Functionalism shows us how each part contributes to the spread of obesity. The media contributes to obesity especially in childhood. Several fast food establishments provide kids' meals in bright, delightful packaging that frequently come with a toy (Kluge, 2017), they also advertise a lot of unhealthy food on television such as sugar, in which children love. Families contribute to obesity because children learn a lot about good and bad decision making from their parents or guardian. However, with parents drawn in numerous directions and apparently facing a countless quantity of responsibilities and obligations, fast food can repeatedly be an appealing replacement to cooking at home (Kluge, 2017). Parents also do a lot to satisfy their children; unfortunately giving them unhealthy food is one way to satisfy them. The economy contributes to obesity as well due to the prices of unhealthy foods. Studies confirm that unhealthy foods cost less than fruits, vegetables and other healthful foods, whose prices continue to go up. To make fast food requires little money and time to do verses eating healthy food which requires more of both. The economy makes it harder for people to eat healthy because they make fast food more convent and …show more content…
Unfortunately, many Americans lack eating healthy due to low income. Conflict theory shows us the issue between low class and the higher class concerning obesity. Many low-income families try to feed on a weekly budge of $100, which means they try to get more food for a low price. parents that have to feed a family of five would choose the bag of 50 chips verses the bag of 5 apples because they can get more for less. Wealthier families can afford to eat healthier because if they buy a bag of fruit and it goes bad they can afford to buy another bag, unfortunately low-income families have to buy preservatives so there food is affordable and can last longer. This causes conflict because everyone should be able to eat healthy and afford it. Many Americans believe that the government has control of unhealthy and healthy food. Regardless of complaints about the government control of food, at the end of the day it works. In consideration of attempts to control advertising have been secured as free speech, city governments have looked for new ways of producing healthier eating choices for consumers. Removing items, investigation shows, allows easier approach to healthy choices (Nestle,