osarusan wrote: » Indeed. I know in my case, the only way you could get me to eat anything in school as a kid was for it to be fairly 'junky'. Otherwise I'd just go out and play. I would have eaten a lot of jam sandwiches, peanut butter, and that Panda chocolate spread. But at home there were always loads of vegetables, loads of them, as my mother could ensure we actually ate them, which she couldn't when we were at school. Of course, healthier is better, but the content of a child's lunchbox at school isn't necessarily an insight into their overall diet.
....... wrote: » Do you actually have anything to contribute to the discussion or are you just trolling for the craic?
WhiteRoses wrote: » I think it might be because she is implying that children who she sees eating junk food have parents who neither care nor love them, even though that might have been the only bit of junk food they've had for weeks, even though the child may have a behavioural or health issue which impacts what the parent can get the child to consume, and a variety of other reasons. Granted some parents feed their children rubbish out of convenience but to say that every child she sees eating a chicken nugget has parents who don't give a sh*t is obviously gonna get peoples backs up. She seems to do a great job of feeding her own kids a healthy diet and instead of offering advice and tips to other parents, she's making snide comments and insinuating they don't care about their kids. There are kinder ways of going about things than the way she has.
Romantic Rose wrote: » Easily offended because the truth hurts. I don't know it all but I see it all on a daily basis. I only have to go to my local play centre and see what kind of food parents serve up to their children. It's pure and simple the easy option. My 4 year old has never once being served a chip. I don't feed her highly processed food. I go to the supermarket and I check labels. If it's processed, it won't be going into my trolley. Not that hard to do.
Hammer89 wrote: » Here's something you won't like, but a woman on her high horse as much as you deserves to know: Children born to authoritarian parents are MORE likely to become obese. Google it. You're making unhealthy food the forbidden fruit and they will always view those foods with more temptation than others as a result of your great parenting. I'm not saying you're a bad parent, but you an ignorant, judgmental one and that needs to stop.
pwurple wrote: » No-one putting it together with smoking yet then? My friends who smoke, do so because it suppresses their appetite. Or as they put it, to keep them thin. Irish smoking has massively decreased. Which I think is a good thing in general, but it has probably impacted a generation of non-smokers in terms of weight. People are talking about looks in here, which is highly subjective. But what is the actual impact of weight on health. I don't see any huge problem with being in the 25-27 BMI bracket, aka mildly overweight. I'm at around 24.5, within the range of a normal BMI, but I have been up to 26 after pregnancies etc. The "Sweet spot" for longevity is apparently a BMI of 27. A little bit of excess to get you through a serious illness, but not enough that your own weight impacts knees, hips or other joints/organs. And there's huge difference between that and needing a motorised wheelchair to get around under your own weight. But honestly, I don't think I've even seen once person this year in Ireland in that category. Plenty in the US though.
....... wrote: » This post has been deleted.
Nettle Soup wrote: » We are catching up with the US at an alarming rate. Even developing countries in South America are astounded at how they went from 0-60 in the child obesity stakes. The likes of Nestle and Coca Cola to blame.
Romantic Rose wrote: » My posts are out of frustration. It's very sad seeing a child with poor health who needs to be referred to a nutritionist. I have seen so many cases like this in the last 5 years in particular. You said I didn't offer tips but I did say that I spent a lot of time preparing food for them. I also said that I didn't feed them junk. Everything my baby ate up to one year, was made from scratch by me. The Annabel Karmel recipe book was never far away. I did not feed them anything premade in any way like bread, La Liga biscuits. The fact that he government has to bring in so many initiatives like Food Dudes in schools says a lot about the health of our nation.
LirW wrote: » I know another girl that has two little daughters and she's like North Korea military with healthy diet, I'm quite sure she only cooks vegan food. Nothing wrong with it but the kids have to pray permanently how bad sugar is, salt and pretty much anything to the point where the kids start to patronize and smartarse strangers in supermarkets (she's very proud of that). No clue how she'll handle when the kids get older, invited to parties.
Romantic Rose wrote: » At least my horse will be fit and healthy and able to move You can still give your children treats without being processed. Ever try homemade baking. Treats are not banned in my house but I will make them from scratch myself.
ceadaoin. wrote: » Great, your medal will be out in the post shortly Annabel karmel you say? That's processing the food too much and basically mush. I just did baby led weaning. Studies show that babies weaned this way are less likely to be obese. Do I win the mother of the year award?
Romantic Rose wrote: » I did not feed them anything premade in any way like bread, La Liga biscuits.
pilly wrote: » You're obviously a full-time professional mother, that's great for you.
Romantic Rose wrote: » Hahahaha. Nah I'm going to knock off for the weekend now. The children will feed themselves. They know where the freezer, oven and condiments press is.
Zubeneschamali wrote: » I know a family where there are 3 girls - for the oldest the mother was a total food nazi like you, for the younger ones she gave up. The oldest is the only one that is overweight as an adult.
givyjoe wrote: » If boards is just about quoting peer reviewed studies to back up every observation/post, we may as well shut down all AH threads now and not come back. I noticed precisely the same thing in America last week. Long Island = drives everywhere due to large distances, driving door to door and a very, very noticeable obese population. In Manhattan, most people you see are doing lots of walking in between subway journeys etc, far less incidences of morbidly obese people. It makes a lot of sense that this would be replicated here, but perhaps not necessarily limited to the west.. but anywhere remote where most transport was by car alone.
....... wrote: This post has been deleted.
Romantic Rose wrote: » At least my horse will be fit and healthy and able to move
Electric Sheep wrote: » I've often noticed that when people move from the city to the suburbs the weight tends to pile on, especially suburban areas with no sidewalks.
Hammer89 wrote: » Your horse and kids are probably on the same diet: hay. "Yah there's only 0.4 calories per straw, so little Martin gets five straws a day and a drop of water in his beaker. If he's good, I drive past the window at our local McDonalds and let him smell it."
