Childhood obesity strategy "lite"

In our days we had a greengrocer and a butchers within walking distance and the fish van used to come around on a Friday.

JessM's point about the underweight children in primary school struggling academically and reaching puberty later could well be linked to their emotional needs being neglected, along with poor/insufficient food.

Most of us will have had cereal/toast for breakfast, with full cream milk, jam and butter. Meat, poatoes and two veg followed by sponge cake and custard at school dinner, then another cooked meal at tea/supper time. In our family, if we asked for something between meals we were told to get a piece of fruit. A bag of crisps was a real treat and we had sweets on Saturday when grannie brought them. We ate a lot but we also had so much more freedom than most children do today. We ran about, rode bikes and generally played out a lot.

JessM's point about the difference in the weights of customers and their children in for example Waitrose and Asda is sadly correct. I've just seen on line, a report from a tv programme yesterday where a 22 stone mother complained that her obese 11 year old needed to go to fat camp. The mother complained there is no help for parents whose children are over weight, then went on to list her GP, a dietician, camhs, involvement with her daughter and how unhelpful that had all been. She said the government need to step in to help mothers like her.

Come on. Are some people trying to say that parents don't know what is a healthy and unhealthy option? Of course they do.

This is less to do with income and more to do with being able (for whatever reasons) to cook up a healthy meal from scratch.

The reasons
1) unable to access raw ingredients. Most local greengrocers and butchers have closed down. When did you last see a greengrocers or butchers on these sink estate? You don't. You'll only see typically the off-licence, mini stores and takeaways. These days it's on,y at the supermarkets that some mothers can get a decent selection of fresh veg, fruit and protein. But you can buy pizzas, and other junk, cheaply enough at the small local shop.
2) transport
If you are unable, or unwilling, to get to a big supermarket what are you expected to do? Getting the bus limits the amount you can carry, cuts into your day especially if you have children to get to school, pick up or ore-school children to juggle.

I used to sit on the North West Obesity Forum as LEA/school representative. These above were two of the major issues we highlighted. And that was before considering how to teach people to actually cook.

Haha Daphneboon I think a bar of chocolate after an hours workout is totally anti productive The calories in a bar of chocolate are probably double or more what you lose in the gym but its more about the message its giving than the actual calories... but soft drinks crisps choc bars in dispensers in high schools is just daft in my idea Yes and I think the lunchbox police in primary school is equally daft There has got to be a middle line and thats whats needed
Any legislation needs to be directed at food producers to limit all the hidden sugar I read that our cereal has the highest sugar content in Europe I think its all this hidden stuff thats damaging

Nobody is trying to ban the sales of chocolate! All that is being suggested is to curb the aggressive marketing of junk foods. What's wrong with that daphnebroom and thatbags? I don't think the economic welfare of the country depends on 2 for 1 offers on biscuits and crisps - and I don't think May does either.
Might have something to do with who donates to the Tory party though... That's how lobbying often works.
willa we have (at the moment) safer food in the EU and consequently UK than you do in the states.
And of course not all poor families are overweight Anya and nobody is suggesting that they are. In fact when I was governor of a school in a very poor area it was noticeable that the kids that struggled most academically were also the kids who were on average smallest and latest having puberty (which is related to body weight). However it does not take a genius to compare the rates of obesity in Waitrose to those in Asda.

gillybob too right!! Who qualified your average dinner lady as a nutritionist??

maizied if you can buy a can of beer in a supermarket at all hours of the day or night, a packet of cigarettes likewise, how do you construe chocolate bars or crisps as " hazardous substances"?

Good food is expensive and I can totally understand why some parents feel that giving a child in a buggy a sausage roll ( or whatever) to eat is far easier and cheaper than buying the ingredients and producing a healthy balanced meal . But how do we make these people understand that once in a blue moon that's fine but not everyday .

It's a myth that junk food is the only cheap alternative. Vegetables are generally much better value and a better option if you're on a budget. Add some meat, fish, cheese, eggs etc and you can produce a tasty cheap meal.

Not all 'poor families' have obese, unhealthy families that's a myth.

Many families provide healthy, nutritious meals on a limited budget. But it's certainly 'easier' just to grab a ready made cheap meal and bung it in the oven.

True, very true DaphneBroon about legislation not being selective.

I would disagree with you about legislation being help though, in this instance at least. And agree with MaizieD.

I sometimes think this. If the legislation had come in, would there be people[general public not lobbying bodies] trying to get it taken away? I doubt it, though I could be wrong.

Which bits of it would people have been most annoyed about?

My DGC's school have "lunch box police" ( DGD's words not mine) who patrol the lunch hall and confiscate anything they consider to be unhealthy . Funnily enough the two ladies who do it are bloody enormous and probably eat everything they take away !

I don't see it as meddling with our right to feed our children fattening foods; I see it as attempting to control the sale of hazardous substances.

But obieone legislation is not selective. It doesn't just apply to "other people" whose kids may or may not be overweight. It applies to you and me whether we like it or need it or not.
And legislation is not, repeat not , "help".

And on the other hand Blue belle we get primary schools banning little boxes of raisins in lunch boxes as being "unhealthy"?
I personally think if you have been burning up energy in a sports centre you are perfectly entitled to a chocolate bar if you so choose, and have been known myself to collapse like a starving man on a packet of totally unhealthy crisps or a KitKat while spending hours with DH in A&E.
I will never support legislation which deprives me of the ability to make my own decisions.

It isnt the kids of the parents that you are talking about thatbags and others. It is the other parents that need the Government help.

I dont agree thatbags.
Childhood obesity and adult obesity is too important and expensive an issue, to not have help from Government.

What really annoys me is the chocolate /biscuits /crisps and soft drink dispensers in high schools, I've seen them in sports centres and hospital corridors too Of course the kids will use them

Well said, db. All the parents I know who have been careful about what their kids eat and how much, and who have talked to their kids about healthy choices (educated them), do not have obese kids.

My eldest DGD (10) knows quite a lot about the food we eat including vitamins, colourings, additives etc. as she does a healthy eating class at school . She loves cooking too and lists all the foods and ingredients in a traffic light system Green you can eat as much as you like, Amber eat in moderation, Red only eat occasionally . I don't know if all
Schools do this? If not they should .

I am not really worried by a lack of government action, in fact Inam not at all worried as I do not think matters of how we feed our children should be passed upwards to a higher authority. People need to take responsibility for what IS within their control and what we put in our mouths falls into that category. Of course there needs to be legislation which applies to manufacturers to endure we are not left in the dark or misled over food contents, but frankly it is none of the government's business what I put on the table or eat. There have been too many "fads" over recent years which have proved to be unfounded if not downright misleading - marge /spread instead of butter, low fat but padded out with sugars and starch, high carb/low carb, sugar free but artificial sweeteners, so-called "healthy options" with precious few natural ingredients.
No, I don't actually want the government to meddle.

May has said that government needs to focus of the economy and that is why she's not pursuing this strategy at the moment. I haven't got the impression she has ruled it out entirely, only that it is on hold. Given all the predictions of economic gloom and doom that were spouted before Brexit, I'd have thought people would understand this stance of hers.

I've read two articles in the Times this morning on the subject, including one by Jamie Oliver. Even allowing for his complete commitment, I can still see May's point of view. She has even more complicated and difficult problems to deal with. This one can go on hold for the time being.

This is part of the problem with a nanny state. Sometimes nanny state is not best and certainly does not work in our best interest some of the time.

My point JessM is that it is not necessarily the food ( the quality or the quantity) it is the entire lifestyle to blame. If a child eats 3 good meals a day plus snacks and drinks (as mine do) and does lots of exercise then they are going to stay lean and healthy . A child eating the same but doing no exercise will become fat. It's simple. I mean sometimes you only have to look at the size of some of the parents to know that the child will become fat and I'm not sure what you can do about that ?

It's simple economics. High quality, nutritionally safe food is more costly. Biophosphonates (BPA) in cans and plastic containers and RBST an added growth hormone in milk cows can play havoc with human endocrine systems, especially right before puberty. Children should consume organic (grass fed) beef, free range poultry, organic eggs and dairy along with produce that is grown without pesticides, fungicides and chemical fertilizers. The jury is also not out when it comes to genetically modified corn and wheat (GMOs). Unfortunately, the high quality foods I just mentioned are much more expensive than ordinary food. It's also no coincidence that cereal, pasta, candy, soda and fast food in general are the cheaper alternatives.
Statistically, poor families (in the US at least) who can't afford to buy BPA, hormone free organic food, suffer a much higher rate of obesity, especially among their pubescent children.

Not sure what your point is gillybob?
My GC are similar but they have the kind of parents who are forever taking them to netball/swimming/basketball/martial arts etc
These are not the kids that get obese.
Even the supermarkets are unimpressed with this "strategy" - they would prefer a fairly regulated level playing field than all this persuasion.
www.theguardian.com/society/2016/aug/18/childhood-obesity-retailers-urge-mandatory-cuts-to-food-sugar-levels?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other