances can avoid an addiction later on in life.
Debate Round No. 4
jscutaro

Con

so you are saying we should expose children to cigarettes and alcohol at a young age? Also, once again, children under 10 years of age will almost never be without adult supervision, so regardless whether they want soda, or want to be rebellious, they will not be able to get it. There is no social peer pressure, and they won't have money in their pockets and walk to the supermarket to get it. It would be fairly simple to keep it away from children, especially considering that most elementary schools wouldn't have it anyway. Parents have rules, and children have to follow those rules. Adding no soda to that list of rules will not have a giant negative effect. Sure, maybe they will complain a little more, but parents don't give in if their children complain about wanting to eat ice cream for breakfast, or not eat their vegetables at the dinner table.
justinegiani

Pro

Overall, my opinion still stands. I do not believe you can deny a child a substance that is readily available throughout society. As cigarettes and alcohol law prove, you can not protect children against a substance that is socially acceptable in life. Although you may be able to minimize the amount of consumption, I do not seeing banning soda an ultimate solution as long as it is available throughout society.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by zang 5 years ago
zang
cant vote. but i agree with pro. reasons being in my experience i have never had the negative effects that are associated with soda.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by miketheman1200 5 years ago
miketheman1200
jscutarojustinegianiTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Felt pro made a more convincing argument, In talking about how the ready availibility would hinder the effect of any ban on soda.
Vote Placed by jwesbruce 5 years ago
jwesbruce
jscutarojustinegianiTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Vote Con on health outweighing negative effects.