[Closed] At last Britain is leading Europe in something!

No, let's not assign blame, let's sort it out.

No, let’s not assign blame, let’s sort it out.

sorting it out would include working out who's attitude to food to change and how, though - essentially establishing blame?

Kids can't really control what they're given to eat before they're teens so focusing on teaching parents about healthy food choices would help both adults and children?

So, should we blame the parents

Well at age 10 I was only eating what my mum gave me to eat seeing that I didn't have my own money or do my own shopping so probably a good place to start.

So, should we blame the parents for making poor food choices for their children and starting the slide into obesity and poor health?

Yep. There’s no excuse for feeding your kids the kind of crap I’ve seen some very young children eating for breakfast. It’s laziness and selfishness on the parents behalf.

However - its also supported by the crap, cheap food we allow to be available in this country. As the saying goes, its not that good food is expensive, its that poor food is cheap. The change that trend would mean a massive industry overhaul, not just the random application of “fat tax”.

I don't really get this 'poor food is too cheap' tbh, good food is cheap too, it's more about the effort it takes to turn it into something.

It's more of a lazy bastard parent, than a poor parent issue.

It’s more of a lazy bastard parent, than a poor parent issue.

Add in education, pressure, confidence and a bunch more. Then after you have decided on blame you need to get through those issues and work out the root causes of those and how to fix them.

However – its also supported by the crap, cheap food we allow to be available in this country.

I very much agree. Our village shop (co-op) is packed to the rafters with sugar, fat and booze. But try and get some hazelnuts or corn flower, for example and you’d be stuffed.

It’s quite difficult to make informed choices though as the food industry has been playing smoke and mirrors with consumers for decades. They advertise food as low fat and the healthy choice but fail to highlight that it has double the sugar for instance . Sure the information is on the side of the product but even that is misleading and often hard to read. I can remember a few years ago there was a government initiative to put a green amber red coded system on food and drink products as an easy to understand way the consumer could tell how healthy the product was but the food industry was vehemently opposed to it.

Education is a straw man, no one in this country can possibly not know the effects of poor diet, ditto fags and booze. It's been all over TV for years now.

I'm not blaming anyone, I'm pretty sure the current breed of folk that feed their kids this muck were themselves brought up by similar folks.

Let's not be crabbit this morning Mick, just cos your team got a pumping again 😊

All of the meadows around my house are under housing estates as of this summer just gone. Kids used to be able to run around outside in those meadows all summer, now watching Netflix with a bag of crisps is pretty much the only thing you can do within safe distance of home.

Meanwhile the two nearest local primary schools have doubled in size from 1 to 2 FE - but there was no more land to expand them so the kids have half the outside area to play in.

I don't think this is just about poor parenting (although that's a factor). When I was a kid I didn't nag my Mum for sweets because I was too busy playing outside to think about snacks. Win Win.

We need to create more land out of sea Dutch stylee and get a grip on our population and stop urbanization. If we want European standards of health and fitness we need European population densities. (....and European weather, but based on last summer climate change will sort that out for us. :))

I don’t really get this ‘poor food is too cheap’ tbh, good food is cheap too, it’s more about the effort it takes to turn it into something.

It’s more of a lazy bastard parent, than a poor parent issue

I agree. We need to recognise that society’s has changed to one of convienience though in all aspects. The generally means that people are squeezing more things into less time, but it needs a balance. I’m sorry love, but rather than gossiping down the pub whilst smoking 20 fags and checking your messages on your iPhone XR, you could perhaps be at home preparing tomorrow’s vegetables to feed your 5 kids in a healthy manner. But oh no! I don’t have time, that’s OK ‘cause Shirley’s taking them down to McD’s for lunch...

Can someone explain to me why its all about "cubes" of sugar when the food packets have grams of sugar, why do people always need to complicate things?

All of the meadows around my house

By meadows you mean fields, I doubt you have had meadows near your house for 50 years.

We need to create more land out of sea Dutch stylee

We don't need to create more land; there are vast parts of the country with very low population density

What we need to do is get more jobs and careers up north (which i know is a cliche). It would reinvigorate those areas, and stop the brain drain to the south east.

And don't be kidded that this is a poverty council estate issue (I was brought up on a rough as **** council scheme), I work with plenty well educated folks that's kids are a complete inconvenience and every day is a strive to get them to bed and get wine o'clock going.

When I was at school, it was only the poorer kids that were fat, all the kids from the more salubrious areas weren't. That's changed now.

By meadows you mean fields, I doubt you have had meadows near your house for 50 years.

I mean big grassy areas that the farmers were happy for local kids to play on. (Or at least never tried to stop them.) Kids and parents always referred to it all as meadowland for as long as I can remember, maybe that was wrong.

Heartbreakingly the dog egg infested grassy 'play area' that serves the new development is described by the developer as 'Meadow'. I doubt meadow is the right term for that either.

The shops are stuffed with cheap calorie high food, booze and chocolate because people buy it ....
There is a huge issue now with all classes being obese, not just the poor. Fod is cheaper in the UK than most of the rest of Europe ... and I do not get the good food is expensive .... vegetables, pulses, eggs etc are not expensive. But buying a sausage roll from Greggs is easier.

The fault lies with parents and their education (BTW not the education system per se, self education is easier than it ever was with the internet, but parenst would rather look at You Tube ...).
Nobody seems to learn to cook from first principles any more, despite millions of cooking programmes ... std fayre seems to be ready meals / takeaways.

More and more schools are being asked to take over the basics of child rearing - morals, hygeine ( toilet training & washing FFS), dealing with realtionships, money and "life skills".
This is the parent's role ... they are not meant to be their kids best mate and buy them everything. They are meant to prepare them for life ...

What we need to do is get more jobs and careers up north (which i know is a cliche). It would reinvigorate those areas, and stop the brain drain to the south east.

That would be very popular in the South. Successive governments seem to try to do it without any success. I think they should use the planning system. If we blanket ban green field building in the South the only place left to build a new business will be in the North, the houses will have to follow. Job done.

I've no doubt there would be a health benefit for Southerners.

I know people who live in Northern areas that are complaining of *lowering* population. (But then they post photo's on Facebook of themselves biking/walking around beautiful open space, which makes me wonder how sincere their complaints are!) Plus the Socotish Parliament doesn't seem too keen on a competitive tax regime to encourage people to move businesses into Scotland in spite of having the power to do so.

But yeah, 100pc agree. Let the North share the pain.

Depressingly.. three quarters of children spend less time outside than prison inmates

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/25/three-quarters-of-uk-children-spend-less-time-outdoors-than-prison-inmates-survey

No, let’s not assign blame, let’s sort it out.

Sure, plenty of food banks around these days.

Why not ask the public to donate Hummus and Celery instead of tins of Hot Dogs and Spam..

I mean big grassy areas that the farmers were happy for local kids to play on.

Its funny and indeed partly relevant to the thread that people use a word because it gives the impression of something pleasant without knowing what it is.it shows how society has changed. Dont mind my grumbles! 😁

Let’s not be crabbit this morning Mick, just cos your team got a pumping again 😊

Not at all, just branding people as Lazy is really missing the point and not providing any kind of solutions.

Why not ask the public to donate Hummus and Celery instead of tins of Hot Dogs and Spam..

I've changed my mind - let's just snipe from the sidelines instead.

I don't blame the parents. Most love their kids and want the best for them.

Once a job provided an income to support a breadwinner, a stay at home spouse, and children. Now both parents need to be employed for a decent standard of living, and it's hard for the average person to be enthusiastic about arriving home and then engage in high energy activity with the kids.

I don't remember many fat kids when I was young, but kids these days have a lot of arse magnets to keep them inside, and in any case what's outside? - a road with cars and entitled people whose drivings skills are so perfected they don't need to observe speed limits, or a distant park where god knows who may be hanging around?

Then there's the necessary child care which sucks up the time kids used to be outside and active in.

We can blame eating habits and parents all we like, but if we don't want fat kids then they need to have opportunities for plenty free range activity, as well as the opportunities for more structured stuff like sports.

And perhaps do what some Scottish schools require of the kids, a mile a day around the playground - that reputedly has cut obesity down remarkably.

a mile a day around the playground

Not just Scottish schools. Our primary school does it; in all weathers. And a weekly running club

And the kids do seem to love it

outofbreath
...Plus the Socotish Parliament doesn’t seem too keen on a competitive tax regime to encourage people to move businesses into Scotland in spite of having the power to do so...

We can sort that out after independence. 🙂

Its funny and indeed partly relevant to the thread that people use a word because it gives the impression of something pleasant

I'm less sure now. Google says Meadow = "unimproved grassland". So what's the definition of Meadow that I should be working to?

My Brother owns some "unimproved grassland" which he refers to as a Meadow and it looks very similar to the 'Meadows' I'm talking about.

If Meadow means what I think it means then I'd dispute the fact there hasn't been any in the last 50 years. The South Downs seems to have plenty. If anything people buying land and not farming it is on the increase as developers buy land and can't be arsed to do anything with it for years (decades) on end while they wait for planning.

There some land a bit further away from me that was owned by a football club for years. Travellers grazzed their horses on it all summer and there were always deer around. That also went under houses in the last few years. It was never farmed since I've been around.

So I'm going to backtrack, and support my original definition of Meadow and argue there's been meadowland around in the last 50 years.

If you come up with a tighter definition I'm prepared to concede the point.

Sure, plenty of food banks around these days.

To be fair if someone's so poor they need a food bank then high calories are critical. If all they get is celery they're gonna starve to death. Nutrition is more of a long term issue, just getting enough calories to stay alive is the more immediate problem.

Not at all, just branding people as Lazy is really missing the point and not providing any kind of solutions.

This is a forum, where we can express our experiences, I'm not a little pretend politician like some on here, I don't have the solution, I'm willing to hold my hands up to that, no problem.

The people in my experiences main problem is laziness, I'm sorry if that doesn't suit you.

Once a job provided an income to support a breadwinner, a stay at home spouse, and children. Now both parents need to be employed for a decent standard of living, and it’s hard for the average person to be enthusiastic about arriving home and then engage in high energy activity with the kids.

kids these days have a lot of arse magnets

When I was a kid I didn’t nag my Mum for sweets because I was too busy playing outside to think about snacks. Win Win.

All of these, plus some other stuff. We can probably stop the thread now. 🙂

I watched this last night:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0bx3d14/tom-kerridges-fresh-start-series-1-1-get-cooking

A number of the adults had never been taught to cook as children and felt it was 'too complicated' for them. It was interesting seeing them learn how to choose meals and cook - I guess the thing will be if they continue to cook 'from scratch' when the cameras aren't pointing at them. The guy presenting it had all the knowledge about what to eat and how to cook it and was still obese up until a year ago - it's not just about being 'lazy' or untrained though.

I think a lot of people use food for emotional reasons and this type of program rarely look at why people overeat.

Was followed by this;

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0bx0gjv/the-twinstitute-series-1-1-get-thin-fast

which also focused on weight loss through diet and exercise (by splitting twins and putting one of each on diet and one on exercise). Results were dramatic for both, tbh. But suggesting 2 hours a day exercise was 'just short of being a professional athlete' level of activity seemed a bit ott - I spend more than that time walking the dog every day.

https://www.nap.edu/read/11514/chapter/4#56

Figure 2-2 shows the required daily calorie requirement has fallen by 500 calories in a generation. It’s not the sugar per se (although dental caries has fallen). It’s an activity issue. Food input is an easy target, movement is less popular.

unimproved grassland”. So what’s the definition of Meadow that I should be working to?

Unimproved grassland will contain lots of wild flowers if managed as a meadow.
A meadow is grassland grazed most of the year and shut up for growing hay in the summer months.
Most grassland in the UK is now improved, something like 97% of UK unimproved meadows have been lost since 1940-50s.

The South Downs seems to have plenty

Most likely chalk grassland, much of thats been lost too though, its now pretty rare.

anyway, cos I'm sad, and like data, I found this 3D population density map

pop Density

innit lovely? There's still a lot of nothing out there.

Results were dramatic for both, tbh.

Yep, good results. But the people doing the 2 hours of cardio vascular exercise everyday would have also got a lot fitter than they were at the start as an extra benefit over the dieters.

Of course the answer is to eat a bit more healthily and do a bit more exercise but then everyone knows that already...

Unimproved grassland will contain lots of wild flowers if managed as a meadow.
A meadow is grassland grazed most of the year and shut up for growing hay in the summer months.

Ok, you were right first time and I was wrong. I've never seen any of the land I consider Meadow mowed for hay and I hardly ever see livestock on it. Plenty of flowers though.

Most likely chalk grassland, much of thats been lost too though, its now pretty rare.

Again, looks like you were right. I've deffo heard the downs described as Chalk Grassland so if that's different to Meadow it's not meadow, and also fails to meet the Hay definition and to a large extent fails to seriously meet the livestock definition. (Which is weird, I'm sure there used to be far more livestock on the Downs.) Again, plenty of flowers. (...and brambles, which are less pleasant on a valuable Bivvy bag.)

There’s still a lot of nothing out there.

In which case lets change planning law so four objections for any reason whatsoever halts a development. If we have plenty of space there's no need for a planning system that makes building inevitable. If there's loads of spare land about let's stop building on land the people love.

Those kind of stats are misleading. If there's nobody about why is my only chance of getting a hill more or less to myself if I go at night or in Heavy rain? (and even then I'm very unlikely to be properly alone.) Why is there dog eggs by the ton on even the most remote paths?

Even kayaking/sailing in remote areas on the West Coast of Scotland there still seem to be people about unless you go in terrible weather or well out of season.

....but most of all if there's load of space how the hell can there be a housing crisis? You could just put blocks of flats up on all the land nobody GAF about.

If there's loads of space, why have a massive battle to extend Heathrow - just build a new airport somewhere nobody GAF about. Why is HS2 such a ball ache? Clearly people do care about the land, which suggests its not empty.

You go to less densely populated areas in Europe building often happens almost without opposition because there are fewer people and they can be sensibly compensated. In CHina you can build a city for 30 million people and nobody cares at all (A benefit of the 1 child policy AFAIC).

But yeah, if there's loads of space, let's have policy to allow locals to totally restrict building and then everyone will be happy. People who don't want development nearby don't have to have it, but land nobody GAF about can be used for development.

In CHina you can build a city for 30 million people and nobody cares at all

well, not that they're prepared to say publicly.

why have a massive battle to extend Heathrow

Why is HS2 such a ball ache

Cos they're building in the built up area....

you could build it in an empty area, but then it's not much use...

And people do care about empty land. They like to escape suburbia. If all is built on, there's nowhere to go. But that's missing the point. Liverpool was (is?) knocking down streets of houses which would cost millions each in London. All to do with supply and demand. Create the demand. And to do that you need jobs, and work.

And with space - I live very close to the Thames, in a supposed busy area. I can go for a run on a summers evening on the tow path, and see no-one in the hour I'm out.

Cos they’re building in the built up area….
you could build it in an empty area, but then it’s not much use…
And people do care about empty land. They like to escape suburbia. If all is built on, there’s nowhere to go. But that’s missing the point.

I thought your point was that there's loads of space? Which, as you say, is clearly not the case. If your point was we should build in places with declining populations to move our populations to places that want more people then brilliant. Everyone would vote for that.

And with space – I live very close to the Thames, in a supposed busy area. I can go for a run on a summers evening on the tow path, and see no-one in the hour I’m out.

I live outside a smallish town somewhere (I assume) is far less densely populated and I'm skilled in getting out at times nobody else is. I went for a riverside run at dawn the other day in drizzle thinking there was a good chance I'd be on my own and saw 3 other people. On a dry summer evening it would be 30. If I ride one of my typical local trails at 9pm on a dry but dark winters night I'll see half a dozen other riders and several dog walkers.

In some bits of the Downs national park it's different. If it's dark and/or rainey there's a very good chance of having a walk alone.

Maybe people in your area don't like running or don't have dogs.

I still maintain our population is too dense and the decisions government make are aimed at addressing that. If we don't think our population is too dense, great, let's have policy appropriate to a non-densely populated place and allow locals to prvent building through the planning process.

well, not that they’re prepared to say publicly.

Perhaps a bad example - but if you're only building on a fishing village with a population of 250 you can give them each a small fortune so there's probably no need to be heavy handed. So maybe not that bad an example.

There's a cultural problem that extends well beyond just the parents. And I think there are a couple of levels.

There is a complete lack of understanding, or ignorance, and even sometimes a Trump-esque 'fake news' attitude towards harmful ingredients. To the point where they are encouraged by schools, by doctors (was literally told to feed a 6 month old child jam and toast and toast by a GP, to help him grow, despite being a healthy weight already)...

This is an issue that comes all the way from the top, and I think requires the food industry to be more regulated. Often reading the labels when I do my shopping, and not being the best of cooks, or have the time to make my own, it's actually pretty hard to find anything without anything in it that's going to contribute negatively to your health, mentally and physically. Yes, maybe in a perfect world you will buy all the raw ingredients, maybe even grow them in your garden, and make your own deliciously healthy food. But in the 21st century, you should be able to walk into a shop and buy it ready made, without being some kind of expert on what you're looking for - it is actually really quite difficult to ascertain what is the good stuff amongst all the labels that advertise Protein! Low-fat! Reduced sugar! Etc, etc. They fail to mention it's low fat but 50% sugar. Or reduced sugar and made with lard...

The other thing is we just don't let our kids play outside any more. Just when did that happen? I think it's partly related to food issues, in that it's partly to do with laziness. Sit them in front of the xbox/tv/ipad, you've got yourself an easy day. Also save money on play parks, general infrastructure to keeps safe, etc. Something that strikes me on the continent, is that they really care about their kids. And not just their own kids, but the young population in general. They create infrastructure not just for middle-aged cyclists (like how we see it over here), but for their kids to get to school. And the kids use it. You see signs everywhere... slow down, watch out for the kids.. They have actual parks. And they play outside, and actually talk to you without suspecting that you're a peadophile. We seem to spend all of our time telling our kids that it's too dangerous outside, instead sitting them in front of the x-box rather than creating a safe environment outside. There is no meaningful investment from government, communities, or parents, to get our kids leading active lives outside, all to the detriment of their physical and mental well-being.

I thought your point was that there’s loads of space

my point was there's loads of space outside the south east. My exact quote was "there are vast parts of the country with very low population density"

I blame the likes of Adele and other fat celebs.

On the continent there are fat people, but you don't see them out and about so much. Maybe they are ashamed to go out?

The UK has embraced this idea of the body beautiful. That it's ok to be big boned and proud, to flaunt what you have.

The amount of money some girls must spend on their nails, make up, hair, clothes etc so that they look "beautiful"... Thinking they can buy their way to beautiful as opposed to eating responsibly and being a more active.

Bring back fat shaming. Laugh and point at the fat kids.

Being fat is a lifestyle choice.

my point was there’s loads of space outside the south east.

Your original post in it's entirety:

"anyway, cos I’m sad, and like data, I found this 3D population density map
pop Density
innit lovely? There’s still a lot of nothing out there."

Anyway we both seem to be in agreement now you've clarified that you do think that the South is too densely populated and we should build elsewhere. I'm all for that, everyone else would be as well. The planning system could easily be changed to make that possible. Just make any four objections for any reason whatsoever veto any development. Everyone in the South would object, people in underpopulated areas wouldn't. Problem solved. Everyone happy.

Bring back fat shaming. Laugh and point at the fat kids

This may result in other eating disorders?

I blame the likes of Adele and other fat celebs.

.........

Being fat is a lifestyle choice.

I read the first line thinking you were joking but reading the rest of the crap you wrote I think you may be serious. It was a joke wasn't it?

This may result in other eating disorders?

This is the hilarious thing about our culture. We're a nation of obese people who constantly fret about anorexia.

I wish a few people had told me I was fat (and meant it) when I was younger.

But fat is beautiful according to the Guardian! What do you mean you don't like fat chicks? You ****ing balding misogynistic creeps!

Your original post in it’s entirety:

Oh good try, but unfortunately that's my second post rather than my first.

Go back just a little bit further (clue: it's the one with the bloody big map) and you'll find the real first one

I'll even quote another part for you 'What we need to do is get more jobs and careers up north.... It would reinvigorate those areas, and stop the brain drain to the south east.'

Northerners are ****ing stupid so it won't happen.

https://www.tomforth.co.uk/onintelligence/

Poulation density as a cause of obesity doesnt really add up, countries like Holland & belgium far more densely populated than the UK (tho similar to England alone) Germany would be best comparison, but all of those ****ries have far lower rates of obesity. Likewise weather is similar too.

Theres obviously multiple factors, our poperty market obsession means that developers are focused on squeezing in as many houses as possible, with healthy infrastructure way down the list of priorities. Public transport faires rise, petrol tax is frozen, integrated cycle infratsructure is a joke in many places.

The map of obesity overlays very well with maps of poverty in the UK.
The correlation in developed countries between poverty & obesity is very well doccumented.

walk through a poor neighbourhoods & youll be tripping over pizza & kebab shops, walk through a posher area & its all bistros & coffee houses.

UK is the processed food capital of Europe. https://www.tasteaholics.com/news/uk-leads-europe-in-the-consumption-of-ultra-processed-foods-16868/
just wait until brexit brings us the glories of a fully american diet!

Education on what & how to cook is part of it as once it becomes the 'cultural norm' to eat crap it sticks

good study in last moths nature https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-018-0201-x

Diabetes costs almost as much as smoking does for the NHS now, we have no problem with heavy regulation & taxation of tobacco but food industry lobbyists have succesfully resisted this regulation for decades at EU & Uk government level.

The way we have pictures of cancer on fag packets should we have pictures of dibetics with amputated limbs on every box of Mr Kipling cherry Bakewells?

We've established that its mainly thicko northerners that voted for brexit.. but are they obese too? Maybe there's a strong link between being thick AND being fat...

northerners

Nope, was the Midlander, the gammon belt, us in the actual north voted against...

Isnt the Midlands just north of the clever rich southern border? Therefore included in the fatty hypothesis..

Oh good try, but unfortunately that’s my second post rather than my first.
Go back just a little bit further (clue: it’s the one with the bloody big map) and you’ll find the real first one
I’ll even quote another part for you ‘What we need to do is get more jobs and careers up north…. It would reinvigorate those areas, and stop the brain drain to the south east.’

Yup, I remember that post and agreed with it, didn't realize it was "you". So yeah, my bad, I didn't read the names and therefore completely missed your point, I apologise.

Solution is still the same, allow four objections from locals to stop any development. Job done. Houses would get build only where the locals want them, which would be in the places with excess space and/or declining populations.

Poulation density as a cause of obesity doesn't really add up

Population as a *sole* cause of obesity doesn't add up, but it must be a factor. If you can't play actively outsides you have to play inactively inside. Kids who play outside by definition are snacking less and more active.

Germany is far less densely populated than the UK, it also has a declining population so it's going in the right direction as far as space is concerned.

Theres obviously multiple factors, our poperty market obsession means that developers are focused on squeezing in as many houses as possible, with healthy infrastructure way down the list of priorities. Public transport faires rise, petrol tax is frozen, integrated cycle infratsructure is a joke in many places.

All of these are population related. Lower population, more land per person = lower housing density. Fewer people more space for infrastructure and less need for it.

The only problem I can see there that wouldn't be fixed by a lower population is Public transport cost - it might get more pricey but it would get a *lot* better.

This thread's about obesity and we've probably over represented population density as a cause of that so we can probably drop it.

Germany is far less densely populated than the UK

UK 272, Germany 232 /km2 closest big european country in terms of density
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_and_population_of_European_countries

and thanks to immigration germany has been able to increase its population (& thanks to its excellent education system) helping to keep its productivity high

whether its through how we build our towns & cities, educate our population or regulate food manufacture it can only come from government.
Deregulation & free the market obsession will only make things worse

I live in one of these low population areas and the kids are still fat. They still don't play out. And there's still no parks for them...

Whilst the available space may be a factor, I refuse to believe it is a significant contributor. We need to provide for, and encourage people of all age groups to get outside, regardless of population density. Our attitudes toward well-being, standards of living, and what we prioritise in our public spaces are key.

Population as a *sole* cause of obesity doesn’t add up, but it must be a factor.

Could be a factor but could also be because the parents are not letting the kids go out and play on their own. I grew up in a heavily populated area but either played in street, walked down road for a mile and played in playground, rode my bike to BMX track etc,. but that was because I had less protective parents than we seem to see today.

Could be a factor but could also be because the parents are not letting the kids go out and play on their own.

The two aren't mutually exclusive.

...but I think we've analysed the 'wild space to play' factor enough now.

I'll lick your greyhound for a mars bar.

The way we have pictures of cancer on fag packets should we have pictures of dibetics with amputated limbs on every box of Mr Kipling cherry Bakewells?

No, because a lot of us 'diabetics' are Type 1 which has **** all to do with diet, is not self inflicted and winds me up no end when the media and some individuals lump type 1 and 2 into the same bracket.

No, because a lot of us ‘diabetics’ are Type 1

Votchy around 10% are type 1 as opposed to 90% who are type 2 according to Diabetes UK. The balance of lung cancer in non smokers compared to smokers is very similar. So if you think it reasonable that warnings should not appear on food stuffs as they offend you as a type 1 diabetes sufferer I assume you equally oppose warnings on cigarette packets as they might offend lung cancer victims who have never smoked.
Actually I don't think you think that at all and I'm sure in reality you wouldn't want anyone else to suffer the consequences of diabetes even if it is self inflicted. While I can understand your frustration at the way the media can simplify and portray the situation don't forget that they do that for absolutely everything. Not sure pictures on cherry bakewells will do any good but don't oppose any effort that is made because it offends you oppose it if you think it won't work or if you can put forward a better idea.

Its not a personal attack on diabetics, especially if its type 1

similarly not all cancer sufferers are smokers, I dont think its wrong to scare off smokers with warnings of cancer tho

avdave2 and kimbers: fair points and I agree with both, just vented a little frustration in the way some 'generalize' things

I recently found out my 7 year old nephew's primary school (in a small village) won't let him walk to school on his own until he's 9

Don't blame you votchy, the superficiality of a lot of media coverage is infuriating. A large percentage of media is now just a source of entertainment not of information.

Being fat is a lifestyle choice.

Really? How did you arrive at this premise?

You are not born fat. You might be born gay.

You choose to eat more than necessary. No one forces you to eat more than you need.

Tell me if I'm wrong.

You're wrong alpin.

One word - hormones.

May I just park this here, see if you can find out what's wrong with it:

https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/eat-well/

If the country wasnt designed around cars then kids might be able to go outside without risking being run over and killed.

∆ that. Staying in the UK this week, always shocks me how fast the traffic is through the centre of a small town.

I thought I read somewhere that studies in the US showed calorie intake amongst kids hasn't risen significantly since the 70s whereas obesity has.

Yeah, cg, you're right.

It must be all those hormones making everyone fat.... Hormones, not gluttony. Not calories. Not laziness. Not shit awful food that is sold on every high street.

Saying that, I'm sure that hormones are an issue, albeit for a tiny minority of people. But it's a convenient excuse for the rest of the population with little self control.

Epicyclo and butcher appear to be today’s fully functioning adults on the thread. Well done for talking sense. Combine your posts and that’s pretty much everything covered.

alpin - did you look at that NHS link? Is that appropriate dietary advice for the majority of the population bearing in mind we're talking about relatively inactive people? Who benefits from said advice? The food industry of course, amongst whose shareholders will be MPs and the House of Lords. The truth is it suits whoever is in power cos if they were genuinely concerned about the welfare of its citizens and cost to the NHS then something would have been done a long time ago.

There should be regulation regarding fast food outlets, if I had my way we'd get rid of at least half and see a welcome reduction in litter.

How many people know how to cook a nutritious meal? There's enough cookery programmes on telly so they should know shouldn't they? Oh wait, it's become entertainment instead. I've said this before but we need to start making cookery lessons and health care education a priority in schools in addition to regular exercise. It's never too late to make changes and if people need help then they should get it.

The second or third, can't remember which, most prescribed pharmaceutical in the UK is for hypothyroidism. Affects 1 in 50 women but a lot less men and it's for life. For many one of the side effects is weight gain regardless of how little one eats and how much one exercises. Forget any help, sensible advice or indeed investigation from the health service, it just won't happen.

I’ve said this before but we need to start making cookery lessons and health care education a priority in schools in addition to regular exercise.

Schools cant do what parents havent and exercise is not the answer designing a country where people have to move more and not rely on cars is the fist step.

I recently found out my 7 year old nephew’s primary school (in a small village) won’t let him walk to school on his own until he’s 9

How do they enforce this given that their reponsibility only starts at the school gates?

Things sure have changed since I walked to school on my own from 5 crossing three (relatively quiet) roads on the way. But has the law changed? Junior always walked to school (from 2 1/2) but accompanied until 12. He then walked to school and back twice a day rather than put up with the canteen - he made his own lunch. 8km a day on foot is a good start to a healthy weight.

In the United States, hypothyroidism occurs in 0.3–0.4% of people

Doesnt explain the fatty epidemic

Not read the original link, but pleas tell me it’s not based on BMI? If it is then 99% of us will be classed as obese. It’s entirely ridiculous way of gauging healthy weight.

Rotherham is leading the charge