cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Sugar

nanotm
Pro
Posts: 5,756
Thanks: 156
Fixes: 2
Registered: ‎11-02-2013

Re: Sugar

To be fair, so far it's only been the advisory body to public health England that has been spouting off, which is exactly the same thing they did last year and got ignored after the media had carried the story for weeks.
It's just as likely that the same thing will happen this time round as well, and the government (this one at least) cares quite a lot about the young, for without them who will fund people like them and us when we become OAP's in the future?
No serious government would ever get rid of the state pension system because that really would be a case of turkeys voting for Christmas given so many are almost there......
That they might run the numbers and work out how many the country can afford as wastage along the way will always define policies but far from creating a target group it's much better to let nature take it's pick from across the spectrum as has been proven every time scientists have tried to interfere in the past and created unforseen unwanted problems, just look what's happened each time they have tried to wipe out pest species with genetics.......
No I don't think they would intentionally introduce things to the food chain to cause problems as there just as likely to get their own loved ones by accident as they are to achieve the desired outcomes
just because your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
Community Veteran
Posts: 5,658
Thanks: 652
Fixes: 1
Registered: ‎21-03-2011

Re: Sugar

I see the ex-Chief Dental Officer climbs on to the Sugar Wagon when he bemoans that many children under the age of eight don't see a dentist. Clearly he's not tried to get an appointment with an NHS Dentist. They are so rare nowadays I think they must be off treating hens teeth. It happened on his watch.
Now Zen, but a +Net residue.
Community Veteran
Posts: 5,619
Thanks: 1,386
Fixes: 3
Registered: ‎06-11-2014

Re: Sugar

Quote from: 7up
Why are you laughing at that? Do you think it's funny that the young'uns today are so worthless to the government? - I don't and I doubt many others do either.

It's a laugh of irony, as had been pointed out, if they kill off the young of today, there'll be no old votes for them tomorrow (assuming by then a voting system is even still in place given how many are wanting a jury-duty style random selection system to prevent the mess that political parties have caused), but they still don't want to help the young get anywhere in life so treat them like uneducated low-down scum because they haven't been born with a silver spoon (to keep the sugar theme on track!) in their mouths... Grin
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 21,444
Thanks: 3,218
Fixes: 688
Registered: ‎11-01-2008

Re: Sugar

I'd vote for personal responsibility rather than a nanny state.
What are the parents doing feeding their children rubbish constantly and not getting them to brush their teeth.
Customer / Moderator
If it helped click the thumb
If it fixed it click 'This fixed my problem'
Community Veteran
Posts: 5,619
Thanks: 1,386
Fixes: 3
Registered: ‎06-11-2014

Re: Sugar

Quote from: dvorak
What are the parents doing feeding their children rubbish constantly and not getting them to brush their teeth.

Rebelling against their own parents who never let them have sugary snacks and demanded they brushed their teeth every 5 minutes I guess, or they're just idiots...
Community Veteran
Posts: 19,274
Thanks: 430
Registered: ‎12-08-2007

Re: Sugar

Quote from: dvorak
I'd vote for personal responsibility rather than a nanny state.
What are the parents doing feeding their children rubbish constantly and not getting them to brush their teeth.

I have to agree with you there but unfortunately many parents are poorly educated on the risks of sugar.
nanotm
Pro
Posts: 5,756
Thanks: 156
Fixes: 2
Registered: ‎11-02-2013

Re: Sugar

which is the failing of public health England allowing the curriculum to get rid of all the nutritional and food /cooking lessons.
which ever way you look at the "problem" it comes down to the labour governments desire to rule every part of daily life by engendering ignorance in the parents of today and the left wing media puppets in supporting this goal by getting rid of anything that could possibly undermine that effort
just because your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 21,444
Thanks: 3,218
Fixes: 688
Registered: ‎11-01-2008

Re: Sugar

Quote from: artmo
I have to agree with you there but unfortunately many parents are poorly educated on the risks of sugar.


next you'll be telling me the same about alcohol and tobacco Roll_eyes
Customer / Moderator
If it helped click the thumb
If it fixed it click 'This fixed my problem'
Steve
Seasoned Pro
Posts: 6,821
Thanks: 315
Registered: ‎13-07-2009

Re: Sugar

Tesco eh getting sick of them with every day that passes : From September 7th Tesco  will no longer stock small cartons and lunch box-sized added sugar drinks And it has some backlash on twitter Roll_eyes
Quote
@LilyBaileyUK tweeted: "I was gonna buy a Ribena but Tesco don't sell it cos it causes obesity so I guess I'll have a coke, fags and wotsits cos they must be fine."

Quote
"Tesco stops selling Ribena to tackle childhood obesity?! So processed meat, Coke, chocolate, crisps & pizza next yeh?," tweeted @RouReynolds.

Quote
Rachel Adedeji tweets: "I don't think @Tesco banning @RibenaUK will prevent child obesity. I think parents stopping feeding their kids junk food will though

Source: http://news.sky.com/story/1526721/tescos-ribena-ban-sparks-twitter-mockery
If life gives you lemons, make lemonade.
Community Veteran
Posts: 1,990
Thanks: 5
Registered: ‎11-12-2013

Re: Sugar

Quote from: gleneagles
The medical and dental profession make a strong case that sugar is the cause of a number of health problems such as obesity and loss of teeth in young children which is costing the health service billions of pounds to deal with yet the government refuses to increase the tax on sugar.
Why ?
I can think of no logical reason.

taxing sugar wouldnt achieve much, the same as taxing cigarettes doesnt make people quit.
A certian amount of sugar is needed in a balanced diet, so its dangerous to tell someone to stop ALL intake of sugar.  I think the issue with things like bad teeth is things that you chew that have high sugar content such as sweets, sugar coated doughnuts, that sort of thing.
With that in mind the way forward really is to sell low sugar sweets only, no cakes etc.with sugar coating. As well as to increase education on a healthy diet from a young age.
Things like putting sugar in coffee isnt so bad, its certian products that are much worse like sweet cakes, and kids sweets.
As someone with massive teeth problems I speak from experience. e.g. I have never had coffee with sugar in it trigger toothache, but cakes, sweets, especially chocolates have done.  I have learnt my lesson but way too late.  As a kid not only did I not brush my teeth much but I ate a LOT of sweets, I would often fill up a bowl mixed of sweets and eaten the lot within 2-3 days.
Ironically I think sweeteners are too sweet.  If I use sweeteners in my coffee, it tastes too sweet, as I am used to half a teaspoon of sugar which is nowhere near as sweet as sweeteners.  It seems sweeteners are only aimed at people who are used to high amounts of sugar in their drinks.
I also have been a heavy consumer of cola and pepsi in the past. Those two both are aweful for teeth.
A better way than taxing is to possibly ban certian foods/drinks, but I expect the impact on the economy has been considered too much from such a thing, probably the same reason they wont ban tobacco.
Community Veteran
Posts: 6,500
Thanks: 1,331
Fixes: 1
Registered: ‎23-09-2010

Re: Sugar

Quote from: gleneagles
I can think of no logical reason.

How about scientists now saying they would rather fry with lard instead of sunflower oil after new studies.
Who really knows what scientists will be saying about sugar next year?
nanotm
Pro
Posts: 5,756
Thanks: 156
Fixes: 2
Registered: ‎11-02-2013

Re: Sugar

That it's better than the artificial sweeteners......
just because your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
Community Veteran
Posts: 14,731
Thanks: 880
Fixes: 12
Registered: ‎01-08-2007

Re: Sugar

Which is true enough.
Artificial sweeteners are not good. I'd rather stick with sugar.
I need a new signature... i'm bored of the old one!
Community Veteran
Posts: 5,619
Thanks: 1,386
Fixes: 3
Registered: ‎06-11-2014

Re: Sugar

Tesco's good at annoying their customers, the local store has decided to flat out stop selling Heinz mayonnaise, I don't like gotohellmans or tesco's own brand, but apparently I don't have choice now, well, except for shopping elsewhere of course... Roll_eyes
As for banning fruit-based drinks over banning popular fizzy soft drinks, well, that's just moronic, but then, "Every little helps"... Roll_eyes
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 21,444
Thanks: 3,218
Fixes: 688
Registered: ‎11-01-2008

Re: Sugar

Quote from: 7up
Artificial sweeteners are not good. I'd rather stick with sugar.

i found this an interesting read http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/28/upshot/the-evidence-supports-artificial-sweeteners-over-sugar.html
Customer / Moderator
If it helped click the thumb
If it fixed it click 'This fixed my problem'