To think peoples lives are crap enough without needing the government to interfere with Meal Deals

[Jeansmeansheinz]

FFS just let people have the pleasure of a Meal Deal. I really don't need the Government telling me what I can and can't eat.

They are not banning the parts of a meal deal. Presumably they are banning the all in one price that incentivise people to get a sweet drink and crisps or chocolate with their sandwich even if they don't really need it.It's not about the sandwich! But If you have a can of coke big bag of crisps and twix every day as well as the sandwich (a lot of people are not as virtuous as PP's) you might eventually put on weight.

People might hesitate about the Twix and coke if it added £2 to their lunch, that's the idea.

A sandwich is not really a bad option for lunch on the move.

Aaasrgh. It's not about the sandwich.

So much deliberate missing the point here.

No one needs crisps or chocolate with a sandwich for lunch. It probably won't work but something has to give. Right now we have people wanting an NHS that fixes all while taking no responsibility for their health.

I think the problem is that people think it is healthy, lots of sandwiches have more calories than a big mac.

A big mac and small fries is 730 calories. The big mac is 493 calories.

A Greggs ham and cheese baguette is 492. Add a packet of crisps at 198 gives you 690 calories. If you ad a fruit yoghurt you are at 910 calories.

I suspect many people chose the crisps, chocolate bars and fizzy drinks regardless of the many MNters who state they pick the healthy options and only eat half.

Yes but a sandwich is an OK lunch and not everyone is calorie counting. It may be a factory sandwich (Greggs are made in their shops actually) but it's still more filling and nutritious than chocolate and crisps. It's the junk food extra's being bundled in that make it excessive for the average person.

Also that massive baguette will take twice as long to eat as a small greasy Big Mac.

You obviously have not had a Greggs baguette recently.

Just about to go for lunch, maybe I'll test it rather than walking all the way to Pret for a twice as expensive and even higher calorie baguette

@roarrfeckingroar At my Slimming World group years ago there was an NHS theatre nurse who hadnt had time to eat AT WORK for days due to them having to move equipment around due to changes the trust had inflicted upon them.
THE NHS NEEDS TO GET ITS OWN HOUSE IN ORDER BEFORE BLEATING ABOUT THE PUBLIC

The point of his/her post really went over your head didn’t it?

the NHS do give out press releases about obesity while their own staff dont have time to eat healthily. Its hypocritical

Yes but not a reason to eat junk if you don’t have to, that’s just cutting off your nose to spite your face isn’t it? Me tucking into chips and puddings every night until the NHS stop being hypocrites won’t help me.

@Sweetashunni er i know that i was just pointing out that because the NHS is an employer too

The problem is people are misunderstanding. Nutrition is important however too many calories are left on the body as excess fat.
So yes supermarket ready food is dross but excess food is the real issue.
It's not 1909 people toiling all day. We don't need 3 square meals per day.

We don't need 3 square meals per day.

There's nothing wrong with 3 square meals a day. It depends what your square meals are. It's a bit daft to say that the problem is excess calories entirely caused by quantity of food. What do you mean by quantity? Weight? A 400g lunch could be made up of mostly veg or mostly carbs and fat.

We don't need 3 square meals per day.

I need four, because that's the only way that I can space meals closely enough tp avoid a migraine.

What even is a square meal as opposed to a meal?
I don't think its unreasonable to have 3 meals in a day, but obviously some choices are healthier than others. And it's not a forgone conclusion that eating sandwiches every day for a year leads to weight gain.....

There seems to be some kind of denial.
65% of all adults are overweight or obese.
In the 1970's it was 10%.

It can be true that 65% of adults are overweight
and true that eating 3 meals a day is not necessarily unhealthy

Not gonna read the whole thread so these have probably been mentioned but:

• Why are the government targeting meal deals instead of the biggest culprits like fast food (McDonalds, KFC, etc)?
• Not all meal deals are created equal. Big difference between bottled water, carrot sticks and smoked salmon sandwich versus a bottled coke, crisps and bacon sandwich - right?

Because people, like you, assume that KFC and McDonalds are poor choices and sandwiches and crisps are good choices when that isn't always the case.

It's seen as perfectly normal to have crisps with a sandwich every day when the crisps should probably be a treat, once a week maybe.

Erm...I was saying the crisps were unhealthy.

I said the coke/crisps/bacon sarnie was a poor choice while the water/carrot/salmon sarnie was healthier.

The only truly healthy things from McDonalds I can think of are shaker side salad and the apple bags in the kids meals.

I don't think anyone denies that we've got fatter.

The question is why, and what to do about it.

We tried full on shaming, high social pressure and denial of goods to plus sized people (clothing over a size 16 was ugly, expensive and hard to find), and that appears to have made things worse.

I completely agree.

The one thing that hasn't been tried is making healthy food cheaper and more readily available, and giving children a proper education in school about how to cook filling, nutritious and affordable meals - and snacks.

It's always the stick and never the carrot, quite literally.

By making unhealthy but tasty food more expensive, it becomes even more desirable, psychologically. When it's more expensive, it's aspirational. It needs to be unsexy and unappealing.

If you want to be more radical, stop all adverts for unhealthy foods. Slap health warnings on wrappers - it won't deter everyone, but it might deter some.

Do a full-on charm offensive with healthy foods, while also making fruit, veg, fish etc much more affordable. Teach kids how to whip up a quick snack that's healthy, and how to cook really delicious dinners that aren't crammed with fat and sugar.

If I get caught hungry while I'm out and about (I'm often missing meals!), I need to be able to grab a healthy snack/light meal that I can eat on the run. I rarely find fruit to be substantial enough to keep me going and other options are typically very limited. Make it easy to make healthier choices. Pay a good advertising firm to make some ads with ideas of healthy, delicious food/meals - think M&S style, sexy foods but healthier! Sounds daft but if shown regularly, it will start to penetrate into the collective consciousness - it's why advertising works.

But all of this will piss off the big corporations, and cost a lot of money to implement - and in reality, the government doesn't really give a shit. They just want extra £££ in their coffers and ass pats for looking as if they're trying to do something.

This came up on my news feed and I thought of this thread

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jul/04/do-you-take-a-packed-lunch-in-to-work-perhaps-thats-why-youre-exhausted-?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1688487001