I had a snickers a few days ago, it was almost 'fun size'.... Which is less fun, if anything....
A full size snicker is 49 grams. Maybe you had a multipack bar. I would not touch multipack snickers, mars or twix bars the way they are now.
You will have to go to Poundland or Poundworld and buy 3 loose full size ones tor ￡1. Full size single bars are far too expensive at supermarkets, boots, superdrug, WH Smith (and even more expensive at hospital, bus/train station or airport WH Smith stores), Spar, newsgents, markets and corner shops.
Call me cynical but this is just purely about profit.
It's impossible to reduce the amount of sugar in any product by making it smaller. If the product contains 80% sugar then it'll still contain 80% sugar whether it weighs 5 grammes or 5 tonnes. If the parent companies that own all the confectionery brands are making any claims that reducing the size of the bars somehow helps to reduce their sugar content then it's complete horse doo-doo.
The only way to reduce the amount of sugar content is to substitute it with another sweetening agent.
If the Government had any balls it would be tackling the problem of hidden sugar in processed foods, and in particular it would be taking a long hard look at low fat foods. When someone buys a chocolate bar then they should be sensible enough to realise they're buying a big slab of sugar, but they could be forgiven for not realising just how much sugar is in the everyday food we all consume in processed foods.
It's daft really as people will probably go ahead and purchase multipack bars for £1 (when on offer) and skip the single countlines when the average RRP is 70p Plus nowadays.
So they aren't doing us any favours other than to give the impression they are tackling obesity whilst maintaining profits!
Everything in moderation, surely?
It's totally counter productive for tackling obesity as the full size single bars are far too expensive (if you are nowhere near a pound shop), and you are forced to buy the multipacks where many of the bars in them nowadays are far too small to have a proper chocolate fix you have to eat 2 of them.
And as you have eaten more chocolate than in a full sized single bar by eating 2 of the smaller multipack ones, you are likely to put more weight on than by eating the full sized single one.
So they make these bars smaller, but still sell them in multi-packs for not much more than a single one. Was the population fatter in the 90's than now? Chocolate bars have certainly reduced in size since the 90's but the population seems to have got larger, so clearly changing the size of the single chocolate bar does not work at reducing the waistlines of the public, not when people can get a sharing size bar for pennies more.
Yes, you still have to be active to burn it off regardless of how,much they reduce the size of chocolate bars, or even a reduction of the percentage of sugar even if the chocolate bar weighed the same as before.
As been pointed out already a lot more people are far more sedentary than in the 1990's and further back when most chocolate bars weighed a lot more than they do now. Exact same ingredients too.
Therefore 20% less sugar. Am I really the only one who understands how this works?
Your argument is based on a smaller bar equaling a lower consumption of sugar. But a smaller bar will encourage many people to buy two bars and eat both thus defeating the aim of the government to reduce the sugar intake of the nation.
Your argument is based on a smaller bar equaling a lower consumption of sugar. But a smaller bar will encourage many people to buy two bars and eat both thus defeating the aim of the government to reduce the sugar intake of the nation.
Your argument is based on a smaller bar equaling a lower consumption of sugar. But a smaller bar will encourage many people to buy two bars and eat both thus defeating the aim of the government to reduce the sugar intake of the nation.
The manufacturers want you to buy and eat as much sugary and fatty shite as possible. The govt want to run your life and get you to eat less.
This is the manufacturers' way of being seen to be doing something even though we all know it's daft and pointless.
Your argument is based on a smaller bar equaling a lower consumption of sugar. But a smaller bar will encourage many people to buy two bars and eat both thus defeating the aim of the government to reduce the sugar intake of the nation.
I'd rather they tried to formulate the same size bar with more sweetener than sugar to try and make it taste the same but without as many calories.
But then you'd get all the ''OMG aspartame causes cancer!!!!!!!!!!!" brigade come out and say we're all being poisoned by under orders from the elite, etc.
Better just to keep things as they were and allow people to make their own minds up on what they consume. At the end of the day, this won't have any real effect on peoples health or obesity figures in the UK. Greedy people who are prone to being overweight will simply eat more multiple bars rather than just the one larger one.
What problems do they cause? Have heard some people say they have certain mild negative effects after taking sweeteners but think that pales into comparison to the negative effects of sugar.
Their on a hiding to nothing, reducing it doesn't work as reduced sugar stuff tastes crap so you just stick to the usual one. If people want to eat sugar their going to eat it. The sugar nazi's would have a fit if they saw how much sugar my American chocolate fudge brownie recipe has - 2 full cupfulls and icing sugar to powder the top afterwards:p.
What problems do they cause? Have heard some people say they have certain mild negative effects after taking sweeteners but think that pales into comparison to the negative effects of sugar.
But the same percentage of sugar in confectionery products, cakes, puddings and ice creams never caused an obesity crisis way back yonder long before the smartphone era began.
People blame McDonalds too. But before McDonalds came along there used to be the Wimpy bars in the same towns and cities in the 1970s and 1980's as well that sold burgers, fries and fizzy drinks the way McDonalds do now and again there was no obesity crisis. I highly doubt McDonalds big mac, fries, large full sugar fizzy drink and a sugary dessert is the daily meal for many the way it's being perceived in the press. People are no more inside McDonalds, or Burger King, Pizza Hut or KFC for that matter for a meal now than they were in a wimpy bar in the 1970's or 1980's. Most who go into such restaurants go in for a meal as a rare treat like they used to a Wimpy bar.
It's the far more sedentary society of now that's to blame in reality. These things are only blamed because people are not doing activities to burn off all the calories like in the past.
But the same percentage of sugar in confectionery products, cakes, puddings and ice creams never caused an obesity crisis way back yonder long before the smartphone era began.
People blame McDonalds too. But before McDonalds came along there used to be the Wimpy bars in the same towns and cities in the 1970s and 1980's as well that sold burgers, fries and fizzy drinks the way McDonalds do now and again there was no obesity crisis. I highly doubt McDonalds big mac, fries, large full sugar fizzy drink and a sugary dessert is the daily meal for many the way it's being perceived in the press. People are no more inside McDonalds, or Burger King, Pizza Hut or KFC for that matter for a meal now than they were in a wimpy bar in the 1970's or 1980's. Most who go into such restaurants go in for a meal as a rare treat like they used to a Wimpy bar.
It's the far more sedentary society of now that's to blame in reality. These things are only blamed because people are not doing activities to burn off all the calories like in the past.
Dead right IMO. Kids driven to school, cars for every journey, kids not being able to roam the way they used to but it's the food that's blamed.
I've lost a lot a couple of stone and there's only so much difference diet can make, you need to get off your arse.
Dead right IMO. Kids driven to school, cars for every journey, kids not being able to roam the way they used to but it's the food that's blamed.
I've lost a lot a couple of stone and there's only so much difference diet can make, you need to get off your arse.
People now seem to look for any excuse why they are obese, as you say lack of excercise is mostly to blame
If we accept that this move is more to do with profit than any other reason - which I think the majority here, do - then the whole issue comes down to a matter of choice.
You either choose to buy the smaller product, knowing that you're being ripped off and just grin and bear it, or you tell 'em to stuff it where the sun don't shine and go without.
It aint rocket science.
Now, I like my choc as much as the next girl and would miss my occasional fix, but not having it wouldn't be the end of the world. I'll live. Hey, I may even find alternative option that offers better value. Who knows.
The test will come when I have either: a bad day / heavy period / a grizzling child or am otherwise stressed out for whatever reason. If I resist the temptation to succumb to comfort choc at such a time then it might be a victory of sorts, but I'd advise anybody coming nearby to approach with caution.
If they want to reduce them fine but they should be honest and reduce the packaging and not find crafty ways to just reduce the contents.
Toblerone now look half empty,most bars are inflated with air to fill the wrapper and Chocolate oranges have been given a raised lip so there's a gap between the segments.
The only good thing is that a 20% reduction isn't as big as used to be.
Comments
And are 🌏 right now
A full size snicker is 49 grams. Maybe you had a multipack bar. I would not touch multipack snickers, mars or twix bars the way they are now.
You will have to go to Poundland or Poundworld and buy 3 loose full size ones tor ￡1. Full size single bars are far too expensive at supermarkets, boots, superdrug, WH Smith (and even more expensive at hospital, bus/train station or airport WH Smith stores), Spar, newsgents, markets and corner shops.
I have no idea what that smiley is?
No you are not cynical you are correct
It's totally counter productive for tackling obesity as the full size single bars are far too expensive (if you are nowhere near a pound shop), and you are forced to buy the multipacks where many of the bars in them nowadays are far too small to have a proper chocolate fix you have to eat 2 of them.
And as you have eaten more chocolate than in a full sized single bar by eating 2 of the smaller multipack ones, you are likely to put more weight on than by eating the full sized single one.
As we say, profit before health.
20% less mass but the same percentage of sugar content per gram of product.
Yes, you still have to be active to burn it off regardless of how,much they reduce the size of chocolate bars, or even a reduction of the percentage of sugar even if the chocolate bar weighed the same as before.
As been pointed out already a lot more people are far more sedentary than in the 1990's and further back when most chocolate bars weighed a lot more than they do now. Exact same ingredients too.
Therefore 20% less sugar. Am I really the only one who understands how this works?
Your argument is based on a smaller bar equaling a lower consumption of sugar. But a smaller bar will encourage many people to buy two bars and eat both thus defeating the aim of the government to reduce the sugar intake of the nation.
Well, that's a different issue.
The manufacturers want you to buy and eat as much sugary and fatty shite as possible. The govt want to run your life and get you to eat less.
This is the manufacturers' way of being seen to be doing something even though we all know it's daft and pointless.
But then you'd get all the ''OMG aspartame causes cancer!!!!!!!!!!!" brigade come out and say we're all being poisoned by under orders from the elite, etc.
Better just to keep things as they were and allow people to make their own minds up on what they consume. At the end of the day, this won't have any real effect on peoples health or obesity figures in the UK. Greedy people who are prone to being overweight will simply eat more multiple bars rather than just the one larger one.
They causes problems plus have nasty aftertaste.
I haven't noticed any nasty aftertaste.
What problems do they cause? Have heard some people say they have certain mild negative effects after taking sweeteners but think that pales into comparison to the negative effects of sugar.
But the same percentage of sugar in confectionery products, cakes, puddings and ice creams never caused an obesity crisis way back yonder long before the smartphone era began.
People blame McDonalds too. But before McDonalds came along there used to be the Wimpy bars in the same towns and cities in the 1970s and 1980's as well that sold burgers, fries and fizzy drinks the way McDonalds do now and again there was no obesity crisis. I highly doubt McDonalds big mac, fries, large full sugar fizzy drink and a sugary dessert is the daily meal for many the way it's being perceived in the press. People are no more inside McDonalds, or Burger King, Pizza Hut or KFC for that matter for a meal now than they were in a wimpy bar in the 1970's or 1980's. Most who go into such restaurants go in for a meal as a rare treat like they used to a Wimpy bar.
It's the far more sedentary society of now that's to blame in reality. These things are only blamed because people are not doing activities to burn off all the calories like in the past.
Dead right IMO. Kids driven to school, cars for every journey, kids not being able to roam the way they used to but it's the food that's blamed.
I've lost a lot a couple of stone and there's only so much difference diet can make, you need to get off your arse.
People now seem to look for any excuse why they are obese, as you say lack of excercise is mostly to blame
If we accept that this move is more to do with profit than any other reason - which I think the majority here, do - then the whole issue comes down to a matter of choice.
You either choose to buy the smaller product, knowing that you're being ripped off and just grin and bear it, or you tell 'em to stuff it where the sun don't shine and go without.
It aint rocket science.
Now, I like my choc as much as the next girl and would miss my occasional fix, but not having it wouldn't be the end of the world. I'll live. Hey, I may even find alternative option that offers better value. Who knows.
The test will come when I have either: a bad day / heavy period / a grizzling child or am otherwise stressed out for whatever reason. If I resist the temptation to succumb to comfort choc at such a time then it might be a victory of sorts, but I'd advise anybody coming nearby to approach with caution.
Toblerone now look half empty,most bars are inflated with air to fill the wrapper and Chocolate oranges have been given a raised lip so there's a gap between the segments.
The only good thing is that a 20% reduction isn't as big as used to be.