Constant snacking ffs

[anothersuitcase]

So sick of this. My group of friends are obsessed with forcing snacks on their kids, they are literally never allowed to become hungry. I like my kids to feel hungry at mealtimes, and actually want to eat their dinner rather than pick at it. But every time we meet up snacks are produced or bought not even an hour after the last meal. Is it just the people I spend time with or is this the way things are now?

Yes I know you do get kids that need to eat regularly for various reasons, but surely not all kids? Is there actually anything wrong with a rumbling tum, even a bit of a gnawing hunger pang at mealtimes? I know I could tell my kids they can't partake but that is pretty awkward when all the others are tucking in.

I raised this with my friend today and she said something along the lines of this isn't post-war Britain and why deprive them when you don't have to? And I said that's exactly why there is a problem with obesity in children (her kids aren't obese to be fair) Things were slightly strained after that. So who is being unreasonable?

I agree OP (not with the 'gnawing hunger' though).

Feeling hungry for a good hour or so before a meal is perfectly natural and not the 'enemy' some parents make it out to be.

Also this 'hangry' thing, is no reason to let a child spoil their appetite before dinner, so they end up getting 'hangry' again an hour or so later because they couldn't actually eat their dinner.

Learning to control your temper/poor behaviour is all part of growing up and not something we should be looking to 'fix' immediately, by shoving a snack towards said children.

It's something that really bothers me. I don't like the culture of it, and I don't want my children getting into the same habits.

They eat their three main meals well, and have a snack mid-afternoon, which is perfectly adequate. They don't need to be grazing from the time they wake up until they go to sleep, and not eating proper meals because they're not actually hungry by the time the meal is served.

I don’t buy that, QueenUnicorn. I think sensible routines established from the word go are much less likely to cause obesity
I've worked in the fitness industry for well over a decade and the massive focus is weight loss.
The thing is, eating shouldn't be routine, you need to listen to your body's cue's. Having designated mealtimes and finishing the plate full rather than eating when hungry is a huge factor in over eating. The vast majority of overweight people I have worked with were big dinner eaters and routine eaters. Their portion sizes were way off and they would eat at a designated time rather than when hungry.

Previous generations managed to get through 2/3 hrs in the cinema without needing to eat or drink. Now it's the norm to load up on snacks, or smuggle them in, because cinemas depend on the profits from food to make ends meet.

As a result, watching a film is associated with eating to the extent that popcorn or a family bag of treats is sold as central to the experience of snuggling up on the sofa at home, even if they've just had lunch or their evening meal.

E

Maybe not as far as gnawing hunger but i agree with listening to bodily signs of hunger rather than 'I'll keep feeding my child snacks any time thry aren't being direvtly entertained by something'.

It's not popular to suggest continupus snacking isn't needed and probablybis contributing to people being more overweight though

I prefer to eat 4-6 smaller meals a day because that's what suits me. But it's not possible during the week. My snacks include some cheese, crackers and grapes / peanut butter on toast etc. Not a bag of mini cheddars/squeezy yoghurt/snack packs.

Some people act like their child will die of dehydration and thirst if they don't eat every hour and have continuous access to a half litre bottle of water during the school day which must be topped up and then you ask tje students if they drink that much on a weekend and stop in town to fill their bottle up... unsurprisingly they manage jist fine out of school.

What I have trouble understanding is this.

There are so many overweight people who have struggled (and continue to struggle) with their weight, all their adult lives, who place the blame firmly on their parents, who during their childhood would insist they ate everything on their plate at mealtimes.

Yet often the very same people can see nothing wrong with constantly providing snacks for their children, to keep them 'occupied' or because they're trying to avoid bad behaviour due to this 'hangry' thing.

Do they not realise that if/possibly when their children grow up to join the 65% of overweight adults in the UK, they will be blaming their parents for all their snacking between meals?

It's like a vicious circle that needs to be broken.

your body's cues are the result of habit rather than actual need if you've got used to chocolate or crisps as a snack in the evenings or half-way through the morning. Once upon a time, people used to have just a sandwich. Now it's a sandwich AND a bag of crisps or a Kit Kat for lunch. Crisps and chocolate bars were rare when I was growing up. My dcs used to share a Mars bar. Now there are individual Mars bars and small bags of crisps in multipacks bought as routine in the weekly shop.
I don't think younger parents realise how much things have changed.

No child who's had a good breakfast suffers 'hunger pangs' mid-morning. It's good to feel hungry at lunch-time. But so many kids really don't because they've been fed food they don't need all morning.

I agree with QueenUnicorn - I've spent quite a lot of time in eating disorder units and the emphasis there is on re-establishing 3 meals and 3 snacks as a healthy, normal structure to be maintained.

I try not to go more than 4 hours without eating as it tends to make me dizzy, faint, snappy and/or forgetful.

I follow similar patterns with my children because that's what works for us. We don't eat much at a time but we eat often. If my eldest (15) was restricted to meal times only, she would be in serious trouble. Shes underweight as it is and eats probably 8 times a day. She wouldn't be able to eat enough in one sitting to only eat 3 times.

Different things work for different families.

I don’t get why anyone has an issue with a child having a bottle of water?

bluntness I'm pretty sure I don't have a problem with food, never had to do slimming world or similar and don't deprive myself. Not tiny by any stretch, not overweight though. Maybe gnawing hunger was not a great choice of words! But I don't think 4 hours of not eating can result in feeling actual pain from hunger, to me it's a healthy feeling of needing to eat, and knowing how much I'll enjoy it.

Yes most of my mum friends do lots of offering snacks - usually “healthy” ones eg popcorn, fruit, veg sticks. I do less healthy snacks —chocolate buttons— but as a treat not a matter of course iyswim. I think there’s a bit of frowning on my choices but I don’t know what the point is of filling them up with loads and loads and loads of “healthy” breadsticks etc rather than letting them wait for an actual meal.

YANBU.

I don’t know why people are telling you to ‘mind your own business’ (besides that they’re being defensive). It is your business of your children are there when snacks are being offered round.

The frequency of snacking is ridiculous.

I've also noticed more and more people saying they simply have to snack or 'graze' as it's called nowadays because if not, they feel dizzy/shaky etc.

Well if your body isn't used to feeling hunger and if it's constantly fed as soon as it hits (as is the case with many children), then of course it's not going to handle it well, if it ever comes across that feeling because it's totally alien to it.

Try asking a smoker how their body feels when it's suddenly allowed to feel low nicotine levels.

'Not pleasant' will be the answer.

YANBU OP. I absolutely agree. Yes "gnawing hunger pangs" probably was the wrong choice of words but hunger pangs are the body's way of telling you that it's time to eat.

3 Sisters, 2 kids each. One Sister always had a full sweet drawer in the kitchen plus multi packs of crisps and juice. Her kids had to ask but more times that not they were told "take 2 things each" but this was more than once per day. Other 2 Sisters, treats bought about twice in the week.

Kids are all now 20 something and sweet drawer Sister's kids are morbidly obese, the other 4 kids are not. I don't think that is a coincidence.

If you're a biscuit, cake, chocolate and snack advocate, please do some research on the role of what those sugar-spikes do to your body's production of insulin, leptin and ghrelin.

I just think parents continue to infantilise their children.

Eating all day is what a baby does as they need it. You cannot go out without feeds for a baby or careful planning around feeding time as they need feeds and cannot wait.

Parents still seem to apply this logic to much older children. Dont go anywhere without a camelbak full of water and a bag full of snacks. They seem to think the kid will die if not fed constantly just like a baby.

New absolutely! It's ridiculous isn't it! A parent at my eldest school kicked right off last week because her son was told he couldn't eat or drink on the coach to a trip.... it was a 40 min journey ffs!

Research has concluded that frequent snacking is a big contributor to obesity in the US. I reckon we’re not far behind. www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.firstwefeast.com/eat/2015/02/extreme-snacking-is-a-major-cause-of-obesity-in-america

now, what I don't get with all the talk of obesity due to snacking etc is that I am part of this "obese generation" -

we grew up WITHOUT snacks - we grew up eating 3 meals a day with water from the tap in between - most of my friends (age 30-50) are on the fat side of "normal"

my kids snack, they are not fat let alone obese. They snack on foods that are good for them - not chocolate or crisps which are "treats" occasionally given, not snacks which are given when wanted

the problem is feeding kids crap, not snacking.

Beyond, if they're on the 'fat side of normal' and are not snacking, the chances are their portion sizes have grown over the years, along with the size of plates, the rise in people driving everywhere (I'm 48 and when I was young, a family with 2 cars was very rare to see) and the fact we have more things to keep us sitting still...like the internet/100s of TV channels etc.

Today's kids, will slow down eventually too. They'll stop doing PE when they leave school, they'll learn to drive, they may end up in sedantry jobs.

If they don't stop the snacking habits their parents taught them, they'll very likely end up much more 'on the fat side of normal'.

It's not just about eating crap, even healthy food causes obesity when eaten in large volumes without enough exercise to burn it off.

If I leave my 3 year old to get too hangry he will refuse to eat his dinner. A small snack keeps him going and he'll eat his proper meals too (well, apart from pretending he doesn't like vegetables but I don't let him get away with that).

And when I say hangry arseholes I mean shouting, hitting each other, throwing things. Not just a little bit whiny.

Even the word 'snack' annoys me. I can always hear it said in an Alan Partridge voice. "Sssnaaack".

Beyond If snacking is built into the day as the norm with the idea that there is a need to eat between meals, it gives parents another opportunity to make the wrong food choices or give into their children's demands. Your generation didn't become obese till they were adults. This generation has high levels of obesity before they've even left primary school.

Oh the horror, how dare people keep their children fed and watered. What cruel hell is this.