To think you can't ban food on trains?

[poshme]

In today's times (sorry rubbish at links) there's an article saying the outgoing chief medical officer wants to ban food on trains unless for medical reasons.
AIBU to think this is completely stupid & unworkable?
Apparently it's because we're snacking too much & too many children are obese.

I regularly catch trains with my kids- usually a 3-4 hr journey. Invariably it's a meal time, and part of passing the time is eating a packed meal. Yes- it's not the healthiest meal in the world & includes crisps & chocolate, but as part of a normal diet it's fine.

My kids are not overweight. In fact they're generally underweight.

If this is implemented they're never be able to enforce it surely?

I wouldn't like this. I am able to work out for myself if I will be hungry, and take appropriate food with me.

I live mainland europe, long train journeys crossing borders are the norm. Everyone eats as and when they need to, and they seem to either use the bins, or take rubbish with them.

I have a 6 hour journey on Monday, 1pm-7pm. I don't see why i should rush and eat early when not that hungry when i have hours to sit around doing not much and could eat at 2ish. They still have full restaurant areas here though with cafe, tables etc so you can choose to eat there on journies.

I will probably take something simple like a sandwich/fruit. As i am currently pregnant I will also likely vomit or feel dizzy going hours without anything.

I don't think everyone needs to be snack policed either. Many people aren't snacking every 5 minutes, so should have full license to on occasion when they do fancy or need something else.

Not even sure most nutritionist would advise not eating for over four hours.

Are you serious? That;s a joke surely!

There is plenty of evidence that extending the times between meals is beneficial to health and can prevent diabetes.

No one needs to eat every 4 hours.

Your body can live off fat for days, so thinking you need food after 4 hrs is ludicrous! Unless you are diabetic and need a card fix, doing longer between meals is actually better as it makes your insulin levels drop and which has a lot of health benefits.

As for 'burning off' what you have eaten after 4 hrs, it doesn't work like that. Women have around 25-30% subcutaneous fat. Your body uses that for fuel and you could live for weeks with no food if you had to.

I think banning food outright is a bad idea for a number of valid reasons, not least personal freedom. However I'd like to see the snack cart go on shorter journeys. If you are trying to be healthy and have a mars bar and a packet of crisps shoved under your nose 3-4 times on a 90 minute journey, you'd need an ironclad will to turn these 650 or so unnecessary calories down.

I'd have no issue with banning hot food. A lot of the smells turn my stomach and hot food can be quite messy.

I'd struggle to get through a lot of journeys if I couldn't eat at all as I get travel sick but some food heads off the nausea. My daughter would also have struggled when she was a toddler. She needed to eat little and often. She was underweight so we were just happy when anything went in. And as a baby she was fed expressed breast milk as she was prem and never got the hang of breast feeding. Would that be acceptable? How would the food olive distinguish it from formula? Would they like to taste it, do you think?

What a ridiculous idea. What even is a local train anyway.

Dh leaves the house at 7am, he grabs a coffee and a breakfast sandwich/cereal bar/whatever and gets the local stop at every station train from our small local station to Crewe.

He then gets another local transport to Wales service to the town where he works. Total journey time 1.5 hours.

Dd gets the train back from college or to get to work. She often grabs a sandwich etc or she simply wouldn't have time to eat. She starts work at 11am and finishes at 4pm.

@poshme The report actually says on local public transport- it doesn't mention trains specifically. In reality this would be buses as not all regions have a local train service.

There is plenty of evidence that extending the times between meals is beneficial to health and can prevent diabetes.

And also "evidence" to suggest blood sugar levels can be better managed by more frequent smaller meals to prevent "spikes".

I generally agree that people are snacking too much- but so what? If I want to eat junk on a train, that's my right.

:47LemonPrism

I think it's stupid... I'm not overweight and I like to eat on the train. Why should I be punished?

Quite. And by contrast, I rarely eat on trains and am still fat.

Perhaps we should have personalised government bans? Mine could be no eating or drinking wine on the sofa once the kids are in bed. Maybe Alexa could monitor me via the fridge and there could be armed guards poised to raid when I crack and scoff a profiterole. I am fairly sure that would help me lose weight. And I wouldn't have to join Slimming World. Bring on the nanny state!

Also to people who suggest you should just eat in the station and grab a later bus/ train- there isn't always another bus or you'd be late.

DS has packed lunch on a local bus journey as I pick him up from school after 3 and need to be at the activity at 4, not feeding him isn't an option as he already eats very little up until that point so he just couldn't go... Or we'd have to get another car and he would have his lunch, but not the walk from the bus to the activity...

Haha! You'd have toddlers SCREAMING the whole time. It's the only way to shut them up sometimes.

Mine aren't overweight, if anything I worry that they're too skinny - both very active and walk miles to school. I give them their dinner & lolly pops on train journeys for mine and other passengers sanity!

@JinglingHellsBells

I feel ill when I don’t eat for long periods of time to the point of nausea and fainting. Doesn’t matter how little or much fat is on my body. I’m a healthy adult and have been the same size 8/10 for 15 years. I also have family in the medical field as well as some who are personal trainers. None would advise not eating for long periods of time which four hours is, unless medically advised.

I also notice in my experience and talking with others, going without food for long periods of time tends to make people overeat.

It’s ridiculous. People aren’t obese because they eat on a train journey.

Ah the we were skinnier when we didn't eat in public argument.

Those halcyon days when you couldn't actually see anything on public transport because of the cigarette smoke.

And the comedian's beloved British Rail sausage roll was fictitious I suppose?

On the report I heard, she only wanted eating to be banned on local trains. So it wouldn't apply to your 3-4 hour journeys.

But those "local" journeys can easily end up taking 3-4 hours the minute there's a problem (which is why DP will never take a job in London again, even though it should only take just over an hour to get there).

I think that we need better regulations on the type of food sold and the price. It's very disheartening when you want to eat healthily and your only options are cheap pastries/chocolate or a tiny salad that you'd need a second mortgage to afford. Why can we not have shops that sell genuinely healthy fast food at affordable prices?

No one is talking about banning food on trains. They are proposing to stop selling food on trains.
It is inherently poor quality, junk food.
Nothing of stop you taking your own food.

She also said there should be a maximum calories on take away food.

So people will just buy two slightly smaller items and end up eating more calories than if they just bought one slightly bigger one in the first place. She's bonkers.

I saw the BBC news report. It did say local transport. Even that would be hard - not like in the old days when we had bus conductors!

I think it's a good idea.
I remember this was suggested years ago by some Tory MP because he didn't like the sight or smell of people eating. I was absolutely against this as it was just snobbery. This is different because it's for public health. I'm fat, if I was banned for eating in public it WOULD help me.

So people will just buy two slightly smaller items and end up eating more calories than if they just bought one slightly bigger one in the first place. She's bonkers.

I think I would normally share your sensibilities, but there is some evidence that the 'nanny state' measures actually work. Sort of like, if a Big Mac is re-worked to a certain caloric target (provided it's not miles off where it is now), people will generally not notice and consume less.

It's a crying shame that we've gotten here, but we have.

I think hunger needs to stop being treated as some sort of medical emergency* that needs immediate treatment.

• Unless you are one of the tiny percentage of people that it is a medical emergency for.

Worraliberty fair point about 'passing the time' but generally I travel with the kids over a meal time- deliberately so that the eating of the meal uses up some time.

Hold on, you're travelling like this deliberately?

In that case I don't think it's fair on the kids.

Trains are not the cleanest of places, they're generally cramped, smelly and the constant movement I'm sure does nothing for their digestion.

I'm sure given an actual choice, no-one would prefer to eat their dinner on a train rather than in a better surrounding.

So if you're making them do it just to 'pass the time', why not feed them before the journey and take some books/travel toys instead?

I eat breakfast on the train and would ignore any ban

Oh, come off it worra. . Eating up some time by having dinner on the train in less than ambient surroundings doesn't fall into 'will someone think of the children?' territory.