Question

2 Case Descriptions

You direct the Healthy Public Policy program for a large municipal public health department that recently has come under fire in a newspaper exposé about contributions from fast food companies to after­school programs for youth that the city government runs. The exposé highlighted the contributions of Big Boss Burger, a local fast food hamburger chain with 12 locations across the city. Big Boss Burger donates cooking equipment to the city’s high priority, after­school cooking program for 9­ to 11­year­olds. Although the program is well-liked by youth, it is regularly threatened by funding cuts. The chain has recently offered to scale up its annual cash donation to cover all food and equipment costs in exchange for renaming the program “The Big Boss Burger Community Kitchen” and for placing the chain’s logo on all signage and promotional materials he highly successful Big Boss Burger chain is owned by a beloved, self-made restaurateur who has spent his entire career in the local food industry. Considered a colorful local personality, he frequently sends Twitter updates that reflect his over­ the top advertising style. One tweet, for example, offered a free sample of the chain’s “quadruple bypass” burger to anyone who visited one of the chain’s locations within the hour. Media spokespersons for the mayor, meanwhile, have reiterated the community benefits of cultivating positive partnerships with local businesses. They note that only registered public health nutrition staff run the city’s cooking programs, while insisting that Big Boss Burger has no influence whatsoever on city policies or youth curricula. The media furor nevertheless has prompted city officials to explore developing a sponsorship policy for municipal child and youth programs. The Medical Health Officer has asked you to prepare a briefing note outlining the key public health considerations that such a sponsorship policy needs to address. You face a dilemma. On the one hand, several years ago your Healthy Public Policy team launched a study of the impact of food and beverage advertising on children. Last year’s update on the study to the Board of Health included a recommendation that city operated venues and programs avoid commercial advertising of food and beverages targeting children younger than 13 years of age. Thus far, the recommendation has not led to any formal policy changes. Municipal employees partly attribute this inaction to the reluctance of local authorities to act when there are no state or national policies that govern sponsorship or marketing restrictions. On the other hand, the financially strapped city relies on engagement with the local business community to fund many city run programs, including health education activities. It is also well known that the owner of Big Boss Burger grew up in a local low-income community and frequently volunteers his time at events in his former neighborhood.

3 Discussion Questions

1. What key points will you emphasize in your briefing note? How will scientific information from past public health reports and decisions influence your response? How should ethical considerations influence your briefing note?

2. What population groups are you most concerned about with regard to the sponsorship policy? What if the cooking program sponsored by Big Boss Burger was for 14­ to 16­year­olds instead of 9­ to 11­year­olds? For adults? For children in a high-income neighborhood?

3. Does corporate sponsorship constitute food promotion? What benefits to the municipality might be derived from Big Boss Burger’s contributions (for example, local economic benefits or having increased public attention and private­ sector support of priority neighborhoods)? How should the public health department weigh these benefits against population health benefits and harms? Consider your response if Big Boss Burger

(a) Had offered its support without the naming rights request?

(b) Had instead offered a cash donation to a parents’ association supporting the program?

(c) Was an organic, vegan comfort food restaurant? or

(d) Was a large, multinational fast food corporation.

4. How will public opinion inform your briefing note? How will you handle the situation given that Big Boss Burger is a highly popular fast food chain and that the owner is a local public personality?

5. What are (and should be) the roles and responsibilities for various city departments in defining the sponsorship policy? Consider, for example, city departments responsible for public health, parks and recreation, municipal licensing, social services, and economic development.

6. Let’s imagine that you are a parent of two girls, ages 6 and 9 years. In an ideal world, how much food and beverage marketing do you think they should be exposed to? How does your perspective as a parent enter into your professional decisions as director of the Healthy Public Policy program? How about your perspective as a voting citizen or city resident?

Answer 1

1.a) What key points will you emphasize in your briefing note

Ans : We have to consider children as protected group from this advertisement of unhealthy foods. it will affect the healthy eating behaviour of the child and it alters the growth and development of the children. from a single meal the children were geting 800- 1200 Kcal, It is not a healthy way of eating for childrens.

B) So many research articles had been published on this context, Eating junk food has essentially turned out to be normal for some families, the scientists found. 33% of youngsters and teenagers announced expending junk food in any event once every week, and 16% to 17% of youths' caloric admission originated from drive-thru food eateries. On a normal visit to a junk food eatery, adolescents requested 800 to 1,100 calories in a solitary feast (30% of which originated from immersed fat or sugar) — that is half of their suggested day by day caloric admission.

C) According to Mary story's research The developing scourge of youth overweight and corpulence is a noteworthy general wellbeing concern. As of now 15% of US youth are overweight, a pervasiveness almost twice as high in youngsters and three times as high in teenagers contrasted with 1980 predominance rates. Almost 66% (60%) of overweight youngsters have no less than one cardiovascular hazard factor (e.g., hypertension, hyperlipidemia) and the pervasiveness of sort 2 diabetes mellitus is expanding in youth. These patterns may genuinely bargain the future wellbeing and profitability of the populace and add to human services costs.

2.A) I was more concerned about the prescholers and adolosecents regarding this sponsorship policy.

B) Either it may be cooking program or eating from the outlets both were harmefull, more than 12 online suppliers are there through out the country but they are not targeting the adolescents or childern through their parents they are getting As a feast,, which is not a healthy option for children so we have to educate the parents regarding this concern, According to my values it is not not advisable for both Childrens and adolescents or high income family child because health and wellness is common for all.

3. I am not sure how the corporate sponsorship will be benifitted but it is against the public health policy, advertising is one type of marketting stratergy We also aware that it is the second largest economy source for the govenment.

Advertisers realize that little children and preschool youngsters have significant buy impact and can effectively arrange buys through what advertisers term the "bother factor" or "annoy control".

Develop federal, state, or local policies to designate schools as food advertising-free zones, where children and adolescents can pursue learning free of commercial influences and pressures. Children's health should never be an acceptable "trade-off," no matter how severe the budgetary constraints in schools or communities.

Create government or state school strategies that advance an empowering eating condition in schools. The offer of sodas and other unhealthy, low nourishment sustenances ought to be denied amid the school day in government funded schools.

4. We have to create a proper awareness to the public and children it is the responsiblity of a government. No matter of well known brand or local person if it is harmful we have to avoid, it is not must to eat all the marketed foods, it is in the hand of an individual to select between the good and bad clearly.

5. The responsibility should be ther with FDA, Health and family welfare department and Marketting and advertisement committee.