# data[].attributes.body
1. Introduction

2. Voiceover

3. Literature Review

4. Point of Contention 1

5. Point of Contention 2

6. Concession

7. Refutation

8. Conclusion

9. References

# data[].attributes.body
Fast food has become a major part of American life because it’s cheap, quick, and super easy to get. But over time, eating fast food leads to serious health problems like obesity, heart disease, and diabetes. Fast food is also tied to bigger issues like how companies market their products and which communities they target. It’s become clear that fast food plays a big role in our nation’s health problems, especially because it affects low-income and vulnerable groups the most.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Collage of hundreds of fast food company logos. Image source: Holy Family Lampost, 2025.

# data[].attributes.body
Introduction:

I learned that fast food has a major impact on both individual health and public health in the U.S. While weight gain and increased BMI is a short-term effect, fast food is also linked to serious long-term issues like diabetes, heart disease, and metabolic problems. But beyond the health side of things, research also shows that fast food affects certain communities more than others due to exploitative marketing.

Short-Term Effects:

Fast food has been linked to short-term health problems that can become apparent quickly. In the short term, people who eat fast food regularly tend to have higher BMIs, increased body fat, and elevated cholesterol levels (Rosenheck, 2008). These effects can quickly become apparent due to the high amounts of saturated fats and lack of nutrients in most fast food items.

Pereira (2005) conducted a study and found a significant amount of weight gain in people who ate fast food more than twice a week, even over a short period. These changes may seem small at first, but can lead to serious problems later if habits don’t change.

Long Term Consequences:

Not only does eating fast food lead to short-term health effects, but leads to potentially fatal diseases. Consuming fast food over an extended period of time (years) significantly increases the risk of developing serious health conditions such as heart disease, diabetes, and metabolic syndrome (Nelson et al., 2006). Rosenheck (2008) supports these findings, also linking fast food to metabolic syndrome and a higher risk for cardiovascular diseases.This has led to many people in our country struggling with these diseases stemming from the fast food they consume.

Predatory Marketing:

A big part of my research also focused on how fast food companies market their products and who they specifically target. Mai and Hoffman (2014) explain how these companies use eye-catching ads, bright colors, and playful branding to make fast food seem fun, affordable, and convenient, especially for children. Fast food is often marketed as a quick solution for busy people who don’t have the time or energy to cook at home (Zhong and DeVoe, 2018). This messaging is also prevalent in low-income communities, where time and financial stress are common.

Conclusion:

Overall, the research I’ve looked at makes it clear that fast food isn’t just bad for your health in both the short and long term, but it’s part of a bigger predatory system. These companies use specific marketing tactics and target low-income communities and children making fast food making fast food seem fun, cheap, and convenient. These companies are destroying our health as Americans. We need to realize the fact that we are putting extremely unhealthy food in our bodies every time we eat fast food, and we need to start making more conscious choices about our health in this country before it’s too late.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Man aggressively eating fast food. Image source: Super Natural Eats, 2022.

# data[].attributes.body
Short and long-term health effects:

Fast food has been linked to both short-term and long-term health issues. In the short term, people who eat fast food regularly tend to have higher BMIs, increased body fat, and elevated cholesterol levels (Rosenheck, 2008). These effects can become apparent quickly because of the high amounts of saturated fats and low amount of nutrients in these foods. Pereira (2005) observed a significant amount of weight gain in subjects, even over a short period of time.

Over the long term, the consequences become even more serious. Pereira (2005) also found that people who consumed fast food more than twice a week had a higher risk of developing insulin resistance in the future, a precursor to type 2 diabetes. Freeman (2007) linked consistent fast food consumption to chronic illnesses such as diabetes, heart disease, and metabolic syndrome. These findings are part of a larger body of research showing that frequent fast food intake contributes not only to immediate health concerns but also to life threatening diseases over time.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Street crowded with fast food signs. Image source: David McNew/Getty Images via The New Republic, 2017.

# data[].attributes.body
Exploitative Marketing:

Fast food consumption isn’t necessarily all about people making bad choices but also about how the system is set up to make fast food the most available and convenient option, especially for certain groups.

Fast food companies don’t just market their food but they also promote convenience, affordability, and instant gratification. Their advertising frames fast food as a quick, easy, solution that fits into an Americans everyday life. This messaging is especially common in low-income areas, where fast food feels like the only affordable or available option. Stender (2007) found that food companies often expand into low-income communities to capitalize on residents’ limited food choices and economic vulnerability. This shows the lengths that these chains will go to in order to maximize their profits, at the expense of public health.

Companies also put billboards and signs everywhere with their next greatest deal to convince you to walk through their doors. Mai and Hoffman (2015) explain how fast food brands use bright visuals, catchy slogans, and playful imagery to make their products appear appealing, especially to children. It shows how these businesses profit from people’s limited options while avoiding responsibility for the harm their products cause our health system.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans there was a brief moment of shocked compassion before racial anxieties flooded the Internet. Victims of the disaster were quickly recast as looters, criminals, and layabouts. They were government "dependents" seeking even more entitlements now that they were bona fide survivors. Some of these hideous opinions drew on the physical "evidence" of the bad character of hurricane survivors: their size. The mostly black bodies crowding the Superdome, getting on rafts, and being carried away by helicopters, were too large for online critics. Obesity, while common in the U.S. and over-represented in the South, was conflated with blackness. Black bodies fleeing New Orleans were not only linked to historic stereotypes of menace and criminality but also slothfulness, helplessness, and a tropical torpidity unwelcome in hard-working America.

University of Chicago Press, 248 pp., $25.00

African Americans are more likely to be obese in the United States than their white counterparts. The same is true for Hispanics. For some conservatives, that may be an indictment. For the rest of us, it is a public health problem. The rise in obesity in the U.S. is an epidemic and much of the root causes lie in poverty, a condition more prevalent in communities of color. In many U.S. cities, bodegas serve dinner in the form of chips and soda to low-income people living nearby who have no access to neighborhood supermarkets. For those without much money or options, fast food can be a blessing: a full meal that is quick and affordable in a safe and predictable setting. Yet, these very meals are one of the country's biggest public health menaces. Filled with fat and sugar, fast food is contributing greatly to obesity, diabetes, and heart disease.

Supersizing Urban America, a new book by the historian of public health, Chin Jou, shows that fast food did not just find its way to low-income urban areas: It was brought there by the federal government. In the wake of the 1968 riots, Nixon's law-and-order presidency began programs that doled out federal funds to fast food franchises. The administration asserted that black-owned businesses serving fast food would help to cure urban unrest by promoting an entrepreneurial spirit in poor communities. The federal subsidization of McDonald's and other chains to enter urban markets previously considered too poor or dangerous was meant to promote "black capitalism." It did make a select group of black entrepreneurs wealthy, but it was mostly a boon to fast food giants searching for new market demographics.

Like "ethnic" advertising in the alcohol and cigarette industries, fast food companies sold a dream of middle class affluence to communities of color that were nonetheless still excluded from the housing and education that would make those aspirations a reality. Jou's book shows conclusively that obesity and diet in America have little to do with personal responsibility, and everything to do with public policy.

Large bodies used to be a sign of health and vigor. President Lyndon B. Johnson's War on Poverty targeted malnutrition and used the emaciated bodies of unemployed Appalachians to illustrate the shame of America's wealth gap. It was Johnson who in 1964 began the Equal Opportunity Loan program that helped bring fast food to low-income areas. The agenda gained traction after violent unrest broke out in Los Angeles, Newark, and a dozen more cities in the mid-1960s. In the aftermath, Johnson's administration called for a "Marshall Plan" to revitalize the ghetto. In communities where riots had occurred, only 25 percent of businesses were black owned and most were small. Providing loans to restaurants promoted the wholesome mission of the program, but fast food was also industrialized food. It replaced the soda fountains and greasy spoon neighborhood restaurants of the previous era with streamlined burger assembly lines answering to corporate shareholders.

Nixon, Johnson's successor, saw in the promotion of black businesses a mixture of markets and morals that fit with his anti-communist agenda and the conservative belief that all the poor need to prosper is uplift. In a position statement released after he created the Office of Minority Business Enterprise in 1969, Nixon stated: "What we need is to get private enterprise into the ghetto, and get the people of the ghetto into private enterprise-not only as workers, but as managers and owners." The program was allocated $65 million in the first year, although Nixon asked for three times as much, and fast food companies were some of the most eager participants. They used federal money to expand franchises from the white suburbs into low-income black neighborhoods, providing an easily-copied business model and a tested product.

The administration asserted that black-owned businesses serving fast food would help to cure urban unrest.

The growth of fast food franchises, like McDonald's, into black neighborhoods with black owners was a highly visible step taken towards Nixon's dream of a more robust Black Capitalism. The Small Business Administration (SBA) made thousands of loans in the early 1970s to black entrepreneurs. There were just 405 minority franchises in the United States in 1969. By 1974, there were 2,453. This growth owed not a little to loans from the SBA. McDonald's went from one minority franchise in 1969 to 10,142 in 1984 (mostly African American).

Just as fast food companies attempted to "modernize" ghetto diets they also wanted to create a new black business class. For the government, this group was important because of their community standing, which could purportedly help to keep order. For fast food companies, the new black bourgeoisie would serve as their community liaisons, often doing business in places where white owners were distrusted. Jou shows that under the guise of community empowerment, federal loan programs may have diversified who accessed capital, but they also redistributed money upward to fast food companies, which grew their businesses while bypassing riskier investments that didn't involve government support.

The federal loan programs never met their original goal of granting 40 percent of Small Business Administration loans to African Americans. The number never reached more than 23 percent. Yet, this did not stop the gleeful marketing of the program as a means to connect black entrepreneurs with funding. The government saw the franchise system as a form of tutelage in proper capitalist citizenship and did not bother to hide their paternalistic goals. Some participants agreed with them. Brady Keys, a former NFL player and star of the Nixon era program, opened multiple franchises; between 1969 and 1973, he received $9 million in loans. He was grateful for the apprenticeship the scheme gave him. But as Jou makes clear, many black franchise owners did not need this kind of guidance. Some were overqualified, such as Robert Alexander, who operated a Hardee's in Washington D.C., despite holding a PhD and having previously worked for the CIA under the Ford administration.

The grantees of federal loan programs, Jou shows, were often disappointed by their trajectories after accepting the loans. Many of those who operated McDonald's and Burger King restaurants complained of racial redlining by the companies, stating that they were expected to operate franchises in black neighborhoods only and were never given locations in more prosperous areas. In this sense, the operators served as a sort of managerial class amongst the marginalized: resenting the white corporate profits from their labor and also seeking to differentiate themselves from poorer residents of color. Jou's book sadly does not contain enough conversations with these entrepreneurs that would make this relationship clearer. However, one can infer that as middle class blacks took advantage of waning residential segregation to move to suburbs, more privileged entrepreneurs operating businesses in the inner city felt a gap between themselves and their patrons. As inner-city poverty became more concentrated, the gap between black business people and their working class customers grew severely.

One is reminded of the McDowell family in Coming to America, who own a knock-off McDonald's in Queens and treat their customers and employees with disdain: including Eddie Murphy, a young African prince in disguise. Of course the Shakespearean swapping of class identity in Coming to America is the whole joke: By 1988, when the film came out, there was nothing regal about McDonald's or, by proxy, McDowell's. The chain was barely clinging to its middle class image. Jou shows us that as the general public has learned more about eating healthy, fast food has been demonized along with those who eat it. Too often, burgers and fries are not understood as the sustenance of last resort but as a pleasure of the irresponsible and gluttonous.

Many cities have been more intent on cracking down on the ingredients in Happy Meals rather than raising the hourly wages of those who make them.

The Reagan Era antipathy for the poor and shrinking of the social safety net is expressed in elite condescension towards those who eat at fast food restaurants. Fast food is viewed as a matter of taste rather than resources even, sometimes, by public health advocates. As Jou puts it: "Foodie disdain for 'fast food values' elides the ways in which historical circumstances, governmental practices, and targeted, relentless food industry advertising helped create and reinforce fast food consumption in America's low-income urban communities." In places like the Bronx, where 62 percent of restaurants are fast food and childhood diabetes is skyrocketing, the fast food market was not just created by the appetites of residents but also by the corporate craving to increase market share, even if that means drawing in less affluent consumers.

Supersizing Urban America makes clear that addiction to fast food is not a moral lapse or a brain chemical but the effect of poverty. Jou recognizes that "low wages affect the type of diets households can afford." She also shows that anti-poverty programs have had ulterior motives, often creating markets for large companies. Politicians like Michael Bloomberg are often fascinated with the 'bad choices' of the poor requiring the government to mandate posted calorie-counts, rather than the calculated logic of multinational chain restaurants that keep wages far below the cost of living. Many cities have been more intent on cracking down on the ingredients in Happy Meals rather than raising the hourly wages of those who make them.

Fast food once symbolized middle-class status, prized in neighborhoods where many were just scraping by on public assistance and food stamps. Today, it has become much more identified as the food that people who labor in fast food restaurants eat, as the miserable pay leaves them few other options.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Fast Food Chains Supersized Inequality

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans there was a brief moment of shocked compassion before racial anxieties flooded the Internet. Victims of the disaster were quickly recast as looters, criminals, and layabouts. They were government "dependents" seeking even more entitlements now that they were bona fide survivors.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Charles Barkley eating pizza. Image source: Focus on Sport/Getty Images via Sports Illustrated, 2015

# data[].attributes.body
Some argue that fast food can be a part of a balanced lifestyle if enjoyed in moderation. Dr. Kim Kaiser supports this idea saying, “Moderation is key,” and notes that personal discipline and exercise can allow for occasional indulgence (Han, 2019, para 12). This is a valid point by Dr. Kaiser and I believe that a decent number of Americans could consume fast food within a healthy diet given certain circumstances.

Also, fast food restaurants have started to incorporate healthier options in addition to their usual high calorie meals. Katie Horrell, MS, RDN, CPT, says there are ways to make fast food meals as nutritious as possible by substituting items (2024). She says you could "choose grilled foods over fried, opt for whole grains when possible and add a fruit or veggie side" (Horell, 2024, para 23).

These points could make the argument that for some individuals, fast food in moderation may not be entirely detrimental to health. However, it's important to consider whether this approach is practical for the broader American population.​

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Large crowd at a McDonald’s restaurant. Image source: Globe Newswire, 2012.

# data[].attributes.body
While moderation or careful substitution sounds reasonable in theory, I don’t think it necessarily works in practice for most Americans. It’s important to consider that most Americans don’t live a highly disciplined lifestyle. They’re not eating fast food occasionally, but rather they’re eating it several times a week. And while healthier options and substitutions are available, I don’t think they’re commonly chosen.

Dr. Kaiser states that she exercises “45 minutes to an hour per day, 6 days per week” and enjoys “outdoor activities on the weekends” (Han, 2019, para 13). Dr. Kaiser herself admits that her ability to eat fast food in moderation is supported by her active lifestyle and carefully managed meals (Han, 2019, para 13). So while she and the few other disciplined Americans may be able to make it work, most might not.

While the idea of substitution and moderation are awesome in theory and may work for a small population of people, the reality of the situation is that it is not solving the broader issues of over consumption in this country.

# data[].attributes.body
Fast food has become a public health hazard. The research shows that the consumption of fast food is strongly linked to obesity and long-term disease (Freeman, 2007). It’s also concerning how fast food companies are targeting specific communities with marketing that encourages eating unhealthy food. When fast food is constantly advertised and placed right in front of Americans every day, the choice starts to feel less like a decision and more like the only option.

We need to cut fast food out of our diets and be more conscious about what we put in our bodies. As Americans, we must address these issues and push for policy changes that hold fast food corporations accountable for the food they put out into the world.

# data[].attributes.body
Currie, J., DellaVigna, S., Moretti, E., & Pathania, V. (2010). The Effect of Fast Food Restaurants on Obesity and Weight Gain. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 2(3), 32–63. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25760073

Freeman, A. (2007). Fast food: oppression through poor nutrition. California Law Review, 95(6), 2221-2260. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1639302

Fuhrman, J. (2018). The Hidden Dangers of Fast and Processed Food. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 12(5), 375–381. https://doi.org/10.1177/1559827618766483

Han, D. Y. (2019, July 18). You can still eat junk food and be healthy – UK providers explain. UK HealthCare. https://ukhealthcare.uky.edu/wellness-community/blog/you-can-still-eat-junk-food-be-healthy-uk-providers-explain

Healthdirect Australia. (2023, August 15). Junk food and your health. Healthdirect. https://www.healthdirect.gov.au/junk-food-and-your-health

Horrell, K. (2024, June 3). Why Exactly Is Fast Food Bad for You? GoodRx; GoodRx. https://www.goodrx.com/well-being/diet-nutrition/why-fast-food-bad-for-you

‌

Mai, R., & Hoffmann, S. (2015). How to Combat the Unhealthy = Tasty Intuition: The Influencing Role of Health Consciousness. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 34(1), 63–83. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44164825

Nelson, M. C., Gordon-Larsen, P., North, K. E., & Adair, L. S. (2006). Body Mass Index Gain, Fast Food, and Physical Activity: Effects of Shared Environments over Time. Obesity, 14, 701-709. https://doi.org/10.1038/oby.2006.80

Pereira, M. A., Kartashov, A. I., Ebbeling, C. B., Van Horn, L., Slattery, M. L., Jacobs, D. R., Jr., & Ludwig, D. S. (2005). Fast-food habits, weight gain, and insulin resistance (the CARDIA study): 15-year prospective analysis. The Lancet, 365(9453), 36–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-

6736(04)17663-0

Rosenheck, R. (2008). Fast food consumption and increased caloric intake: a systematic review of a trajectory towards weight gain and obesity risk. Obesity Reviews, 9, 535-547. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-789X.2008.00477.x

Smith, A. F. (2016). Fast food: The good, the bad and the hungry. Reaktion Books.

Stender, S., Dyerberg, J., & Astrup, A. (2007). Fast food: unfriendly and unhealthy. International Journal of Obesity, 31, 887–890. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ijo.0803616

Zhong, C.-B., & DeVoe, S. E. (2010). You Are How You Eat: Fast Food and Impatience. Psychological Science, 21(5), 619–622. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41062259