With one in four children overweight ...
 

Although this article is not about low carbing, I am posting it here anyway because it is related and this is also very big news in the UK today.

I know exactly what I would want to see in the blueprint - a move towards a low carb woe, as well as exercise programmes etc., perhaps a ban on the advertising of junk food, and certainly the end of sports stars (i.e., Gary Lineker) promoting unhealth foods (he fronts the Walkers crisps campaign).

I doubt very much that low carb will get a look in - I do expect that the usual low fat, high carb dogma will be rolled out :rolleyes:

Would be interested to hear anyone else's views on how this issue should be tackled.


With one in four children overweight, the experts explain what can be done about it
By Maxine Frith, Social Affairs Correspondent
The Independent
26 May 2004


A tough blueprint for tackling Britain's growing epidemic of obesity and weight problems is to be published tomorrow.

The report by the House of Commons Health Select Committee is expected to warn that obesity is one of the biggest social and medical problems facing children and adults.

Weight problems among children have tripled in the past decade alone, with one in four overweight and 6 per cent obese. Doctors say they are seeing cases of diabetes in children as young as six because they are so overweight. More than half of the adult population is overweight and of those, one in five is obese.

The select committee report will say that treating obesity costs the National Health Service £4.9bn a year.

In evidence to the committee over the past six months, health campaigners have warned that childhood obesity is a "ticking time bomb".

Some groups have called for the advertising of junk food to children to be banned, and for obese adults to be prescribed exercise and diet club memberships on the NHS.

However, MPs on the committee are said to be divided over whether to recommend an advertising ban, or to focus on educating parents to say no to "pester power" and to take more responsibility for what they and their children eat. And ministers have been reluctant to back restrictive legislation because they fear it will leave them open to accusations of acting like a nanny state.

The food industry has been lobbying against any suggestion that advertising of their products to children should be restricted or banned.

Among the other proposals which may be included in the select committee's report is a "traffic light" system, under which all products would be labelled with red, orange or green dots, depending on how healthy they were.

But manufacturers and retailers say such a proposal would be unworkable. Martin Paterson, the deputy director general of the Food and Drink Federation, said: "Some shops have already tried this and it doesn't work.

"Raspberries had to be labelled with an 'unhealthy' red dot because of their sugar, and how would you label cheese, or an avocado which is high in fat, under the system?"

Last week, the World Health Organisation published a global plan for reducing obesity rates, which included cutting sugar, fat and salt levels in food, and subsidising fruit and vegetables in canteens.

THE PARENT

Hayley Brown, 29, a hotel manager from Ashford, Kent, is married with a seven-year-old son, Joseph.

She said: "Advertising has a massive effect on children and I think it would be fantastic if they banned it during their viewing times.

"It's not just that advertisements make Joseph want to choose a particular brand - I think they convince him that he is hungry as well.

"He will be sitting in front of the television and an advert comes on for crisps or chocolate, and he will come in to the kitchen and say he wants something to eat. That can make things really hard when I am trying to make him wait till dinner time and not snack between meals.

"The pester power thing is huge. He and his friends always demand the cereals with the latest toys, or the products being advertised on television. The latest thing is a chocolate biscuit shaped like a hippo." Joseph has a packed lunch four days a week but on Friday eats the school meal. "They do have a healthy option for school meals but Joseph will always go for the sausage and chips and chocolate pudding. I make him eat fruit and vegetables but it can be an uphill task when you've got someone like Gary Lineker promoting crisps and no advertisements for apples."

THE MP

The Labour MP Debra Shipley is bringing a private member's Bill which would ban the marketing of "unhealthy" food to children.

She said: "We need to rein in the food and drink industry, which has been a completely unregulated field in the way products high in sugar, salt and fat are advertised to children.

"You have people like Kellogg's saying that children should have cereals every day because they need breakfast, but some of those cereals are incredibly high in sugar. It is outrageous that they have been able to get away with this for so long."

Her Bill is backed by more than 100 health groups, medical organisations and MPs. It would ban sponsorship deals between schools and confectionery companies and ban products deemed "unhealthy" by the Food Standards Agency from school vending machines.

Ms Shipley believes that while education and exercise are important, legislation is vital. "The food industry simply refuses to accept that it is part of the problem and if the Government goes for a voluntary ban, it will be absurd," she said. "Obesity is now a really serious problem."

THE DOCTOR

Dr Fred Kavalier is a London GP and The Independent's resident health expert.

He said: "It is a very complex issue but child obesity is not just about food - exercise has got to be a big part of it. Children are spending more time in front of the television and less time playing games, at the same time as they are eating more. That is the root cause of the problem."

During evidence to the select committee, some experts said GPs should do more to advise on healthy diets and exercise, and to identify children and adults at risk of becoming obese. Dr Kavalier said: "Doctors are prepared to play their part but this is a big social problem, rather than a medical one."

THE FOOD BOSS

Martin Paterson is deputy director general of the Food and Drink Federation, which represents retailers and manufacturers.

He said: "We do not subscribe to the idea of healthy and unhealthy foods. There are healthy and unhealthy diets, and that is what we need to concentrate on.

"Consumers know what foods are high in fat and sugar and salt. Where they have difficulty is in translating knowledge about food and diet into changes in lifestyle."

THE ADVERTISER

Jeremy Preston is director of the Food Advertising Unit, a branch of the Advertising Association focused on research into marketing food to children.

He said: "We do not believe that advertising increases consumption. It is all about getting children to switch brands."

He claimed that in countries where such adverts are banned, obesity rates have stayed the same as in neighbouring nations.


http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/he...sp?story=524930


More here from the BBC:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3748365.stm

I agree with you, Demi--my guess is that the dietary advice will be the same old anti-fat message that hasn't worked for years, plus the new anti-salt and anti-sugar diatribe. Yes, excess salt is not good for you and we all know what excess sugar can do to the body, but fat is still the Big Demon over here.

I think if the government is going to tell us what we should eat, they should push for a return to fresh meat, fresh vegetables/fruits, and real dairy products as the basis of a healthy diet, with controlled amounts of grains added, if desired, and with fast foods, crisps, candies, and the like relegated to the status of once-weekly treat. But IMO they are never going to promote such a diet because the food industry would go berserk.

OBTW, who was the genius that thought to label "unhealthy" foods by percentage of calories from sugar??? How many fruits (like raspberries which are one of the best fruits you can eat, even on LC WOE) are going to get a warning label? :lol: :rolleyes:

Must go off to the gym right this minute, but I'll have a think on what I would like to see in terms of a gov't recommended (or god forbid, mandated) exercise regime.

Emily

Just heard the tail end of a radio interview with an MP (didn't catch her name). Her comment was that we needed the legislation because (and this is a close to verbatim as I remember):"If overweight peopele won't take responsibility of their eating and weight, then their fatness costs the rest of us through the NHS."
Grh..

Oh, that makes me angry. Better take the rant to my journal, though...that's what it's for.

Anyone remember the the choc bar advertised as,

"the one you can eat between meals"

I was walking past a school yard this morning and a lady was selling chrisps (chips) and soft drinks to the kids. :mad:

Lez

School lunches are abysmal in the UK, as is the lack of proper sport etc in many schools - mainly due to the fact that 'the powers that be' consider team games and sports days to be 'too competitive' ... FGS! No wonder we are rapidly turning into a nation of wimps and obese couch potatoes :rolleyes:

Yes, as I just said in Plum's journal, my teenage daughter tells me her school has just installed vending machines! I can hardly believe my ears!! I would have thought that even uninformed people would accept that vending machines DO NOT HELP stem the growing levels of obesity :nono: :mad: :bash:

I was never exactlly keen on school games, only learnt a bit about fitness at 14 when I took up karate. But I think it is a lot less about PC attitudes on competitiveness and lot to do with making a few bob sselling playing fields off.

Its almost like drug dealers and the tobacco companys, hook them when they're young. I see some of my friends and relatives kids and it just makes me sad. :(

I just checked again with my daughter about the machines, and she says that they are calling the items in the machines "healthy" snacks .... apparently, they are cereal bars ............... :bash:

And here's what they think must be done ...
 

Children's diets 'must improve'

BBC News - Thursday, 27 May, 2004

Improving children's eating habits is the key to tackling an obesity "timebomb", MPs have warned.

The Commons Health Select Committee attacks the government, food industry and advertisers for failing to act to stop rising levels of obesity.

It says obesity costs England £3.7bn a year and warns levels of diabetes, cancer and heart disease will rise.

Its report calls for measures such as cookery lessons and a voluntary ban by the food industry on TV junk food ads.

It also calls for a "traffic light" system in stores to mark out healthy and unhealthy foods, and for annual fat tests for children.

The committee's report, which makes 69 conclusions and recommendations, says that if present trends continue, obesity will soon surpass smoking as the greatest cause of premature loss of life.

Three-quarters of adults are now overweight, with 22% of them obese.

England has seen the fastest growth in obesity in Europe and childhood obesity has tripled in the past 20 years.

The report cites the case of an obese three-year-old who died of heart failure. It says this kind of case is rare, but warns it is a portent of things to come.

It warns that obese children could become the first generation to die before their parents.

'Inadequate care'

Measures recommended in the report range from a national food survey to see what people are really eating to legislation for the "traffic light" food labelling system.

Under the system, red would identify high-energy foods which were high in sugar and fat, amber would be medium energy and green would identify the healthiest options.

The report also calls on the NHS to make obesity services more of a priority.

It focuses on the "desperate inadequacy" of treatment and support for obese children.

The food industry is the subject of severe criticism in the report - particularly for campaigns which encourage children to "pester" parents for junk foods.

Committee chairman David Hinchliffe said: "We have lost the plot with public health perhaps for the last 30 years.

"Our inquiry is a wake-up call for government to show that the causes of ill health need to be tackled by many departments, not just health.

"It is simply unacceptable that sports and education ministers should have endorsed initiatives to supply schools with sporting equipment or books but which required children to buy Cadbury's chocolate or Walker's crisps.

"We found a total lack of joined-up solutions at present."

Mr Hinchliffe said reform of transport would be a key factor.

He said it was unacceptable that people could cross roads without "taking their lives into their hands".

'No quick-fixes'

Responding to the report, Health Secretary John Reid said the government shared the committee's concerns over the health impact of obesity.

He said it would be addressed in the White Paper on Public Health, due out in the summer. Mr Reid said the government had already established a Cabinet public health committee overseeing all departments.

Mr Reid added: "'We recognise that these issues are not just a matter for government - they involve individuals and the choices they make, as well as the food and leisure industry."

He added: "We will consider the recommendations in this report carefully and it is a valuable contribution to the consultation process we are using to inform our White Paper."

Food and Drink Federation Deputy Director General Martin Paterson said: "The entire food and drink chain from farmers to caterers is clear that our industry must be a part of the solution.

"However, the obesity problem is complex and multi-faceted: there are no quick fixes."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3749927.stm

So, the low-fat route once again.



Listening to this man on the radio last night really upset my evening.

"Under the 'traffic light' scheme, orange juice would get a red label. Orange juice may be mostly sugar, but it can't be unhealthy, it's a fruit," was one of the unbelievable statements he came out with :rolleyes:

... so you can imagine what else he had to say.

Oh dear - sorry - I don't believe it is anything akin to drug dealers and tobacco companies hooking them when they're young. There is nothing wrong with having orange juice available at schools, nor is there anything wrong with having starchy foods on the lunch program, or even "gasp" vending machines available! Having food readily available is a good thing, people! If you don't want your kids eating certain things then train them young or send them to school with the kind of food you want them to eat.


Liz

Please note I made my comment before it was revealed the machines would contain "healthy" snacks. Still, maybe that is too strong a comparison, sorry if I shocked you, but I saw "vending" and immediately thought of coke machines and how they advertise to the young people with the cool slogans etc., not disimilar from the way the tobacco companies do or at least did.

This seems to be the only meaningful quote in this article. If only they could stop looking at the wood and see the trees.

Liz - I am confident that my daughter will make the right choices with food (for the most part) even in the light of vending machines with sugary drinks and so-called healthy carb-laden snacks, but the majority of children are not well educated in this regard, especially those from a low-income background where cheap food is all important.

Also, its important to remember that peer-pressure is extremely significant at this age. If friends are eating chocolate and coke then most children will want to be the same as their friends. My daughter struggles with this aspect daily and I have great respect for the restraint that she shows (most of the time! :) ) Thus, I'm still aghast that the school should introduce vending machines, especially as most vending machines sell processed, packaged foods - which, in the healthy low carb world, is what we are trying to avoid.

Yoda - I maintain that "healthy" foods such as cereal bars are processed and full of sugar and preservatives and thus extremely bad for young metabolisms. The school calling them "healthy" doesn't change that basic premise.

And I don't disagree with that, I was just trying to explain to Liz why I said what I said. :rolleyes:

I have a 'healthly' cereal bar in fromt of me. It is a Quaker Chewy Granola Bar (low fat). The nutrition facts are that it has 2 g of fat, 1 g of protein and 22 g of carbs (10 sugar, 1 fiber). In the ingredients are partially hydrogenated soybean and/or cottonseed oil (listed three times), corn syrup, and natural and artificial flavors (which could mean MSG), high fructose corn syrup (three times), sugar (3 times).

As it contains wheat, soy and milk; if a child has any food allergies, then this product will help aggrevate them.

The large box I got the bar from states "Labeled for C-stores & Vending"

:D Well apologies - I wasn't sure from which direction you were coming! :)

No prob, we're all friends here, sometimes I'm not sure what direction I'm going either. :p

Among the other proposals which may be included in the select committee's report is a "traffic light" system, under which all products would be labelled with red, orange or green dots, depending on how healthy they were.



I think this might be a good idea because most processed and junk food would be red. The fact that the food industry seems to fear it suggests it might have some effect. I'd like to see the end of multipacks and supersized portions of processed foods like crisps and sweets. Also promotions (3 for 2 etc) or anything that encourages people to buy more.

I also think parents should get serious about commercial interference in schools. Get militant. Demand change.

"Also promotions (3 for 2 etc) or anything that encourages people to buy more."

Lord no! We can't get rid of those! It helps the budget tremendously.

LOL I'm sure you meant on the highly processed foods, and I agree and disagree. I have no problem limiting advertizing, especially ones aimed at kids.....but prices are a different story. The manufacturers should be allowed to sell their products at prices as they see fit. They should also be able to have specials, coupons, etc to boost sales. If the regulators get into that we could have a real mess on our hands! Do you only restrict "unhealthy" foods? if so, who decides what's "unhealthy". I am 100% against any interference on price setting for all products....except to make sure two or more companies aren't getting together to "price fix".

What I would like to see is TRUTH in advertizing and pricing. If an item is more than one serving, it should be CLEARLY stated...maybe even have regulations as to size of text and placement. If you can pay $1 for an item by itself, but $3 for a larger package that serves 4, that should also be plainly marked.

I'd also like to see better ingredient lists and more complete nutrition facts.

But what does "boost sales" mean to shoppers?--- a population of shoppers buys so many chocolate bars one week. The next week there's a promotion and they buy, say 10% more. Where does that extra chocolate go? It's not that it balances out in sales in future weeks, because that wouldn't be "boosting sales", and food companies wouldn't bother if there was no advantage. The extra chocolate gets eaten by the population of shoppers in addition to their normal intake!

This is one way in which people are slowly trained to eat more to the benefit of food companies.

If promotions were removed, the normal price of product should be lower. And because the population is eating 10% less, it might not be much more expensive for them to do without promotions.

Well I think the only way you'd see an impact on price is if ALL advertizing is stopped.

And if a company wants to do that, fine.....but I don't agree that the government should be involved in regulating who can advertise and how.....as long as they are truthfull in their advertising.

Now....if the ad for the chocolate says/implies that this is a healthy food it definitly should be stopped. But if the company simply wants to advertise their product....whether it's 5% of their profit going to ads or 80%.....that should be their choice.

This is a capitalistic society. In this society we allow buisnesses to make their own choices. We should monitor ads for acccuracy (and that would remove a lot of "diet" ads) but I dont' want to see the gov't regulating who can advertise and how.

I'm concerned about this one.

Yes, some of the supermarket items like obvious junk food would be marked red, but what about those processed and so-called "healthy" bars/snacks/ready meals etc which had low fat content? They would be marked green, because low fat is the be-all and end-all. Also, what about a healthy slice of fresh cheese? And fresh butter and cream? And fresh meat? All would get the red light in the present nutrition environment.

Plus, I think that many people already know what is "healthy". They do buy low fat milk and reduced fat spreads. They do concentrate on eating plenty of pasta/rice/bread/complex carbs with their meals. And still they are fat. I was one of them once. Now I am enlightened :D

I just don't think the traffic light system will help matters.

Have just come across this interesting article in today's Times:

Labour will ban junk-food adverts on children's TV
By Sam Lister, Health Correspondent and Greg Hurst

LABOUR will make a ban on advertisements for junk food during children’s television programmes a key manifesto pledge for the general election to show its commitment to tackling childhood obesity.
Producers of confectionery, fizzy drinks and fast food will be banned from advertising on television at particular times of the day under the law.

The move comes after scathing criticism of the Government in a report by the Commons Health Select Committee, which concluded that ministers had failed repeatedly to address the nation’s weight problems.

Despite being known to favour educating the public on healthy eating rather than implementing laws, John Reid, the Health Secretary, has decided to take the “nuclear option” of an advertising ban to stem the alarming rise of youth obesity.

The committee’s report, published last week, detailed how a three-year-old girl weighing more than 6st had died from heart failure. Doctors who treated her gave warning to the committee that the tragedy was likely to become commonplace if action was not taken to curb obesity in the young.

Mr Reid responded by telling his officials to draw up laws banning junk food advertising during prime-time children’s television, but allowing it during adult programmes. Exactly how “junk food” will be defined remains unclear.

A White Paper on public health, which will contain the proposal for the ban, will be published in the autumn. However, with a general election expected next summer, the Government is not expected to introduce a Bill to Parliament during the next session. Instead, the measure will become a key vote-winning pledge in Labour’s manifesto.

Aides said that Mr Reid was persuaded to back the move by arguments that, while adults can make “informed choices” about what they eat, this option is not available to younger children. About 1,150 adverts for junk food are shown daily during children’s programmes, according to research.

Labour MPs expect an official announcement on the advertisement ban at their party’s annual conference in Brighton in September.

Tony Blair yesterday reiterated the need for individuals to take more responsibility for their waistlines, and not rely on government health strategies.

Speaking on the BBC One programme Breakfast with Frost, the Prime Minister said: “I am responsible for many things, but I can’t make people slimmer. The prime responsibility for people looking after themselves is with people. What I can do is encourage, for example, sport in schools, which we are expanding. We can give information to people, we can try to get the food industry to behave responsibly.”

The committee’s report said that obesity has grown by almost 400 per cent in 25 years, with three quarters of adults overweight or obese. England has the fastest-growing obesity problem in Europe. The report calculates that being overweight or obese costs the nation £7.4 billion a year.

Martin Paterson, the deputy director-general of the Food and Drink Federation, said that the industry, which spends hundreds of millions of pounds on television advertising each year, saw little benefit in a ban. “We have seen examples of bans in Quebec and Sweden, for example, but making no difference,” he said.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/articl...1129085,00.html

it's about time. Hope Canada follows suit. If it was up to me, junk food would be like adult material. Something kids don't see unless they go look for it.

Yup, sweets and sodas on the top shelf sound exactly right to me.

Who is gonna hide the junk food from the adults?

Many adults cant control their eating and cant set a good example for children.

I know plenty of adults that eat junk all day and then feel guilty saying no to their children, because they eat the stuff themselves.

Here in the states they usually have candy at the checckout....same in Canada? Also, a few stores have a few "special" checkouts for parents.....there's no candy or other treats at these registers.

I've seen parents stand in line in these "no treat" lines.....while a "regular" register is open. They do it so they won't have to argue with their kids!

An adult is assumed responsible enough to make his/her own choices. Unfortunately some don't have the maturity necessary to make those choices, but there is little to be done about that, except takes the kids away, in extreme cases. As we know, that has happened.

However, if the food is "out of sight out of mind", it will give poor parents a break. Like the "no candy" checkout aisle Cindysue mentionned. If the kids aren't constantly brainwashed into desiring junk food, if they don't see it at every opportunity, there is a better chance of them not even developping a taste for it. Now combine this approach with a strong education campaign (aimed at the parents, not just the kids) on the danger of junk food and there is a hope to curb this obesity epidemic.

Oh and impose a surtax on junk food. Use the profits to finance all these education campaigns.