An American writer thinks that government should keep out of Canadian kitchens. And if people feel like eating junk food, they have every right to crack open the chips and pop.

Jacob Sullum, a syndicated columnist and senior editor at Reason, a U.S.-based libertarian magazine spoke during a luncheon sponsored by the Montreal Economic Institute.

"People may very well choose to trade off years of their life, or the possibility of disease or injury, in exchange for the current pleasure, excitement, or stress relief they get (from food)," said Sullum.

"It's not for the government to say that's not a legitimate trade-off to make. Canadians need to question the idea that just because something implicates health that government intervention is justified."

Faced with a so-called obesity epidemic -- eight per cent of children and 23 per cent of adults were obese in 2004, according to Statistics Canada -- provincial governments are pursuing policies to limit the availability of junk food.

In July, the province's health promotion minister vowed to target obesity as aggressively as tobacco through a number of initiatives. "Fat is the new tobacco," Jim Watson said in making the announcement.

Ontario recently banned junk food from school vending machines, and British Columbia is considering doing the same. In Quebec, politicians are considering a junk food tax that would send a "healthy message" to citizens while helping fund athletic programs.

In Britain, a sweeping ban on junk food in the nation's schools-- including chocolate bars -- was announced Wednesday.

Sullum believes that while governments have every right to protect the public against health risks posed by communicable diseases and pollution, they have no authority to tell people what to eat.

"You're talking about protecting people from their own decisions," Sullum said. "What you put in your mouth and how much exercise you get, that's pretty personal."

But for Toronto-area dietitian Lynn Roblin, government-directed eating guidelines are key to a healthy society.

"Whatever government you're talking about, whether it's provincial or federal, they do have a role in promoting healthy lifestyles, definitely," Roblin said. Skyrocketing health costs are among the possible results of government inaction on healthy eating, she added.

While Sullum doesn't deny that North Americans are fatter now then they were 20 years ago, he maintains government policy aimed at restricting eating habits is not the answer.

"For some people the solution is, they prefer to be fat," he said. "That's their choice and they should be permitted to make it."