In thinking the govts new obesity strategy is

[laptopdancer]

well, a bit pants?

Why do we actually care if people are fat?

Some people say it's because they use state resources. Yes, they'll probably use more NHS budget but they'll also die a decade earlier and not need pensions and nursing homes. It's probably swings and roundabouts (and I bet the government has already analysed this but not released the results in the interests of PR)

Being fat (and the fat will always be with us) would be a much better experience if everyone stopped demonising it.

Some people say it's because they use state resources.

Brideoffrankenstein - how would you feel if someone you loved got ill in the future and needed NHS care -but the doctor said to you well your loved one can have 50% of the care they should have because actually we have to spend the other 50% on someone else that has a disease brought on by overeating? It will be ok though because your loved one will live and be able to claim a pension and live in a nursing home - it is just there quality of life will be less due to not being enough money to give them the best in health care

IK- the government has an amount of money to spend on everything. It's not as though they have separate silos beyond that year's budget. If they have to spend less on pensions/residential care for ninety year olds, they have more to spend on the NHS.

As I said, it all evens out. A fat person who drops dead at 65 will be no more a burden on the state than a thin person who lives to be ninety and draws the state pension for 25 years, arguably less so.

That is just a daft idea - that middle class families should show working class families how to eat. Obesity is growing fastest amongst the MC because relatively cash-rich but time-poor parents are just as likely to throw a ready meal in a microwave or get a takeaway as the working classes.

I am not saying the MC are already as obese as the WC but they are heading that way. If over half the population are overweight already this isn't just a WC problem. The reasons for being overweight may vary with class admittedly, but no class is exempt.

I don't think taxes are the key to this. It has to be education. It is an individual's responsibility to chose the right foods. To do that they need to be educated so they can make the right choices. My children learn a lot about healthy eating at school - they know what they should eat most and what they should only have occasionally so hopefully they will feed themselves properly when they are old enough to get the choice. If this sort of teaching isn't going on in every school, it should be.

50+ years ago as there wasn't the choice of food available but we need to make sure that the population as a whole know that with additional choice comes the risk of obesity if you make the wrong choices too often.

In an ideal world if people take responsibility, the large corporations won't have to be taxed or heavily regulated and restricted - the consumer will vote with their feet and steer clear of their products anyway.

Thebride - no it doesn't even out. Lists for seeing an endocrinologist are much longer due to type 2 diabetes, so if you get any other type of endocrine disease you will have a longer waiting list to see consultant - you asked why does it matter if other people are fat - the answer is as then other people have to wait or suffer longer as they don't employ more consultants to cover and make the lists shorter.

gluttony is a sin.

Xenia Who is going to enforce the rule against eating on the way to school?

Why should bus-users be under a rule which car-users would not be?

When you weigh the children what are you going to do with the figures and how are you going to keep them confidential in a school environment?

What about packed lunches?

What about the school whose playing field has been sold and built on? You may say it should not have been but it has. What are you going to do about it?

The trouble is that you are trying to use schools to do the parents' job.

IK Yes ok, if you happen to be struck down in your prime by something that generally affects young fat people, then thats a bum rap, but going away from anecdotes and into statistics, the people who use most NHS resources are old people. Fewer of them is good for NHS budgets. 89% cancer sufferers are over 50, more than 60% are over 65, so if you happen to get cancer young, then you'll see a consultant quicker if there are fewer old people.

The main job i s th eparents' job. The thread had turned to schools nad I listed some things schools do. All schools used to have no eating in school uniform rule and it worked. That's more about discipline than eating of course but it's a good rule and plenty of private schools still have it but the sate sector never seems to want to do things from the private sector which cost absolutely no money. First of all good pupils obey or report bad pupils so that helps and some parents enforce it including in cars. There is no ne ed for anyone to eat on a school journey by the way. Are we suggesting mumsnet children leave home in the morning and then eat all the way to school?

Children are being weighed in state schools and used to be in the past. Everyone in the class knows who is the fatso billy bunters of the year. Children aren't stupid but we're getting to a point where there are heaps and heaps of these fat chidlren around and something needs to be done to ensure they are eating meat, potatoes and veg and not b iscuits and fizzy drinks.

£10 per GP visit for those who are obver 30 BMI might work quite well.

What, even if they were going for tonsillitis? Why should they?

If you're going to adjust the tax burden so those who do things likely to add to the state's spending (so called sin taxes) then do it at the point of consumption. Anything else makes no sense.

TheBrideofFrankenstein Not much point in seeing an oncology specialist if you have an endocrine disease....your statistics don't work unless you get the correct illness

I think people should be allowed to overeat if that's what they want to.

People can drink, smoke, and eat themselves to death. it's their life.

I think there should be help for people who want to quit though.

But I don't think you can MAKE people change their way.

I don't want the government telling my pub to serve me a smaller glass of wine. I don't need health warnings or extra tax on my cigarettes, gin and and butter.

If people need help with an addiction, they should get it. If people end up going to hospital because they are sick due to being obese, they should get help. I am happy to pay tax for that.

Fat people don't bother me, it's their life, their choice. Don't want to see them suing McD either though.

It is YOUR responsibility what you put into your body.

TheBrideofFrankenstein Not much point in seeing an oncology specialist if you have an endocrine disease....your statistics don't work unless you get the correct illness

Neither do yours..........basically, you're better off with more thin people if you have an endocrine disease, but better off with more fat people if you get cancer or any host of other diseases in which old people major.

It's one of the biggest problems the planet faces however so it is becoming more than just a personal issue. We could ban all processed foods. That would really upset the food industry but would have a major effect. Imagine if you literally couldn't buy any drinks other than milk and water. Then no children would be taking ain all that rubbish in drinks which is one of the biggest issues of all. If you wanted fruit juice you'd have to buy your own oranges and make it.

originalghoster That's what i was saying. I think that a lot of poorer people think that eating well is the priviledge of the middle and upper classes. Showing a middle class family eating well on an advert won't inspire them, it will confirm what they beleive - that they can't afford to feed their family well.

Budda

Yes, class needs to be taken out of it. There are plenty of middle class folk who eat processed junk. I'm thinking more like war time public information films, which were aimed at everyone afaik.

Yes, that is a great idea. Even "hard to reach" families watch TV

LOL at charging £10 per GP visit if your BMI is over 30. I was obese for 9 years until today and I haven't visited my GP for 11 years. So wouldn't have made a bit of difference to me.

"the strategy was labelled "pathetic and stupid" by experts, who warned it would do little to solve the problem." - which just about sums up the issue for me.

I would say I am typical of a lot of obese people. I know I'm fat. I know I eat the wrong food. I know what I sould eat. However, I have issues with food. And I cannot control myself. I hate myself. I hate the way I look and I hate my weakness. I am afraid I will die young like my mother who had a heart attack at the age of 47.

Telling me I must "take responsibility" is about as useful as telling an anorexic to eat a creamy bun!

But if it were impossible to buy buns you might not eat them. I accept you might go out and buy lots of white flour and sugar etc but we could ration sugar very severely, no one really needs it at all so you'd have to have buns without su gar which might not be so tasy and perhaps virutally ban white flour too and all other refined products. Then you would notfind it so easy to eat those foods as they couldn';t be had for love nor money.

What you are advocating Xenia is prohibition and we all know how well that worked in 1920's America!! You don't really think we should have that kind of nanny state do you? It wouldn't end well.

And while you are banning processed foods, I take it you will also be banning all alcohol - there are a lot of calories in alcoholic drinks? What about dairy products - all high in calories and liable to clog up you arteries. They are processed foods too. What about rice and potatoes and pasta? They ought to be banned too - all those carbs. They'd make you blow up like balloon just the same regardless if they are the 'good' brown or the 'bad' white. Where would all this banning end?

It isn't a question of what you eat but of how much you eat. There is no such thing as a bad food (although Pot Noodles or Pop Tarts and the like surely come close) - no food is bad for you in moderation but that is what people have lost - the ability to eat these things in moderation. Education is the key whether it be at schools or via counselling if you have a problem with food or public information broadcasts which the BBC have already tried I think or whatever avenue works to get the message across and to help those who need help. Surely that has got to be better than banning all processed foods even for those who don't have a problem with them or their weight?

Oh Xenia - rationing? Really?

I suppose we would have to fine a new p.c. name for the "black market", wouldn't we?

Find, damn it!

Education AND food supply.
I went to blackpool last night and I found it almost impossible to find a healthy meal.

Hey laptop, me too! We actually thought the McDonalds looked to be the cleanest and healthiest food establishment there! Settled for chips only which probably had our weekly calories combined!