Gum in School (REVISED)

Before making a case of my own, I will refute Pro’s arguments. I apologize if the paragraphs I type up are too long and do not reach my opponent’s expectations. P1: Gum has studies that show that gum helps students focus and learn better. It is necessary to point out that the source Pro provided (in the comments section) is highly unreliable, considering it is wiki. answers. com. A question, “Does chewing gum help you concentrate” was answered by several individuals on Pro’s source. Not only may the answers contain bias, but the answers are highly subjective. In fact, one person who answered the question stated that only some people concentrate better when they chew gum, whereas others are distracted by it; thus, this essentially renders her entire point moot. Pro then goes on to say that children work better when there is something distracting them. In case Pro did not know, the definition of distract is, “to draw away or divert, as the mind or attention” [1]. I ask Pro how it is possible for students to improve their quality of work if they are not paying attention to it. In response to Andrew Scholey’s studies, I will prove that chewing gum has detrimental health affects on a person’s body—so many that it outweighs improved short-term memory (this will be expanded upon in future arguments). Furthermore, when an individual chews gum in class, they may gain better short-term memory, but other students may be distracted by the sound of chewing gum; thus, the short-term memory effect is rather redundant since it is hindering several students’ capacity to learn (the students sitting around the gum chewer) and is only benefiting one individual (the gum chewer him/herself). P2: Gum in school provides an open teacher-student relationship. Using Pro’s logic in this argument, schools should abolish all rules so students will not feel guilty about breaking the rules. This, in turn, would let the students and teachers feel more trustworthy towards each other so that they may build a better relationship. Furthermore, it is highly unlikely that students and teachers will get a stronger relationship simply because one rule was abolished. Not to mention that gum is generally not allowed in classrooms for several reasons (this will be expanded upon in future arguments). P3: Gum allows kids to choose healthier foods. In the source you provided, it stated that sugar-free gum and gum with ADA-approved seal should only be chewed in order to have these beneficial effects; thus, all the other varieties of gum are still detrimental to the student’s health. In addition, grumbling stomachs should not be a problem during school, because the school serves lunch and breakfast along with snacks from vending machines. There should be no reason as to why a student is hungry during the day. Moreover, if students chew gum, it can be distracting toward other students; thus, you are simply replacing the rare grumbling of a student’s stomach with smacking and chewing, which is not much better since it is more consistent than a grumbling stomach. Now I will move on to my own arguments. R1: Gum is detrimental to one’s health. There are certain ingredients within gum that can be potentially dangerous the chewer. Examples include Sodium Stearate, Aspartame, Acacia, and Titanium Dioxide (so cancerous that external skin contact is dangerous enough) [2]. Among the ingredients of gum, there are three called Sorbitol, Maltitol, and Mannitol. These three are essentially sugar alcohol and increase your blood sugar just as much as eating plain sugar itself. These ingredients, however, are not pure sugar, allowing manufacturers to label it as “sugar-free gum. ” While these sugar alcohols are simply detrimental to one’s health in general, they are even more dangerous to diabetics, and this group is the main target of the so called “sugar-free gum. ” These forms of sugar are highly likely to stimulate even more weight-gain and inflammation than normal sugar (which essentially shows Pro’s R3 to be false) and these sugar alcohols have been documented to cause abdominal pains and diarrhea [2]. Additional health problems caused by gum can cause the tearing of cartilage in your mouth, headaches, cancer, diabetes, and even birth defects [3]. There are a plethora more ingredients, and they are all highly detrimental to one’s health; however, due to my opponent’s request to keep paragraphs short and to the point, I shall leave R1 as it is for now. R2: Gum is extremely expensive, unsanitary, and disgusting to students. Chewing gum is naturally sticky, and students have a tendency to put gum almost anywhere they can reach. Under the desk, on the floor, in peoples’ hair—you name it. The majority of students find this rather disgusting and unsanitary, especially when they accidentally touch or step on the chewing gum. Furthermore, the expenses of removing the gum that students stick everywhere are extremely high. In just the United Kingdom, schools spend approximately £150 million per year on removing chew gum [4]. By banning gum from school, schools could save that amount of money and instead invest it in more pressing and concerning matters, such as better computers, textbooks, cafeteria food, bathrooms, or even becoming more “green” by reducing carbon emissions. R3: Gum hinders students’ learning. Chewing gum can be a major distraction during class. Students will blow, chew, pop, and even make cracking noises with their gum. This can distract other students from doing their work and even the gum chewer him/herself. Conclusion-Gum is unhealthy, expensive, unsanitary, and hinders a student’s ability to learn. I have shown in R1-R3 that Pro’s benefits of gum were either false or were outweighed by the detrimental effects gum brings about; therefore, it is clear that gum should not be allowed in schools. [1] . http://dictionary.reference.com...[2] . http://healthwyze.org...[3] . http://drbenkim.com...[4] . http://www.ehow.com...