Resume Of Avinash Gunda - Email Protected 440

Resumeavinash Gunda Emailemailprotected440

Resumeavinash Gunda Emailemailprotected440

RESUME Avinash Gunda Email: [email protected] 4407 Dixie Hill Rd Ph: Apt#208, Fairfax – 22030 Virginia. USA. Career Objective: To devotedly engage myself in result-oriented research and development towards meeting newer challenges in computer sciences and its application. Personal Strengths: · Comprehensive problem-solving ability. · Adaptability and willingness to learn. Educational Qualifications: Master’s in information technology – Cyber Security The University of the Potomac Vienna.

VA. 22180. USA. Year of Completion: Dec 2018 Graduation Major Degree: B. Tech in Bio-Medical Engineering J.B.

Institute of Engineering and Technology (JNTU - Hyderabad) Year of Completion: 2010 Technical Skills: · Languages : Basic C, Sql · Operating System : WINDOWS XP/vista/Unix · Software : MS Office Work Experience · Worked as a Junior Biomedical Engineer at CARE Hospitals, Nampally, Hyderabad from Dec 2010 to Oct 2011. · Worked with PACE Hospitals, Hyderabad as Biomedical Engineer from Feb 2012 to Sept 2012. · Worked with Omega Hospitals , Hyderabad as Biomedical Engineer form Sept 2012 to Jan 2013. · Working with JSS Medical Research India Ltd ( Max Neeman Medical International) as Biomedical Engineer form Jan 2013 to Oct 2016 on Cyberonics VNS projects. Personal Information: Nationality : Indian Sex : Male Date of Birth : Aug 2nd, 1988 Languages Known : English, Telugu and Hindi Relocation : Will relocate to any location in US.

Paper For Above instruction

The influence of unhealthy food taxation on public health and consumer behavior has garnered significant attention from policymakers and public health experts worldwide. To understand the implications of such fiscal measures, it is vital to analyze empirical data and research findings that shed light on their effectiveness and limitations. This paper explores the impact of taxation on unhealthy foods, such as sugary drinks, chips, and fast foods, focusing on their role in curbing obesity and related chronic diseases.

One of the pioneering studies in this domain is by Colchero et al. (2019), which examined Mexico's implementation of taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) and junk food. The study found a notable reduction in the purchase and consumption of these unhealthy products, especially among lower-income groups. Notably, after two years of tax implementation, SSB consumption decreased by approximately 12%, demonstrating that fiscal policies can influence consumer behavior appreciably. The authors argued that the price elasticity of demand for sugary drinks was higher among low-income households, indicating that taxation is a progressive measure that can help reduce health disparities by encouraging healthier choices among vulnerable populations.

Similarly, Franck, Grandi, and Eisenberg (2013) discuss the broader implications of taxing junk food as a strategy to counter obesity. They highlight that small excise taxes, when properly targeted, have the potential to generate substantial revenue that can be reinvested into public health programs. However, their analysis also recognizes potential limitations, such as industry opposition and the possibility of consumers substituting taxed foods with other unhealthy options. They caution that the effectiveness of such taxes depends heavily on the complementary measures that accompany fiscal policies, such as public awareness campaigns and improved access to healthy foods.

Further supporting these findings, Mytton, Clarke, and Rayner (2012) conducted a comprehensive review of international experiences with taxing unhealthy foods. They found that in countries like Mexico, Hungary, and the United Kingdom, taxation has led to decreases in the consumption of taxed products. The authors emphasized that price changes are one of the most powerful tools to influence diet quality. Additionally, they noted that taxes tend to be more effective among populations that are more sensitive to price fluctuations, often correlating with lower socioeconomic status. This suggests that such policies can contribute to reducing health inequalities by making healthy options more financially accessible.

Beyond behavioral influence, the economic rationale behind taxing unhealthy foods relates to the external costs associated with their consumption. Consumption of high-calorie, nutrient-poor foods contributes significantly to the global burdens of obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease (Nestle & Jacobson, 2000). These health issues impose enormous direct costs on healthcare systems and indirect costs through lost productivity. Therefore, imposing taxes on unhealthy foods can be viewed as a form of internalizing negative externalities, encouraging manufacturers and consumers to shift toward healthier products.

Nevertheless, critics of dietary taxes argue that such measures might be regressive, disproportionately affecting lower-income populations who spend a larger share of their income on food (Miller & Peden, 2020). While this concern is valid, empirical data suggest that policy design can mitigate regressivity. For example, revenue generated from taxes can be reinvested into programs that support healthier eating in low-income communities, such as subsidized fruits and vegetables or nutrition education (Cawley & Frisvold, 2018). Moreover, the overall health benefits, including reductions in obesity and related illnesses, tend to outweigh the financial burden on vulnerable groups, especially if taxation is part of a comprehensive public health strategy.

In conclusion, the available evidence indicates that taxing unhealthy foods and beverages is an effective strategy to improve public health outcomes. While challenges remain in policy implementation and addressing socioeconomic disparities, the consistent decline in consumption of taxed unhealthy products underscores the potential of fiscal measures as part of broader health promotion initiatives. Continued research and tailored policies are essential to maximize benefits and minimize unintended consequences, ultimately reducing the global burden of diet-related chronic diseases.

References

  • Colchero, A., Rivera, J., Ng, S. W., Batis, C., Taillie, L., & Popkin, B. M. (2019). Invited talk: The Mexico experience with SSB and junk food taxes: Impact after 1 and 2 years of the taxes. Obesity Research & Clinical Practice, 13(1), 36-37.
  • Franck, C., Grandi, S. M., & Eisenberg, M. J. (2013). Taxing junk food to counter obesity. American Journal of Public Health.
  • Mytton, O. T., Clarke, D., & Rayner, M. (2012). Taxing unhealthy food and drinks to improve health. BMJ, 344, e2931.
  • Nestle, M., & Jacobson, M. F. (2000). The importance of food policy in obesity prevention. JAMA, 284(9), 1215–1218.
  • Miller, P., & Peden, A. (2020). Addressing the regressivity of health taxes: Approaches and implications. Health Policy, 124(4), 377-382.
  • Cawley, J., & Frisvold, D. (2018). The impacts of sugar-sweetened beverage taxes on dietary behaviors and health outcomes. Current Nutrition Reports, 7(2), 1-9.
  • Hawkes, C., & Lobstein, T. (2011). Regulating the commercial promotion of food to children: A review of actions, policy tools and their impact. Obesity Reviews, 12(5), e38–e48.
  • Zhou, S., & Wang, X. (2017). Fiscal policies and healthy diets: An overview of global practices. Global Food Policy Report.
  • Swinburn, B. A., Sacks, G., & Hall, K. D. (2011). The global obesity pandemic: Shaped by local conditions and global influences. The Lancet, 378(9793), 804–814.
  • Whitney, E. N., & Rolfes, S. R. (2018). Understanding nutrition. Cengage Learning.

Related Assignments