Safe food.

Nemeses · 20-01-2014 02:48PM

don't dis the cheese...

Cheese is awesome...

20-01-2014 02:50PM

Maybe I am getting this all wrong, maybe it is more difficult to have a small child or toddler today than even 20 years ago, my children are gown up, however I still think the ads are a bit patronising or something could be just me though.

Dravokivich · 20-01-2014 02:56PM

mariaalice wrote: »

Maybe I am getting this all wrong, maybe it is more difficult to have a small child or toddler today than even 20 years ago, my children are gown up, however I still think the ads are a bit patronising or something could be just me though.

The adverts may be a bit short on the information we need people to know, but there's only so much you can put into a 30/40 second sound bite. Things always sound harsher when put forward with less words and a definitive tone in the speech too. It's not so much that it's more difficult to raise kids these days, a lot of people have just gotten lazy.

Pumpkinseeds · 20-01-2014 03:27PM

I think a lot of childhood and possibly adult obesity is as a result not only of portion size. I was born in the 70's and growing up then, convenience foods didn't really exist as such. We had home cooked food every day. Mostly it was potatoes and veg with a bit of meat, fish or chicken for dinner, toast or weetabix for breakfast and we took sandwiches and fruit to school in Primary school.

Nowadays there's a trend towards convenience foods which tend to be fairly high in sugar, salt and fat content, as well as being covered in breadcrumbs. I've seen quite a few young lads of primary school age who have larger boobs than many women that I know.

Good food choices, portion control and exercise are what's needed. Although I know that for a lot of families struggling on low incomes fresh fruit, veg and meat are often out of their price range and they often have to use chips and nuggets etc for financial reasons.

FizzleSticks · 20-01-2014 03:29PM

This post has been deleted.

Muise... · 20-01-2014 04:18PM

Pumpkinseeds wrote: »

Good food choices, portion control and exercise are what's needed. Although I know that for a lot of families struggling on low incomes fresh fruit, veg and meat are often out of their price range and they often have to use chips and nuggets etc for financial reasons.

Not true, but it takes time to cook healthy meal from scratch, time that people swear they don't have because they spend it passively, doing things that they'd rather do.

20-01-2014 04:26PM

Dravokivich wrote: »

The adverts may be a bit short on the information we need people to know, but there's only so much you can put into a 30/40 second sound bite. Things always sound harsher when put forward with less words and a definitive tone in the speech too. It's not so much that it's more difficult to raise kids these days, a lot of people have just gotten lazy.

I still maintain the adverts are pointless and a waste of money. Of course they give people a great feeling of self-righteousness (evident on this thread) which might explain why they run them on Morning Ireland.

The comparison with drink driving is illuminating. Drink driving is illegal, and enforcement is real. Drink drive and you won't be driving for 12 months. Food on the other hand - nothing. No fat tax. No tax on fizzy drinks. No tax on sugary or junk foods. Apparently something like that would be interfering with the free market. And we can't have that.

The government chooses to spend it's time and effort on pointless advertising campaigns rather than actually doing something about a problem.

runawaybishop · 20-01-2014 04:27PM

Irish Steve wrote: »

It's nothing like as simplistic as it's being presented.

Part of the problem is that the culture has changed, and it's not deemed "safe" for kids to play outdoors any more, and in some areas, it might be safe, but there's no open spaces for the kids to play safely on.

Part of the problem is that it's not deemed "safe" for kids to walk a mile to school, or there's not enough time for them to walk, so the car is a "time saver". Yeah!

Part of the problem is that the roads are too darn dangerous for kids to be using them on bikes, so they don't get the same exercise in that area that they used to.

Part of the problem is that mum is not a house maker any more, she has to work to pay the bills, so pre prepared meals, canned drinks and snack foods are the norm, and they are loaded with "extra" like added sugar and salt that are no help to a balanced diet. In some respects, a sugar tax might not be such a bad idea, if it means that people get to know what is really bad in terms of the calorie content. It might be easier for the mum and the kids to pick up a can rather than for someone to make a glass of squash up from the concentrate and then add the water to it, the calorie difference is massive.

Part of the problem is that schools don't have time or facilities for "physical exercise" of any sort, no gym, no games, and in some cases, no competitive sports, as "losing might traumatise the child".

Part of the problem is things like console games, Play stations and the like, that encourage solo sedentary activity, so no movement, or interaction with others.

When these are all added together, there have been a lot of undesirable changes that have all combined to put modern families under huge pressure in comparison to the way things were, and while I'm not exactly stone age, my childhood was a long time ago.

Exercise is only a small part of it. You cannot out-train a bad diet. Kids are fat because their parents feed them too much poor quality food, not because they have an xbox. Parents cannot abrogate responsibility for their overweight children - they are responsible for their health.

homemadecider · 20-01-2014 04:38PM

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Your argument has changed from the ad being insulting to parents and being indicative of nanny state interference to it being a complex problem that won't be solved by simple means.

Nothing to do with fat kids at all, but I just got your username. Thought it was just a strange name until now, duh!

Dravokivich · 20-01-2014 04:41PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I still maintain the adverts are pointless and a waste of money. Of course they give people a great feeling of self-righteousness (evident on this thread) which might explain why they run them on Morning Ireland.

The comparison with drink driving is illuminating. Drink driving is illegal, and enforcement is real. Drink drive and you won't be driving for 12 months. Food on the other hand - nothing. No fat tax. No tax on fizzy drinks. No tax on sugary or junk foods. Apparently something like that would be interfering with the free market. And we can't have that.

The government choose to spend it's time and effort on pointless advertising campaigns rather than actually doing something about a problem.

They aren't solely run on Morning Ireland, so I am starting to expect your gripe is with a whole host of things. I haven't got the slightest idea whatever the hell Morning Ireland is.

However I've heard one of their ads and feel the production was rather quickly hashed out. The people it's aimed at aren't going to pay a blind bit of notice to it.

I was under the impression though, that this thread was primarily about questioning the need for these in the first place? It's quite clear to me that it is needed as there is a lot of arrogance around dietary needs, especially for children. The method on how it's done is well and truly up for question as currently it's rather ineffective. You don't tell someone how to do something, by telling them something needs to be done without any further proper information. And that's the short straw with'em as far as I can see.

Instead of shutting it down, we should be arguing for it to be better presented.

vitani · 20-01-2014 05:10PM

Neyite wrote: »

Sometimes its really an uphill struggle to stop people from force-feeding your kids crap food. Not once has my toddler been offered a healthier snack in a certain relatives home instead of sweets, despite having rice cakes, cheese, yoghurts, and fruit there. And then I'm the Hard Mammy if I don't let him have said sweet, when normally he skips with excitement when he gets cheese or a yoghurt.

Or adding sugar to his meals. WTF?? he does not NEED maple syrup in his pancakes, or mi-wadi in his water or sugar in his Weetabix. But still they try. Then they try and badger him to eat his dinner when he knows there is loads more sweet crap in a certain cupboard if he holds out and throws a tantrum.

And, when I handle the tantrum the correct way, by not giving in, I get overruled. :rolleyes:

I genuinely don't understand how fruit, yoghurts and cheese are some sort of penance-food to some people.

Can I join your club?

I get fed up of being told I'm mean or that I'm depriving my child because I don't buy regular junk food for her. She gets the odd sweet or bit of chocolate, but it's not a part of her day to day diet and she only drinks water or milk. She certainly doesn't feel deprived - she loves apples and yogurts, and she's a fiend for vegetables.

I know she's going to 'discover' the existence of sweets and other rubbish in the future, and when she does, I have no intention of banning them, but they'll be given to her in moderation.

Neyite · 20-01-2014 05:12PM

vitani wrote: »

Can I join your club?

I get fed up of being told I'm mean or that I'm depriving my child because I don't buy regular junk food for her. She gets the odd sweet or bit of chocolate, but it's not a part of her day to day diet and she only drinks water or milk. She certainly doesn't feel deprived - she loves apples and yogurts, and she's a fiend for vegetables.

I know she's going to 'discover' the existence of sweets and other rubbish in the future, and when she does, I have no intention of banning them, but they'll be given to her in moderation.

The Evil Mammy Club. I like it. Mwah hahahahaha!!!

Irish Steve · 20-01-2014 05:13PM

runawaybishop wrote: »

Exercise is only a small part of it. You cannot out-train a bad diet. Kids are fat because their parents feed them too much poor quality food, not because they have an xbox. Parents cannot abrogate responsibility for their overweight children - they are responsible for their health.

I don't recall disputing that. I'm sitting here looking at my daughter and her 2 lovely children, none of whom are overweight, or undertall, or "cuddly", or any of the other reasons given as excuses for obesity. The word that seems to keep coming up in a lot of the threads around here is responsible.

It's true about overweight kids, or inappropriate spending by semi states, or drink driving, or a lot of the other issues that seem to be causing a lot of upset to a lot of people.

Let's call a spade a spade, in 99% of cases fat kids are caused by parents that are not responsible.

Bad government happens because voters are not responsible for calling the people at the top to account, etc etc.

We already have way too many ways in which the Government is nanny state in areas where people should be responsible.

Yes, a sugar tax might help, but I don't see significant numbers of people giving up smoking because they can't smoke in a lot of places now.

There are problems with a binge drink culture, and changing the hours that off licences are open isn't going to change that any time soon.

Perhaps what's needed is some regulation on "extra" sugar in some products, prohibiting the manufacturers from putting it in to the product in the first place.

Perhaps tobacco needs to be banned, I'm not aware of any long term beneficial uses of the stuff.

Going back to junk food, what's also needed is for parents to be more aware of what the are feeding to the kids, and in that respect, the ads at the moment are not ideal, cans of drink that are massively loaded with sugar are more damaging than crisps and biscuits. Maybe the ingredient list needs to be more prominent, so that it can be read without a magnifying glass.

In some cases, look at the parents, are they fat? If they are, then chances are, they never learnt about what makes a sensible and balanced diet from their parents.

The lack of exercise may well be one of a number of factors in making a bad situation worse. Maybe the absence of nutritious meals at school at lunch time is a factor, a lot of the kids end up taking junk food because it's easy to throw a few packets of pre packed whatever into the box, rather than prepare things that are nutritionally valid.

We had a family on our estate, time to take kids to school in car, 10 minutes, because of the numbers of cars going in and out of the drop off area. Time to walk the kids to school, 5 minutes, or less, because there's a much quicker route that is not accessible by car. The kids were put in the car every day. That's an irresponsible parent.

20-01-2014 05:23PM

The issues are, do public services ads work, whether its stop smoking, obesity or speeding, I don't think they do.

The ads on obesity, as people have said some people don't care they know full well what they should be feeding their children but cant or wont do it.

The ads don't addressee complex changes in culture and society that have take place over the past 50 years that are a huge part of the problem.

Pumpkinseeds · 20-01-2014 06:58PM

Muise... wrote: »

Not true, but it takes time to cook healthy meal from scratch, time that people swear they don't have because they spend it passively, doing things that they'd rather do.

I have to disagree with you. It's far cheaper for a family on a low income to buy a bag of frozen chips and chicken nuggets/fish fingers etc than it is for them to buy potatoes and other fresh veg. If a family or an adult is trying to stretch a low income to cover all their outgoings buying convenience foods like that is probably going to be most affordable option for them. Time will be a big factor for a lot of people, but without doubt, economics plays a big part for a lot of people.

It's a lot cheaper to have fish fingers and chips than to have fresh cod, vegetables and potatoes

20-01-2014 07:02PM

FizzleSticks wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

"Oh she/he's a great eater, we've never had any trouble from him/her"
Kids are so often praised for eating. Traditionally parents have trouble getting kids to eat right, so when a child clears their plate it's seen as success. When the child is getting fat and is still asking for seconds and thirds at dinner, it's seen as a great thing that there's no trouble in getting those greens into them, but it's far less common for people to see it and say "hey, wait, that child is actually eating too much, and we're encouraging it". So they watch the child grow and say things like "yes he's got a very healthy appetite, just can get enough. He's only five but already wearing 7 year old clothes, he's going to grow up to be big and strong".

mariaalice wrote: »

The issues are, do public services ads work, whether its stop smoking, obesity or speeding, I don't think they do.

The ads on obesity, as people have said some people don't care they know full well what they should be feeding their children but cant or wont do it.

The ads don't addressee complex changes in culture and society that have take place over the past 50 years that are a huge part of the problem.

Ok, so the ads don't address complex changes in culture. What's that got to do with anything? They're a help. They point out something that a lot of parents might not be thinking of.

Considering how insulted you were originally mariaalice, surely it's likely that other parents were insulted enough that it made them take a look at their children's nutrition. It got your attention; that must be a sign that it's caught the attention of parents with young children too. Honestly, I think the "say no in the supermarket once and it's a lot easier to say no at home, when the junk isn't sitting in the press" thing is quite clever and simple, something a lot of people could take on board. Even for people without children, it's a nice reminder to say no to ourselves in the shop so that we don't have to battle temptation at home.

SeaDaily · 20-01-2014 07:17PM

mariaalice wrote: »

The ads don't addressee complex changes in culture and society that have take place over the past 50 years that are a huge part of the problem.

You're making a non-point here. Obviously the ads cannot fully address the problem as they are only 40 seconds long! However, how you can perceive these ads as a bad thing is totally beyond me. They are most certainly a step in the right direction in that they are raising awareness of the issue at hand.

Basically what you are saying is that because the ads cannot fully solve the problem immediately that should not be there at all. Using this logic you could then say you shouldn't ever fix anything unless it can be fixed with immediate effect..

Sir Arthur Daley · 20-01-2014 07:22PM

The most important thing to remember about food being safe is that its cooked properly and in date.

SeaDaily · 20-01-2014 07:23PM

WikiHow wrote: »

The most important thing to remember about food being safe is that its cooked properly and in date.

Thanks for that. Has nothing to do with this thread though.

20-01-2014 07:37PM

SeaDaily wrote: »

You're making a non-point here. Obviously the ads cannot fully address the problem as they are only 40 seconds long! However, how you can perceive these ads as a bad thing is totally beyond me. They are most certainly a step in the right direction in that they are raising awareness of the issue at hand.

Basically what you are saying is that because the ads cannot fully solve the problem immediately that should not be there at all. Using this logic you could then say you shouldn't ever fix anything unless it can be fixed with immediate effect..

I also feel that they give a false sense of something important being done about the issue and a false sense of simple fixes for complex issues. I am not against all such ads but I wouldn't think those ads are really that good, but as I said maybe I am wrong and there really are lots of parents with no clue about how to feed their child despite the wealth of information out there.

I think one of the solation's is the public health nurse weighing the child and having a word with the parents, the child should not be referred to dictations or the like, it needs a friendly but firm no nonsense approach from the public health nurse along with maybe a parenting course if the problem is very bad.

20-01-2014 07:54PM

mariaalice wrote: »

I think one of the solation's is the public health nurse weighing the child and having a word with the parents, the child should not be referred to dictations or the like, it needs a friendly but firm no nonsense approach from the public health nurse along with maybe a parenting course if the problem is very bad.

You said that the ad is insulting and patronising. Surely a public health nurse regularly queuing up parents to have their children weighed and then giving them a firm but friendly no nonsense word if they're already overweight isn't a solution. How much would it cost to regularly have every child weighed, and even if it was cost effective, it would only be catching the problem after the child had already become obese. As for suggesting a parenting course, I'd imagine many parents would go mental over that.

The ad is far more centred on addressing those complex changes in culture and society than employing loads of extra public health nurses to give out to parents of already overweight children would.

araic88 · 20-01-2014 07:57PM

I teach in a "disadvantaged" area primary school & I do not think these ads are too simplistic!
One child in the class eats a giant popcorn chicken (vile stuff!) roll every morning for breakfast. It literally costs €4.50 a day, hardly cheaper than a bag of porridge oats!
Several other teachers & I were unable to convince this child to come swimming with us when we went. I spoke to the mum, who said she didn't want the child to be self-concious as she's "quite heavy". I tried to point out how she'd get a lot more benefit from the exercise than from staying behind but there was no talking to her.
Another child told me she has hot chocolate & a bar every morning for breakfast. When she saw my face of horror & I asked did her mother not mind, she said "oh she wants me to eat other things, but they're the only things I like". . . it definitely got me wondering who the parent was. This child isn't overweight So maybe the mother thinks it's alright. The poor child's teeth are dreadful already though.
Also, I know some people say schools should be educating children better about healthy eating but there's only so much we can do. Our school is fairly strict about Its healthy eating policy for lunches but there's a lot of grey area about certain things too. A lot of parents resent having their children told they can't eat something. Also, as mentioned the school is in a disadvantaged area so it gets extra funding. Parents are offered free cookery classes where the emphasis is on low cost, easy meals. The take up is unfortunately very low & the ladies giving them are often preaching to the converted, to the parents who already feed their kids well.

In a nutshell, I don't think these ads will stop childhood obesity but I agree with them being shown

mad muffin · 20-01-2014 08:31PM

Is this the ad about pester power?

I can tell you, there'd be far less pestering if all these sweets, chocolates and crisps weren't at eye and reach level.

It's a nightmare going to the shops with my three year old with all that stuff right in his face, especially at the check out counter, which is full of that stuff.

Muise... · 20-01-2014 08:54PM

Pumpkinseeds wrote: »

I have to disagree with you. It's far cheaper for a family on a low income to buy a bag of frozen chips and chicken nuggets/fish fingers etc than it is for them to buy potatoes and other fresh veg. If a family or an adult is trying to stretch a low income to cover all their outgoings buying convenience foods like that is probably going to be most affordable option for them. Time will be a big factor for a lot of people, but without doubt, economics plays a big part for a lot of people.

It's a lot cheaper to have fish fingers and chips than to have fresh cod, vegetables and potatoes

Short term, yes, crap food is cheaper. Long term, using ingredients you can bulk buy like rice and pulses, and if you know how to stretch meals by making stock and reusing leftovers, you can definitely get healthier food on the same weekly budget.

Pumpkinseeds · 20-01-2014 09:00PM

Muise... wrote: »

Short term, yes, crap food is cheaper. Long term, using ingredients you can bulk buy like rice and pulses, and if you know how to stretch meals by making stock and reusing leftovers, you can definitely get healthier food on the same weekly budget.

I agree with you on the importance of healthy food. I just think it's a matter of tackling a problem at different angles. I grew up on home cooked healthy food, like most people of my generation. But there seems to be a lot of parents out there with only the most basic of cooking skills combined with a lack of interest in healthy eating.

We had neighbours with a young family, neither worked but would've been coining it in on benefits, I'm not making generalisations based on the fact that they were workshy. They genuinely didn't have a shortage of disposable income. The thing is whenever we would see them in the supermarket their trolley would be full of junk food and the kids were given a full packet of biscuits as lunch, not good for anyone, certainly not for a 3 year old.

Miss Lockhart · 20-01-2014 09:57PM

I akso work in a disadvantaged school (but second level) and I have the opposite experience regarding weight issues and portion control. There are over 700 students and I can count on one hand the number overweight. There are no obese students. Parents are quite obsessive about portion control - there are far too many comments made about the risks of getting chubby or being a savage for eating too much. If anything I would see these ads leading many of these families down the wrong route.

The quality of food provided is often poor though - with fruit and veg often lacking and toast considered a staple for breakfast, lunch and dinner.

SeaDaily · 20-01-2014 10:03PM

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

I akso work in a disadvantaged school (but second level) and I have the opposite experience regarding weight issues and portion control. There are over 700 students and I can count on one hand the number overweight. There are no obese students. Parents are quite obsessive about portion control - there are far too many comments made about the risks of getting chubby or being a savage for eating too much. If anything I would see these ads leading many of these families down the wrong route.

The quality of food provided is often poor though - with fruit and veg often lacking and toast considered a staple for breakfast, lunch and dinner.

That school must be some sort of utopia of skinny teenagers so as that is certainly not the case around the country. You are saying that less than 1% of the school pupils are overweight? Very hard to believe.

Miss Lockhart · 20-01-2014 10:05PM

SeaDaily wrote: »

That school must be some sort of utopia of skinny teenagers so as that is certainly not the case around the country. You are saying that less than 1% of the school pupils are overweight? Very hard to believe.

Yes, that's what I said. Believe it if you like, or not.

20-01-2014 10:07PM

true-or-false wrote: »

"Oh she/he's a great eater, we've never had any trouble from him/her"
Kids are so often praised for eating. Traditionally parents have trouble getting kids to eat right, so when a child clears their plate it's seen as success. When the child is getting fat and is still asking for seconds and thirds at dinner, it's seen as a great thing that there's no trouble in getting those greens into them, but it's far less common for people to see it and say "hey, wait, that child is actually eating too much, and we're encouraging it". So they watch the child grow and say things like "yes he's got a very healthy appetite, just can get enough. He's only five but already wearing 7 year old clothes, he's going to grow up to be big and strong".

.

Or the parents on some of those shows going "omg she won't eat as much as I want, now today she did eat a yogurt for me and this for me and that for me" and the presenter is all "eh.... her eating is not about YOU"

sawdoubters · 20-01-2014 10:09PM

my kids are all slim,we don't eat junk food ever,they are always outside playing ,we go swimming 2 times a week,and hiking,once,if the parant is fat the kids going to be fat

Safe food.

Comments