Empirical arguments have provided the social, cultural, economic, and health justifications that obesity is more than just an issue concerning additional weight solely. Obesity is a personal health care responsibility. This vested responsibility implies that individuals should participate proactively and beyond a reasonable doubt in safeguarding healthy living. Obesity complications are associated with the choice of food eaten, and the shaped body takes as a result. The consumers should remain protected as well as educated on dietary habits as a way of enhancing their responsibility. The variables (environmental, economic, social, and health bottom-lines) affecting dietary choices as well as physical stature are largely manipulated in public. This makes it difficult for the majority to maintain an individual balance (based on these variables), particularly when prone to obesity complications. Based on a cost-benefit perspective and wide-scale impact assessment, a personalized approach will instill individual dietary discipline, while cushioning a shock from health risks involved. The public responsibility approach may be prone to finger-pointing or shifting blame, unnecessarily.
This means that due diligence should apply to avoid infringing the right to choice (and diversity) for the non-obese as well as to deny manufacturers the right to competitive bidding for a larger market share. Even if weight is gained due to eating fast foods at fast food retailers, an individual has the responsibility to control weight gaining (through fitness programs, for example) as well as understand their hereditary background which is linked to obesity problems. Before claiming a public agent, such as fast food retailer, to be responsible for the cause of obesity, hereditary or lack of fitness activities should be taken into account, and a preventive paradigm should substitute a damage control one. This negates the precautionary principle held by the due diligence concept. Public responsibility makes the food producer or manufacturer vulnerable to court cases and judicial decisions. The concept of demand-supply proves that personal responsibility referred to the customer demand for fast foods is the main power that forces the supplier to meet customer needs and requirements.
From a social and cultural perspective, legal action should focus on the individual right to choose as well as public education. Manufactured foods and fast food have wide market access across the world. Food manufacturers should legally be obliged to product labeling and explanation (duty to warn) to enhance consumer safety and awareness of the health risks involved. Obesity thrives against the backdrop of disparities in health care access and affordability. Moreover, there is a trend of a wealthy consumer lifestyle, which includes aggressive advertising that entices fast food addiction and market flooding of processed foods. These factors aggravate the proneness to obesity within a global society.