Saturday, January 5, 2013

Bansturbation writ large.

Politicians love to meddle, it's an inborn thing with them, sometimes it's for the good, more often than not it's because they can, they simply need an excuse, or a cover story to try to sell it to us as a good idea.
Labour has urged the government to consider introducing legal limits on sugar, salt and fat-content in food.
The party says the coalition's emphasis on voluntary agreements with industry is not working.
It is starting a consultation on how to tackle obesity.
The Department of Health in England says its Responsibility Deal with food companies shows the voluntary approach can be successful.
At its core this is an argument about how best to reduce levels of fat, sugar and salt in our food - through regulation, or collaboration.
The coalition says working with industry through the Responsibility Deal has improved food content and labelling.
But Labour argues the government has failed to come up with a convincing plan to tackle rising obesity rates.
Now whilst I'll admit obesity is a problem, what the government and its opposition believe is obese often enough isn't. Nor would legal limits on sugar and salt help very much as a variety of starches in food convert to glucose and are stored as fat by the body far quicker than sugar itself. Nor would any form of regulation help with the quantity problem of people simply eating too much even if it's better for them (in the governments eyes)
No this appears to simply be regulation for regulations sake in other words bansturbation, a favourite pastime of political parties out of power and who can say pretty much anything outrageous to see what people think. If the reaction is negative then it's dropped like the hot potato it is and brushed aside as a personal view, or simply put down as out of the box thinking.
The only way you'll cut down on obesity and over eating is to educate and convince those who do it, not change what's in the food they eat. It doesn't matter if the salt and sugar content of a Big Mac is reduced if you're going to polish four of them off in a single sitting. Yes that's a bit of an exaggeration, but essentially it really is quantity not quality that is the real issue, by all means make foods healthier but don't expect it to fix 'obesity' that's down to the obese.

5 annotations:

Mark Wadsworth said...

"Now whilst I'll admit obesity is a problem,"

For whom is it a problem and why? It's not a problem for me unless I am sitting next to a gigantic fattie on the bus or train, apart from that, I wish them all the best of luck.

And being fat has bugger all to do with diet, it's just the way some people are.

Quiet_Man said...

It's a problem for those who are obese yet don't want to be I'd guess. Though involving a government is always a bad idea.

James Higham said...

The only way you'll cut down on obesity and over eating is to educate and convince those who do it, not change what's in the food they eat.

Trouble with those foodstuffs is they're very morish.

selsey.steve said...

Why can't they just leave us all alone?
What drives this incessant drone of "We must control..."?
My only reaction to this sort of excreta is "Get the FUCK out of my life!"

Anonymous said...

Stonyground Says:

I am fairly slim (36" waist) and middle aged. According to my BMI index, I am seriously overweight bordering on obese. Is the 'epidemic' in obesity caused by reffering to thin people as obese?