Is Ronald the Cause of Obesity?

By in Opinions,

Activist groups really need to focus on bigger issues than attacking a poor redheaded clown? Who doesn’t love Ronald McDonald? Well, apparently that is now the problem. The activist groups are saying that the character Ronald McDonald has hooked children on junk food and is a cause of obesity. They are comparing him to Joe Camel. Cigarettes have been scientifically proven to cause cancer. Cancer is on a different scale than obesity.

First off I think this just to blame obesity on a character. He is the symbol of McDonalds not all the other fast food restaurants that sell similar foods. If you eat fast food responsibly you won’t gain weight. Fast-food can lead to obesity but all foods that are high in fat can lead to that. I guess I can see how a big funny looking clown would be enticing for children, but who ultimately purchases the products? The parents do. The parents decide how much their children consume and what types of things their children consume. If they are allowing their children to eat excessive amounts of fast food I think this witchhunt should be directed towards the parents.

If you are going to take away Ronald McDonald, you are also going to have to take away many of the sugary cereal characters, like the cookie crisp character or the hamburgular. There are so many characters and cartoons that are used in advertising. It is a part of life. Children must learn how to resist these things. They must learn to develop a strong character because there are going to be other temptations in life that they must learn to resist. But the characters are not to blame for obesity in America. Obesity is a problem and there are numerous causes for it. One is the lack of exercise that children get in the United States. Many public schools no longer have recess and most children have to working parents so they have an electronical babysitter, namely the television. Children are not getting enough exercise to sustain a healthy weight. Children are also not eating healthy when they are not eating junk food. Second, the parents are the one’s setting this example. They allow their children to each the fast food and the junk food. The characters are not forcing the parents to make their children eat this unhealthy food. Third, the portion sizes in the US are out of control.

There are many reasons why childhood obesity is on the rise and blaming Ronald McDonald is not going to solve the problem.

  • Jennie

    I had forgotten about Ronald Mc Donald. I don’t think McDonalds even needs him anymore. They had to get rid of the Hamburglar a few years ago and everyone just forgot about it. Ronald is no exception. I think McDonalds is known more for their golden arches than for their outdated clown. It was a gimmick that worked well in the 80′s, not so much now. As long as they keep their Happy Meals, their will be enough fat kids out there. I’m a parent and I can say that I’ve taken my kid to Mc Donald’s zero times this year even though there’s one within every 3 miles. You just have to make the choice as a parent. If there’s a 7 year old kid walking over to McDonalds alone after watching him on TV, then that’s considered a parenting problem. If your kid whines and cries because they saw Ronald and now want you to take them to McDonalds and you take them, that’s also a parenting problem. Get a grip.

  • Ellie

    Ronald McDonald is no more responsible for obesity than cartoons are responsible for violence. This “problem” does not exist because of clever marketing ploys, this problem exists because people are lazy and parents refuse to be parents. If you want to combat obesity, make healthy foods cheaper than junk foods, increase physical education in schools, make after school sports more accessible to all members of the community, increase people’s awareness to fast and healthy meals, and create incentives for parents to take responsibility for their child’s health. And, if the problem really does exist where children see Ronald McDonald and convince their parents to buy them McDonalds because of it, then we should be spending our efforts on teaching parents how to properly and effectively deal with their children. In no way should marketing ploys aimed at children be responsible for a parent’s job. It is up to the parents to decide what is and is not good for their child, and what their children can and cannot get away with. Putting that responsibility on another figure allows parents to become lazier than they already have been. Let us put our time, energy and resources into resolving the problem instead of putting a pretend bandage on it.

  • John

    We’re a marketed-to-death society. Fast foods, whether they come from a chain restaurant, local restaurant or off the grocery shelves are being shoved in our face at every turn. And to “sweeten” the deal, fast-foods are scientifically designed to appeal to our palettes. After all, no amount of marketing can make bad tasting food taste better. And then there are the comfort foods we prepare at home to alleviate the guilt of eating out too often. Yes, a back-yard burger can and probably does have just as much fat as a Ronald burger. Fried chicken is fried chicken no matter where it’s fried. Grocery shelves are loaded with microwave meals, sugary cereals, pastries, and cookies loaded with fat. So, who’s responsible? The politically correct answer is .. all of us. Yes, in our free enterprise society in the U.S. and other countries, we allow ourselves and our children to be programmed (brain-washed) by those who are profiteering. You might say we’re a hooked society. As with tobacco, until we recognize obesity and artery-clogged heart disease as a killer, we won’t do anything about it. It will require activist groups, education, and likely more government (theoretically us) regulation to bring obesity under control. But food, no matter how non-nutricious, is legal and the monster that lures us to eat it to excess is a seemingly unstopable giant.

advertisement


advertisement

Also in Opinions