Obesity: Logic and Marion Nestle

â€Å"Obesity: Who is Responsible for Our Weight? † In the essay, â€Å"Obesity: Who Is Responsible for Our Weight? † Radley Balko explains his argument on obesity; we are responsible for what we eat. Overall, the strengths were clear and persuading in this essay. One strength in his essay was his main point, we are responsible for our own weight. He explains that we are in control of what we consume, and the government should not be responsible for that. This engages the reader to think, should we really blame the government, or is ourselves to blame. This main point validates all his reasoning.Another strength is his ability to explain why government intervention is irrelevant to obesity. For example, he mentions that Oakland Mayor Jerry Brown is conducting to have a Fat Tax on high calorie food, where food restaurants must list their fat, calories, etc. on each meal. And instead they should be promoting personal-sense awareness. Overall this essay had more weaknesses than strengths. Though his side of the argument is completely true, his reasoning weren’t clearly detailed. For example, Radley Balko only targeted the government’s intervention on obesity.But what should have followed that is the food industry businesses that allow this, not just the government. Not only did he lack detail, but also he didn’t consider the point of genetics. Some Americans do not become obese by choice, but by genetics. Those who are affected by genetics may be very conscience of what they eat, but it still does no justice because of their genes. This weakened his essay. Another weakness is that he focuses too much on the government’s intervention on obesity; instead he should have listed more reasons to why obesity is a personal problem.Taken as a whole, the essay was very short, and took a while to get to the point. â€Å"Are You Responsible for Your Own Weight? † I found this to be a very strong, interesting argumentative essay by Kelly Brownell and Marion Nestle. One strength relates to the fulfillment on attention grabbing in their opening sentence. Brownell and Nestle reminds us that the food industry is like any other business: they must grow. This makes a valid point, and grabs the readers attentions which leads to wanting to read more.Mentioning the counter-argument that obesity is a personal responsibility is also a strength. This tells the reader that she is understanding to the opposing argument, while making hers very clear. Another strength is the fact that gives several examples why personal responsibility isn’t to blame which includes; obesity is growing year after year, it’s human biology for humans to be attracted to good food with high calories, the default approach of promotion of eating better and exercising more has failed for multiple years, and how personal responsibility is a trap.Not only did they have multiple examples, they had clear reasoning for each example, which proves they thought out their argument on obesity. Although this was a very strong, convincing essay, there were a couple of weaknesses. The first weakness is the unawareness of government’s real role in business. In America, our policy towards business relies strictly on the concept of Laissez Faire. Laissez Faire means allowing industry to be free from state intervention, especially restrictions in the form of tariffs and government monopolies.This is a very known concept to many Americans, and this weakens her argument. Another weakness is Brownell and Nestle mentioning they’re attentive to personal responsibility, but didn’t clearly give any reasoning to that. Overall, they essay was very well structured and barely had any weaknesses. The essay â€Å"Are You Responsible for Your Own Weight? † gives a more persuading argument. First of all this essay was clearly structured, which made it easier to read. The first essay was not as easy to read, and not as structured.Brownell and Nestle listed their reasoning, which made their points clear reassuring no confusion. Where as to Balko, there were barely any explained points in his essay, which made it hard to follow. Also, Brownell and Nestle are much more persuasive. They provided clear explained examples of why we are not the only ones responsible for obesity while Balko had little to none examples of why we are responsible. Altogether, Marion Nestle and Kelly Brownell provided a more effective argument on obesity and whose responsible for it than Radley Balko.