UK Controversial Junk Food Crackdown Targets Breakfast Staples Including Porridge

[nauseus]

5 hours ago, quake said:

 

Yes, very cold.

No central heating.

Just a coal fire and some paraffin heaters around the house.

 

 

Paraffin heaters? House? You were lucky!

[Denim]

11 hours ago, James105 said:

Perhaps if this abomination of a Labour MP had her/him/it/they/zi oats in the morning then her/him/it/they/zi might be able to stay awake whilst at work

 

 

Please tell me this is a photoshop image and not a real MP

[quake]

11 hours ago, James105 said:

Perhaps if this abomination of a Labour MP had her/him/it/they/zi oats in the morning then her/him/it/they/zi might be able to stay awake whilst at work

 

 Looks like Joe Brand.

After her crash Diet.

[billd766]

13 hours ago, herfiehandbag said:

For crying out loud, banning advertising for Porridge!

 

What an entirely joyless, utterly controlling bunch of bossy boots!

Please don't blame me.

 

I didn't vote for them, nor the lot that preceded them.

[Patong2021]

8 hours ago, CallumWK said:

 

My granola has 15/100gr sugar. A portion is 100 - 150 gram with skimmed milk.

Most foods I know have a much higher sugar content

 

 It is still 15% sugar.

Here's a Nutritionist review of  Aldi Premium Muesli, which I would assume would have been "healthy", but it really is not. It's just a big dose of carbs and sugar. OK if one is an active athlete  who needs  high carbs, but for the rest of us mortals, not needed.  Muesli is fine, provided it is self made to reduce  the sugars and fat.

 

 

Nutrient levels

Fat in high quantity (21.4%)

What you need to know: A high consumption of fat, especially saturated fats, can raise cholesterol, which increases the risk of heart diseases.

Recommendation: Limit the consumption of fat and saturated fat Choose products with lower fat and saturated fat content.

 

Saturated fat in moderate quantity (2.7%)

What you need to know: A high consumption of fat, especially saturated fats, can raise cholesterol, which increases the risk of heart diseases.

Recommendation: Limit the consumption of fat and saturated fat Choose products with lower fat and saturated fat content.

 

Sugars in high quantity (13.7%)

What you need to know: A high consumption of sugar can cause weight gain and tooth decay. It also augments the risk of type 2 diabetes and cardio-vascular diseases.
Recommendation: Limit the consumption of sugar and sugary drinks. Sugary drinks (such as sodas, fruit beverages, and fruit juices and nectars) should be limited as much as possible (no more than 1 glass a day).

Choose products with lower sugar content and reduce the consumption of products with added sugars.

 

[Patong2021]

12 hours ago, mdr224 said:

Wasnt aware that oatmeal was junk food

Quaker Maple & Brown Sugar Flavour Instant Oatmeal:  It has more sugar than candy.

 

Nutrition summary

Per 1 packet (43 g)

160	190mg	2g	33g	4g
Calories	Sodium	Dietary Fibre	Sugars	Protein

---

Nutrition facts

Serving size	Per 1 packet (43 g)
Amount per serving

Calories	160
% Daily Value*
Total Fat2g   Sodium190mg   Total Carbohydrate33g   Dietary Fibre2g   Sugars33g   Protein4g
*5% or less is a little, 15% or more is a lot

 

[ryxyz]

I believe they should force the respective companies to significantly reduce the amount of salt and sugar in the products.

 

[thaibeachlovers]

17 hours ago, quake said:

 

Yes, very cold.

No central heating.

Just a coal fire and some paraffin heaters around the house.

 

I wonder how we survived in NZ during my childhood. It got really cold back then ( it's a lot warmer now, thanks to global warming ) and no one I knew had central heating. Most houses had one fireplace in the lounge, which used wood, and insulation was unknown. Bedrooms were unheated, though electric blankets were just becoming available.

The only heaters we had were those 2 bar things that were only good for making toast on.

 

I guess we were just tougher then than the present generation.

[Bday Prang]

23 hours ago, James105 said:

Perhaps if this abomination of a Labour MP had her/him/it/they/zi oats in the morning then her/him/it/they/zi might be able to stay awake whilst at work

 

who on earth would vote for that?

[James105]

18 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

who on earth would vote for that?

 

Welsh people apparently.  

 

[sungod]

On 12/5/2024 at 8:10 AM, herfiehandbag said:

Perhaps there is a case for arguing that this is discrimination against Scots?

 

The jocks are way ahead in diversity, just look at the photo of a guy in a boob tube and skirt.

[Humpy]

I ate porridge as a kid like thousands of others and I can't remember seeing any fat kids at school. Take a look t photos of kds in the 1950's.... no fat ones.

[hotandsticky]

1 minute ago, Humpy said:

I ate porridge as a kid like thousands of others and I can't remember seeing any fat kids at school. Take a look t photos of kds in the 1950's.... no fat ones.

 

 

Except Billy Bunter.

[newbee2022]

On 12/5/2024 at 3:02 AM, Social Media said:

 

A range of beloved breakfast foods, including porridge and muesli, are set to be outlawed in advertisements under Labour's stringent new policies aimed at reducing childhood obesity. Starting next October, the Government will enforce a law banning ads for foods deemed unhealthy, not just on television before the 9 pm watershed but also online at all hours of the day. This unprecedented measure, designed to curb children's exposure to foods high in salt, sugar, and fat, has sparked widespread debate.

 

The ban doesn't just target the usual suspects like chocolate, cakes, crisps, and ready meals but also breakfast staples traditionally hailed as healthy. Foods such as porridge, instant oats, oat-based cereals, and muesli—all recommended by the NHS for their high fiber and heart-healthy properties—will fall foul of the regulations. These items are classified as unhealthy under the criteria outlined in The Food (Promotion and Placement) Regulations 2021, now repurposed for the new legislation.

 

 

The move is part of a broader government initiative to tackle obesity, reduce strain on the NHS, and potentially save billions in healthcare costs.

 

However, critics argue that the inclusion of breakfast items like oats and muesli is counterproductive, given their proven health benefits. Multiple studies have shown that oats can lower cholesterol levels and reduce the risk of heart disease. In fact, the NHS actively promotes them as a healthy breakfast option, highlighting their higher fiber content. Similarly, the British Heart Foundation praises porridge as "a healthy, nutritious way to start the day," provided it is free from added sugars and artificial flavors.

 

The controversy extends beyond nutrition, raising concerns about the policy's potential efficacy. Chris Snowdon, head of lifestyle economics at the Institute of Economic Affairs, expressed skepticism about the ban’s impact on obesity rates. "The ban on food advertising has no global precedent, so Britain is in uncharted territory," Snowdon stated. "Every other anti-obesity policy has failed, including the sugar tax and mandatory calorie labeling, and I see no reason why this will be any different."

 

Snowdon further highlighted the negative implications for broadcasters, internet platforms, and their users. He predicted that if obesity rates do not decline within five years, the ban should be repealed. "Serious questions should be asked of the pressure groups who pushed for it," he added, calling into question the efficacy of current anti-obesity strategies.

 

As the Government moves forward with its crackdown, the decision to classify oats and other seemingly healthy breakfast options alongside junk food continues to fuel heated discussions. While proponents view the policy as a necessary step in combating childhood obesity, detractors argue that it risks undermining public trust in evidence-based dietary recommendations. Only time will reveal whether this bold initiative will yield the desired results or simply add to the list of controversial health policies with limited success.

 

Based on a report by Daily Telegraph 2024-12-05

 

 

 

Good move, Keith. Porridge comes always sweet 

[mdr224]

10 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

Quaker Maple & Brown Sugar Flavour Instant Oatmeal:  It has more sugar than candy.

 

Nutrition summary

Per 1 packet (43 g)

160	190mg	2g	33g	4g
Calories	Sodium	Dietary Fibre	Sugars	Protein

---

Nutrition facts

Serving size	Per 1 packet (43 g)
Amount per serving

Calories	160
% Daily Value*
Total Fat2g   Sodium190mg   Total Carbohydrate33g   Dietary Fibre2g   Sugars33g   Protein4g
*5% or less is a little, 15% or more is a lot

 

So the sugar is the junk food, not the oatmeal

[CallumWK]

Sure we all gonna die after reading this

[Chomper Higgot]

55 minutes ago, Humpy said:

I ate porridge as a kid like thousands of others and I can't remember seeing any fat kids at school. Take a look t photos of kds in the 1950's.... no fat ones.

In the 50s nobody was eating the processed foods that for so much of todays diet, corn syrup had not yet been marketed into the foods and drinks people consume.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

38 minutes ago, mdr224 said:

So the sugar is the junk food, not the oatmeal

Processed oatmeal is also junk food.

 

It has a high glycemic index, adding sugar and fructose makes it worse.

 

 

[bradiston]

On 12/5/2024 at 8:58 AM, James105 said:

Perhaps if this abomination of a Labour MP had her/him/it/they/zi oats in the morning then her/him/it/they/zi might be able to stay awake whilst at work

 

That's pretty obviously an AI image. Look at the left hand. 2 fingers attached to an arm that looks like a piece of chicken. An unrecognisable mash up.

[bradiston]

1 hour ago, mdr224 said:

So the sugar is the junk food, not the oatmeal

High carbs in oatmeal, get turned into sugar.

[James105]

2 minutes ago, bradiston said:

That's pretty obviously an AI image. Look at the left hand. 2 fingers attached to an arm that looks like a piece of chicken. An unrecognisable mash up.

 

I was thinking that it could be. I imagine the AI prompt would be something like "give me an image of a cross between Jo Brand, Eddie Izzard and a Telly Tubby sitting on the Labour benches in parliament after neglecting to eat the type of breakfast that is now banned from advertising pre-watershed".  I expect it would produce an abomination like that.  

 

But it is a real image of a real Labour MP at "work".  

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-56450997

[Patong2021]

1 hour ago, mdr224 said:

So the sugar is the junk food, not the oatmeal

 

Yes. The regulators are going after the highly processed junk. People are best served by cooking their own oatmeal and mixing their own muesli. They can add, fruit, berry, nuts  and limit the sugar content.

[Patong2021]

28 minutes ago, bradiston said:

High carbs in oatmeal, get turned into sugar.

 

A small portion of  basic oatmeal isn't an issue, because the  fiber content slows the sugar transformation. Peas are high sugar content too, but in a limited portion and served with other high fiber foods are ok.

[Ombra]

On 12/5/2024 at 8:29 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

They are attacking the wrong things. We all ate such in our childhoods and didn't get fat because we played outside and did sports. We didn't spend out childhood in our room looking at porn on the internet.

Till they get kids off social media and other obscenities kids are going to turn into landwhales, get diabetes and have heart attacks at a young age and die.

Nature finds a way to cull the unfit.

True. But dinner plates have almost doubled in size since the 1970s. Most people are eating far more than they need.

[Bday Prang]

Ah, The good old caring government interfering in peoples lives yet again.

                        Considering ones food intake is one of the most important factors in maintaining good health,one would expect after thousands of years of civilization a supposedly intelligent life form like the human race would pretty much have that side side of things fully sewn up,  after all every other species and life form on the planet instinctively seems to know what it can and what it should not eat

                         It is actually astonishing that huge international companies are allowed to produce foods so laden with sugar or salt or trans fats, or what ever else they are pumping into it, that it is barely fit for human consumption, and the only defence or protection offered by the government is some pathetic restriction on advertising.

                         The question that should be asked is why these companies have been allowed to get away with doing this . Manufacturers are obliged to list the ingredients but are allowed to write it in what ia effectively microprint totally unreadable,why is that allowed and who does it benefit?

                         Misleading banners like "New healthy low sugar recipe"  when whatever has replaced the sugar is equally if not more unhealthy and of course not mentioned except in the microprint

                         The government would be better employed just stopping the import and sale of this junk food at the source, it wouldn't be difficult , except for the power of the food industry lobby.  Everything else they have ever tried has failed miserably  

[Bday Prang]

Just now, Ombra said:

True. But dinner plates have almost doubled in size since the 1970s. Most people are eating far more than they need.

You must be American   That's not the case in the UK, most people who are old enough are still using the very same plates they used in the 70's. and the newer ones are exactly the same size

[Bday Prang]

30 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

 

Yes. The regulators are going after the highly processed junk. People are best served by cooking their own oatmeal and mixing their own muesli. They can add, fruit, berry, nuts  and limit the sugar content.

But why on earth is sugar allowed anywhere near muesli in the first place?  If people want to add it themselves then its up to them , but the default product should be sugar free, same goes for any product except cakes etc

There is just no need for sugar at all, 

[Chomper Higgot]

38 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

But why on earth is sugar allowed anywhere near muesli in the first place?  If people want to add it themselves then its up to them , but the default product should be sugar free, same goes for any product except cakes etc

There is just no need for sugar at all, 

It’s added because of its addictive properties.

 

Add sugar, sell more.

 

Health outcomes are not part of the profit equation.

[Chomper Higgot]

47 minutes ago, Ombra said:

True. But dinner plates have almost doubled in size since the 1970s. Most people are eating far more than they need.

Calorie density of meals has gone up regardless of plate size, while snaking/grazing has also become more common, then add to that sugar/corn syrup loaded drinks and apply that across millions of people.

 

 

 

 

[Bday Prang]

9 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It’s added because of its addictive properties.

 

Add sugar, sell more.

 

Health outcomes are not part of the profit equation.

And government initiatives like this one are merely an example of them paying lip service to a handful of troublesome experts, Whilst not upsetting the food industry too much , so its fair to assume that any  measures to be put in place will  have been watered down until the food industry lobby approved them