Adults Only - Junk food & Drink

[Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,219
Forum Member
✭✭✭
Tax the Fat!
BBC NEWS

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-21478314


A ban on advertising foods high in saturated fat, sugar and salt before 9pm

Further taxes on sugary drinks to increase prices by at least 20%

A reduction in fast food outlets near schools and leisure centres

A £100m budget for interventions such as weight-loss surgery

No junk food or vending machines in hospitals, where all food must meet the same nutritional standards as in schools

Food labels to include calorie information for children.

Sugar spikes are an addiction. Just say NO :eek:
«134

Comments

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 22,736
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Leisure centres? I can understand schools but if you work out there is nothing wrong with having takeaway anyway.

    As for taxing sugary pop, if that happens will look into making my own, like I will with booze.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,219
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Prof Terence Stephenson, the chair of the Academy, evoked parallels with the campaign against smoking.
  • Cissy FairfaxCissy Fairfax Posts: 11,801
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I fin the calories list in McDonald's quite interesting. Little between a hamburger and cheeseburger. Better off having 2 hamburgers than a quarter founders. McFlurries and milkshakes worse than most of the food.
  • tim59tim59 Posts: 47,188
    Forum Member
    Would not change a thing, hiking the price of something in the uk has never worked,to stop people smoking, drinking, or useing there cars. Increaseing the price only gets more tax coming in does not ever solve the problem.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,219
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I fin the calories list in McDonald's quite interesting. Little between a hamburger and cheeseburger. Better off having 2 hamburgers than a quarter founders. McFlurries and milkshakes worse than most of the food.

    The Muc calories are in the sugary bun and the relish!
  • James FrederickJames Frederick Posts: 53,184
    Forum Member
    MEW TOWN wrote: »

    A reduction in fast food outlets near schools and leisure centres

    Would Fish & Chip shops come under that rule as if so as I live at a Seaside resort there is about 20+ within 5 mins walking distance.

    If it's just Burger bars there is about 6-7 within 5 mins inc one built in to the leisure centre itself and a KFC directly across the road
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,219
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    tim59 wrote: »
    Would not change a thing, hiking the price of something in the uk has never worked,to stop people smoking, drinking, or useing there cars. Increaseing the price only gets more tax coming in does not ever solve the problem.

    I think price increases would 'price out' children.

    Let's face it children shouldn't be able to affored to smoke!

    Pocket money won't be enough if you price hike enough.

    Price them out of the market as only children start smoking.
    Same with sugar drinks, price them out.

    Simple.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,219
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Would Fish & Chip shops come under that rule as if so as I live at a Seaside resort there is about 20+ within 5 mins walking distance.

    If it's just Burger bars there is about 6-7 within 5 mins inc one built in to the leisure centre itself and a KFC directly across the road

    Government decision? Some say Fish & Chips are ok ?
    Who knows?


    Fish&Peas are best. :D Lose the spuds.
  • Ulysses777Ulysses777 Posts: 741
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Doesn't orange juice have almost the same sugar content per 100ml as Coke?
  • tellywatcher73tellywatcher73 Posts: 4,181
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    MEW TOWN wrote: »
    I think price increases would 'price out' children.

    Let's face it children shouldn't be able to affored to smoke!

    Pocket money won't be enough if you price hike enough.

    Price them out of the market as only children start smoking.
    Same with sugar drinks, price them out.

    Simple.

    so who gets all the extra cash? People will still buy the stuff anyway, it just means that kids who buy the odd McDonald's when out with friends will be giving more money to someone. The ones that constantly eat takeaways etc will continue to do so. For most kids, it's an occasional treat. Maybe we should have takeaway ration books!
  • tghe-retfordtghe-retford Posts: 26,449
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Fizzy drinks are already taxed at 20% - it's called 'VAT'.

    And a tax will not work, all people will do is pay the difference and not spend elsewhere. It'll be a complete cash cow for the Government and won't result in less people drinking fizzy drinks. In Denmark, where a 'fat tax' was introduced for this reason, it was dropped soon after because it was unworkable. The only viable option is a complete ban of sales - and I dare doctors suggest that publicly. Expect ferocious opposition from PepsiCo and The Coca Cola Company to any tax or ban however.
  • flagpoleflagpole Posts: 44,641
    Forum Member
    would 20% make any difference.

    this is just a publicity campaign.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,219
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    so who gets all the extra cash? People will still buy the stuff anyway, it just means that kids who buy the odd McDonald's when out with friends will be giving more money to someone. The ones that constantly eat takeaways etc will continue to do so. For most kids, it's an occasional treat. Maybe we should have takeaway ration books!

    Obviously the government will end up with the money one way or another.

    They have to claw back labours profligate years somehow.
  • tghe-retfordtghe-retford Posts: 26,449
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    flagpole wrote: »
    would 20% make any difference.

    this is just a publicity campaign.
    Supermarkets put up fizzy drinks by up to 20% whenever they have a price hike. They've done this recently when both Coca Cola and Pepsi are now up to £2 for a 2 litre bottle. Hasn't stopped people buying them.
  • CharnhamCharnham Posts: 61,332
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Leisure centres? I can understand schools but if you work out there is nothing wrong with having takeaway anyway.
    yeah I dont get that either. Even if you go to a leisure centre and do the exercise, the fact you have done the exercise is reason enough not to get the take away. Also unlike schools, Leisure centres are something you choose to go to, and there is no expectant of a balance meal anywhere near it.

    Also if they keep increasing the places, stores cant open, fewer will open, and also more that are already open are caught in that catchment area.

    Going to be really hard to put a leisure centre in a city centre, if it means many stores will have to close or change what they sell, could your local paper shop survive if it couldn't sell junk food?
  • SpamJavelinSpamJavelin Posts: 1,071
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Maybe we should have takeaway ration books!
    Maybe the government should stop nannying and wagging their fingers at people's choices and leave people alone to make their choices according to their own lights, as competent adults.

    Radical, I know.
  • tellywatcher73tellywatcher73 Posts: 4,181
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    MEW TOWN wrote: »
    Obviously the government will end up with the money one way or another.

    They have to claw back labours profligate years somehow.

    well, preferably not through my daughters once a month treat with her friends. Its okay for the m.p's, they can call their KFC lunch and claim it back on expenses.
  • 80sfan80sfan Posts: 18,522
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Its okay for the m.p's, they can call their KFC lunch and claim it back on expenses.

    Looking at how many fat obese MPs there are, I'd say they eat a bit more than a KFC ;)

    Conservative MPs seem to have the biggest chins and waistlines
  • MoonyMoony Posts: 15,093
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Ulysses777 wrote: »
    Doesn't orange juice have almost the same sugar content per 100ml as Coke?

    Almost as much sugar - and actually has more calories.

    http://www.weightlossresources.co.uk/calories/calorie_counter/drinks.htm
  • tellywatcher73tellywatcher73 Posts: 4,181
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Maybe the government should stop nannying and wagging their fingers at people's choices and leave people alone to make their choices according to their own lights, as competent adults.

    Radical, I know.

    definitely too radical an idea for this country! Letting people make their own choices? It'll never happen.
  • James FrederickJames Frederick Posts: 53,184
    Forum Member
    I don't see how it will price out children as I see just as many kids smoking today as I did 20 years ago when I was at school if anything at all it will just mean some have to pick a packet of **** or a McDonald's

    As for adults it won't make any difference to the people who eat to many anyway as if anything all they will do is take the money out of what they may have spent on "good" food
  • 80sfan80sfan Posts: 18,522
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I can see it now - coach trips to Belgium to stock up on cola, white bread, butter and crisps.

    McDonalds visit included.

    :D
  • KidMoeKidMoe Posts: 5,851
    Forum Member
    definitely too radical an idea for this country! Letting people make their own choices? It'll never happen.

    The only slight problem with that argument is that people who make the choice to live incredibly unhealthy lives still expect the government to pick up the tab when they find themselves in need of NHS treatment.

    1 in 3 kids aged 11 are obese in the UK. That is an absolutely shocking statistic. I'm not sure whether increased pricing will help that; I suspect not, but something clearly needs to be done.
  • SpamJavelinSpamJavelin Posts: 1,071
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    KidMoe wrote: »
    The only slight problem with that argument is that people who make the choice to live incredibly unhealthy lives still expect the government to pick up the tab when they find themselves in need of NHS treatment.
    Which I assume they'll have paid for (many times over, I dare say) through taxation direct and indirect.
Sign In or Register to comment.