Carbs with carbs, and a side order of carbs. WTF M & S?

[AudTheDeepMinded]

Good grief, no wonder we have an obesity crisis. Was in M & S cafe for a mid morning coffee and spotted their latest menu. Included is a mac and cheese toasted sarnie, with which you can have a side order of fries for an extra £2. Can't believe they seriously thought this was a good idea.
Should probably have posted this in AIBU! what's the most bizarre offering you have seen on a menu?

@icedcoffees well no, but surely there's a balance and a responsibility to the population? Would you be happy if people were left to make up their own minds as to whether they should or should not wear seatbelts for example? Bloody interfering government telling us how to be safe and controlling what we can do with our own bodies!

@bengalcat you have the official Aud seal of approval for the rocket addition!

@julieca to be fair, me too!

[quote AudTheDeepMinded]@icedcoffees well no, but surely there's a balance and a responsibility to the population? Would you be happy if people were left to make up their own minds as to whether they should or should not wear seatbelts for example? Bloody interfering government telling us how to be safe and controlling what we can do with our own bodies![/quote]
I don't think seatbelts are comparable. If someone doesn't wear a seatbelt, they put other people in direct danger as well as themselves (as they turn into a missile in the car).

The same can't be said for a triple carb lunch.

[quote AudTheDeepMinded]@icedcoffees I don't think I've suggesting banning it (I could be wrong, it's a long thread), just suggested it's not an appropriate thing to promote in combination?[/quote]
Meh, I don't think it's upto businesses or the government to decide what meals are appropriate or not.

If someone wants to eat triple carbs, not advertising this particular meal isn't going to stop them anyway - they could just order macaroni cheese, chips and garlic bread, or lasagne, chips and crumble, or any other number of combinations.

@icedcoffees only if they are not the sole occupant? How about dependents of those affected by obesity, should the affect on them not be taken into account? Or the drain on health resources that is already at breaking point. There are ripples out that affect other people, perhaps not as dramatic as in a car crash, but still undeniable.

[quote AudTheDeepMinded]@icedcoffees I don't think I've suggesting banning it (I could be wrong, it's a long thread), just suggested it's not an appropriate thing to promote in combination?[/quote]
But why isn't it appropriate to promote? There is nothing wrong with it, it's a normal meal. Why shouldn't it be advertised? You might think triple carbs is wrong, but it's not. It's often very healthy.

I actually saw that today. I think it was 630 calories. The usual baguette I pick up from Pret has 510 calories so not massively higher.

Not bad if people are choosing it as a treat either, not sure how that’s being responsible for the obesity crisis? My DP picks up a pasta pot almost every day as part of his meal deal that has over 700 calories in it.

I think in fairness OP has at least taken the MN pasting in good part. I mean OP even fizzing about this is just mildly batty but you have stayed and argued your thought process where most people would have flounced.

I did see that advertised today and did think it looked bloody awful but only becauseits really not my thing.

Truth be told there is no moral obligation from shops not to promote these things. That's a floodgate. Addicts could argue they shouldn't promote alcohol, I have been Keto for years so I don't eat sugar or many cards at all but I don't think they have a moral obligation not to promote sugar. They sell their clothes higher than some people can afford without using an overdraft or a credit card....hell they sell a credit card , should they not be doing so in case they encourage debt ?

People make choices and it's infanfilising to talk down to them thinking they will be swayed from lifestyle choices by shops advertising. Its irrelevant if you mean to patronise them, its still patronising. Although I fully admit it seems to come from a genuinely decent place from the OP (still not OK though).

@Pythonista Crikey, please quote where I have said that? That is a very unfair statement to make.

@AudTheDeepMinded

I know I'm not required to order it. I'm objecting to a high street shop with a massive presence normalising something obscenely unhealthy.

It's hardly a full fry up with a pint of vodka, a side of cocaine and a free packet of fags. Stop sensationalising.

Just don't have it daily and you should be fine

There was a pub dh and I went to once where both my lasagne and his Chinese style dish with rice each came with a side chips and bread and butter (white sliced, nothing special!)! He's skinny and managed the lot but I couldn't but then I can't manage most pub meals in their entirety

In Scotland we get macaroni cheese pies. Lucky us. A wonderful cure for a hangover with a bottle of full sugar iron bru. Mind you, we are the unhealthiest nation in Europe - but at least we have pies

@LadyMuckington I don't think that includes having the chips option though.
I've already conceded many points points posters have put forth here. But I still think that there must be a better way of helping people make healthier choices, not by banning items, but by education and by example. It is a fact that there is an obesity crisis but should we all should shrug our shoulders and think 'not my problem or responsibility'?

You seem obsessed with the obesity crisis and are clearly under the impression that fat people are obviously too stupid to make good choices and that they need to have good diet 'modelled' to them.

If you are slim and healthy then what is the problem with eating high calorie food?

And if you are obese, chances are it's a lot more complicated than shops serving 'unhealthy' food

[quote AudTheDeepMinded]@icedcoffees only if they are not the sole occupant? How about dependents of those affected by obesity, should the affect on them not be taken into account? Or the drain on health resources that is already at breaking point. There are ripples out that affect other people, perhaps not as dramatic as in a car crash, but still undeniable.[/quote]
No, it can be the case even if they are the sole occupant. You can easily fly through the windscreen and hit a passer by if you're not wearing a seatbelt.

Yes, there are ripples but do you really trust the government to decide what's healthy and what's not? If you give them permission to ban restaurants from promoting certain meals, what would stop them banning the sales of certain foods for good?

Is that the kind of society you'd be happy to live in?

@AudTheDeepMinded

Good grief, no wonder we have an obesity crisis. Was in M & S cafe for a mid morning coffee and spotted their latest menu. Included is a mac and cheese toasted sarnie, with which you can have a side order of fries for an extra £2. Can't believe they seriously thought this was a good idea. Should probably have posted this in AIBU! what's the most bizarre offering you have seen on a menu?

I'll take that with a large chocolate milkshake on the side please

I’m struggling with the concept that Marks & Spencer a private company, should have any responsibility for public health.

Their responsibility is primarily to their shareholders. As long as their operations, including their retail offering, fall within the law they’ve done their bit.

Health is a personal responsibility. There may be an argument for public institutions to try and inform and influence the population’s personal choices to promote better health, but not private companies.

Where would that responsibility stop? Where would the boundaries be?

You’d be ok with M&S making decisions on what you should and shouldn’t be allowed to order and eat, but what about what you or your children could wear for example? “No you can’t buy and wear that type of skirt, it’s too short, it’s for your own benefit”. “No you can’t buy that type of book, its not funny, its for your own benefit’

I still think that there must be a better way of helping people make healthier choices, not by banning items, but by education and by example

The health of society is not the responsibility of M&S, McDonald's or any other business, though.

Yes, there should be more education but you don't educate people by banning them from eating certain foods.

As for education - people KNOW what they shouldn't eat. It's hardly news.

But yes, patronising people always works.

You do know that people can order side dishes?

Nah. I couldn't eat this. I can't ever stand burger and chips, it's just too carby and boring having chips and a burger bun. I like coleslaw salad Tzatziki or some relish with the meat and chips, not a burger bun.

@Fluffymule

I’m struggling with the concept that Marks & Spencer a private company, should have any responsibility for public health.

Their responsibility is primarily to their shareholders. As long as their operations, including their retail offering, fall within the law they’ve done their bit.

Health is a personal responsibility. There may be an argument for public institutions to try and inform and influence the population’s personal choices to promote better health, but not private companies.

Where would that responsibility stop? Where would the boundaries be?

You’d be ok with M&S making decisions on what you should and shouldn’t be allowed to order and eat, but what about what you or your children could wear for example? “No you can’t buy and wear that type of skirt, it’s too short, it’s for your own benefit”. “No you can’t buy that type of book, its not funny, its for your own benefit’

there are times I could have benefited from a company telling me that the piece of clothing I was going to buy was not a good idea.

Macc cheese and salad, yum!