1. Benton, David. “The plausibility of sugar addiction and its role in obesity and eating disorders, Clinical Nutrition,” Volume 29, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 288-303, ISSN 0261-5614.

Background: The author David Benton researches and tests the hypothesis of whether sucrose consumption leads to addiction. He believes if that were the case, then it would help explain why obesity rates and binging disorders are continuing to rise. There is a large assumption that sugar leads to addiction leaving people to constantly want food that’s high in sucrose. His research is conducted on rats. He finds that as the rat is being subjected to sugary food, the rat’s changing behavioral changes reflect the taste rather than the sugar content within each food. So at the end of his research, he found no strong correlation between sucrose consumption and addiction but did find that palatability creates more of an addiction.

How I used it: I used this source to refute Lauden’s praise for the fast food argument. Lauden argues that fast food created a healthier lifestyle and is more palatable than the times before processed food. So trying to make a correlation between fast food companies drawing customers into overeating. As their food is highly palatable compared to the old days it brings customers back again and again causing them to overeat and deal with the consequences of obesity. And that addiction to fast food would create an unhealthy lifestyle which negates Lauden’s claims.

2. Dor, A., Ferguson, C., Langwith, C., & Tan, E. (2010). A heavy burden: The individual costs of being overweight and obese in the United States. Washington, D.C.: Department of Health Policy, School of Public Health and Health Services, The George Washington University. https://hsrc.himmelfarb.gwu.edu.

Background: This report goes into the financial costs of being overweight and obese in America. The report provides estimated annual costs from individual perspectives such as direct medical costs, disability, disability pension insurance, loss of life, and productivity losses. The report’s research proves that being obese comes with its fair share of expenses as it costs hundreds or thousands more than an average person in each of the individual perspectives mentioned above. 

How I used it: For the definition argument I used this report to categorize fast food as unhealthy food. As an unhealthy food, consumers become obese and end up having to pay more later in medical expenses. In making these expenses known I can present fast food as a costly unhealthy food, and make implementing a social cost a beneficial solution.

For the causal argument, I used the information from this report to be the detrimental downfalls that are caused by fast food. I used the extra costs as one of the effects of eating fast food which follows all the negative effects before consuming fast food. In making fast food sound awful because it brings obesity, increased medical costs, and shortened lifespan as an effect of consumption I can present fast food as a treacherous food from production to even after it is consumed.

3. Fuhrman J. “The Hidden Dangers of Fast and Processed Food.” Am J Lifestyle Med. 2018 Apr 3;12(5):375-381.

Background: This journal article discusses why fast food is at fault for our obesity rates reaching numbers so high. The author does this by going into depth on the ingredients in processed foods that lead us to diabetes, increased heart disease, obesity, and more. Through his research he states that white flour products with sweetening agents increase tumor growth, excess calories decrease lifespan, anything cooked with oil is fast food and the ingestion of these oil leads to obesity, disease, and premature aging. And the goal of the author is to have professionals try and change the food being sold into something that is actually healthy.

How I used it: I used this source to establish the grand nature of fast food’s presence in our society. So much so that anything cooked with oil can be considered fast food which leads to detrimental health risks. Building fast food up this high as to say that it is everywhere and trying to kill us should bring attention to the fact that it is a problem, and solutions should be found. The idea of solutions opens the door for implementing a social cost.

4. Jain, Sarah. “ANALYZING THE PUBLIC HEALTH CRISIS IN INDIA FUELED BY THE GROWTH OF THE FAST-FOOD INDUSTRY.” Www.ijsser.org, Mar. 2020, https://ijsser.org/2020files/ijsser_05__53.pdf.

Background: Sarah Jain discusses the influence of the fast food industry on India and its society. With the increase in fast food in India, the consumption habits of Indians have significantly increased. Jain blames both the convenience and the food chains respecting the religious beliefs in India that prohibit the consumption of beef and pork for fast food’s success. The increased consumption has raised concerns about public health, especially among the younger crowd. Such that, Jain discusses how a Pigovian tax which is basically a social cost tacked onto the market prices would help deter the impending health crisis India might face if they continue to increase fast food consumption rates.

How I used it: I used this source as a stepping stone in identifying fast food as unhealthy. This source provided a great example of recognition among others that fast food negatively impacts our society so much as to call it a “public health concern.” The discussion of the Pigovian tax also really helped draw attention to how a social cost is a viable solution.

5. Laudan, Rachael. “In Praise of Fast Food.” My.northland.edu, University of California Press, Feb. 2010.

Background: The author Rachael Lauden talks about how the invention of fast food or processed foods has revolutionized the food industry. Lauden takes the stance of fast food and old food to two extremes. The old food she describes is everything organic. So she praises fast food for improving our lifestyles, because of time convenience, palatability, healthier, and food stability. Time was convenient because parents didn’t have to spend all day in the kitchen making meals from scratch. Tastier since fast foods contain sugars and fats that make them taste way better than organic foods. Healthier because instead of barely meeting the basic nutritional values for our bodies, processed foods are mass-produced and easily exceed these values. And better food stability because foods like fresh produce can be prolonged way than non-processed foods.

How I used it: I used this source as my target for my rebuttal argument. I used the fast food pros to put more of the blame on the customers. Fast food is way better than the foods from the 1900s but we have overused its power. This is leading us to become over-dependent on fast food and overeating. Not only are we becoming obese, but also creating an unavoidable food source.

6. Norton, Trae. “From the lab to the supermarket: In vitro meat as a viable alternative to traditional meat production.” J. Food L. & Pol’y 11 (2015): 157.

Background: This source discusses meat production’s contribution to greenhouse gas emissions, pollution, and harm to the environment while trying to promote lab-grown meat as a healthier alternative. The article explains how large meat production has become. 30% of the planet’s ice-free surface is taken up by livestock systems. The process of raising food for livestock results in pesticides polluting our waters.

The source mainly focuses on lab-grown meat as an alternative to regular meat production. Lab-grown meat striving to become a new source of food is restricted by a lack of research and the customers conforming to lab-grown foods. In comparison to regular meat, lab-grown meat contains less fat, lacks as much taste, and would cut down the carbon emissions produced by regular meat production.

How I used it: I used this source to help take down fast food by attacking its main and most popular ingredient, meat. Not only does this source help identify meat production’s harmful effects, but also provides an alternative that would help get rid of meat production. The good thing about the alternative is that lab-grown meat at this point isn’t considered a viable alternative cause we have yet to mass produce it and is extremely expensive to produce. The nonviable alternative leaves space for social costs to jump in since the search shows that there is a need to help defend against meat production. 

7. Olson, Olivia. “An Unhappy Meal: How Government Spending Forced Reliance on Fast Food.” Bedrosian Center, USC Bedrosian Center, 18 Dec. 2018.

Background: The author Olivia Olson talks about the government’s involvement with the growing fast-food industry and tries to raise awareness about the connection between poverty, obesity, and fast food. While establishing obesity is an epidemic affecting large populations in America due to fast food’s influence. Within the grand scheme of things, fast food flourishes in America because our government gives a majority of agricultural subsidies to the crops that are processed into fast foods. Those subsidies deprive organic produce production leaving fruits and vegetables more expensive than fast food. Also, since fast food has become so cheap low-income people have become subject to more instances of obesity, diabetes, and heart disease. 

How I used it: I used this source to reinforce the idea that fast food has become inevitable in society. Not only does the government promote the fast food industry, but it becomes the only option for low-income families to turn to since it is cheap. This idea contributed to blaming consumers while not dropping the fault on them. By making fast food seem like the only option, I can still keep my consumer audience and still refute Lauden’s “Praise for Food.”

8. Özkara, A., Akyıl, D., & Konuk, M. (2016). Pesticides, Environmental Pollution, and Health. In M. L.  Larramendy, & S. Soloneski (Eds.), Environmental Health Risk – Hazardous Factors to Livin, https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/50482. 

Background: This source discusses pesticides being dangerous polluting chemicals despite their success in producing high crop yields. The increase in food production has increased agricultural production leading to the increased use of pesticides. The more we use pesticides the more pollution we create that will run into our waters and affect our wildlife. Pesticides get absorbed into the soil, water, and air to become a threat to as many as possible. These chemicals can cause cancers like Hodgkin’s lymphoma and leukemia. 

How I used it: I used this information to create a part of my causal argument. The use of pesticides revolves around the food industry, and the fast food industry is the biggest there is when it comes to selling food. So making pesticides a negative side effect that comes with the production of fast food helps create a sense of danger which helps me argue for a social cost without sounding outrageous.

9. Petimar, Joshua, et al. “Changes in the Calorie and Nutrient Content of Purchased Fast Food Meals after Calorie Menu Labeling: A Natural Experiment.” PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, 12 July 2021.

Background: The source contains information that relates to how many calories per transaction happened in the average purchase at fast food restaurants. The researchers used a combination of calculations from 104 restaurants that are part of a fast food franchise in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas concluding that the average purchase contains around 1,500 calories. They also found that when calories are labeled on the menu customers purchase fewer items compared to when the items are not labeled. Though fewer items were purchased, the number of calories per transaction stayed the same. 

How I used it: I used this source to establish the fact that fast food serves meals that almost meet the number of calories an average person needs in an entire day. Since that is the case and I can get my audience to agree, I can easily argue that people are overeating if they are eating fast food multiple times a week. Because it is not like people are just eating one fast food meal and eating a snack later. They are consuming three meals a day, and with the contribution of a 1500-calorie meal, the nutritional limits are exceeded.

10. Smead, Spencer. “America’s Fast Food Obsession – Global Food, Health, and Society.” Web.colby.edu, 29 Oct. 2008.

Background: Spencer Smead argues that America is addicted to fast food because of its convenience and time-saving. Fast food can be picked up in only a matter of minutes rather than going to the store, getting ingredients, going back home, then cooking, and finally eating. Instead of doing all that we can pay six bucks for a burger, fries, and a drink and have it served in just a few minutes. Smead believes that because of fast food’s convenience has a large impact on the American food economy. It’s fast and easy, so who wouldn’t want to eat at fast food restaurants. 

How I used it: I used this source to enhance the inevitable quality of fast food that makes it so addicting and important in our modern society. The customers know that the food isn’t good for them, but they can’t help themselves because of the cheap food convenience. Once customers get hooked on something easy, it is hard to get them to spend a lot of time and money preparing a meal.

11. Yahya, F., Zafar, R., & Shafiq, S. (2013). “Trend of fast food consumption and its effect on Pakistani society.” Food Science and Quality Management, 11, 1-7. 

Background: The authors discuss fast food as a deceiving health problem. Even though fast food is tasty, they are filled with unhealthy components. The use of fast food has guided people into unhealthy lifestyles that cause obesity, indigestion problems, and high cholesterol. Due to the busy workplace in Pakistan, a lot of people rely on fast food because it is quick, tasty, and easy. Studies talked about by the authors show that only three percent of children’s school meals that came from fast food restaurants met dietary standards. 

How I used it: I used this source to reinforce the idea that fast food is not healthy. The research done in the article helps talk about how fast food negatively affects society to the point where consumers continuously eat food that will slowly kill them. Establishing multiple points of evidence that discuss fast food’s negative effects on society as a whole and the individual health of the consumers helps contribute to categorizing fast food as unhealthy.