The Continuing Nanny State

H/T Rose for this Independent article:

Restaurants that serve big puddings to be named and shamed by Government
Pizza Express, Starbucks, McDonald’s and Gourmet Burger Kitchen have been told to reduce the size of their cakes and pastries
Zlata Rodionova 10 hours ago44 comments

The times of decadent puddings you love to eat in full knowledge they are bad for you could soon be over.

Restaurants, cafés and pubs have reportedly been ordered to make their food and drink healthier or face being named and shamed for contributing to the obesity crisis.

Major chains including Pizza Express, Starbucks, McDonald’s and Gourmet Burger Kitchen, must cut sugar from their dishes or reduce the size of their cakes and pastries.

Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt said the initiative is part of the Government’s plan to reduce the nation’s waistline, according to The Times.

He told a private meeting of more than 100 food companies that the performance of each individual food chain would be monitored and those that failed to take action would be named and shamed arguing that “going out is no longer a treat” and “doing nothing was no longer an option.”

He said restaurants should join supermarkets and food manufacturers to tackle UK massive obesity crisis which Action on Sugar said could “bankrupt the NHS”.

“We can’t ignore the changing habits of consumers. This means we expect the whole of the out-of-home sector – coffee shops, pubs and family restaurants, quick service restaurants, takeaways, cafes, contract caterers and mass catering suppliers – to step up and deliver on sugar reduction,” Hunt said.

Consumers will be able to check the companies’ efforts on a website, although exactly how they will be compared has not been decided.

Chief executive of Public Health England Duncan Selbie told companies that he expects uniform and comprehensive reduction and reformulation” across all categories of food and drink.

”We need a level playing field – if the food and drink bought in cafes, coffee shops and restaurants does not also get reformulated and portions rethought then it will remain often significantly higher in sugar and bigger in portion than those being sold in supermarkets and convenience shops,” he said.

Supermarkets and food producers are also being urged to cut sugar in key products by 20 per cent over the next five years.

Mars has promised to reduce the amount of sugar in its products both in the US and the UK.

Rose asked:

Is this micromanagement some kind of hangover from Cameron? I sincerely hope it’s nothing to do with Theresa May.

The nannying and bullying continues. It does indeed look like the continuation of Cameron’s “Conservatism”, and previous Labour and Lib Dem policies. They’re all the same. Change the government, and you get the same policies. Perhaps they’re all signed up to the New World Order.

If so, it doesn’t bode well for Brexit. About which questions are being asked. When’s it going to happen? From the Independent:

former Chancellor Ken Clarke claimed that “nobody in the Government has the first idea” what to do about Brexit.

In some ways, in my view, it’s best to wait until November and the US presidential election before setting out a plan. But the plan may well be to simply do nothing, and let the Brexit vote be quietly ignored.

If so, the political temperature will start rising rapidly.


About Frank Davis

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to The Continuing Nanny State

  1. harleyrider1978 says:

    make em twice as big and half the price

  2. harleyrider1978 says:

    Joe Jackson

    Here we go with the evil marketeers/profiteers again. Naggers, nannies and prohibitionists always have the same blind spot. I have a Temperance poster from 1913 which shows three scenes: a drunk lying in the gutter, his starving wife and children in rags weeping at home, and a fat, evil-looking saloonkeeper laughing behind the bar. See? The problem is HUGE! And it’s all HIS fault! Close him down!

    People have smoked for thousands of years in the Americas, and about 500 years everywhere else. How long has modern marketing/advertising existed? People don’t smoke because of tobacco companies – tobacco companies exist because a lot of people like smoking. They advertise their brands to try to get you to smoke them instead of someone else’s. But hang on a minute . . . they’re not allowed to advertise any more, are they?! In fact they’re hardly allowed to do anything at all. Whereas people are bombarded by antismoking ‘marketing’ just about every minute of every day, by organisations and lobby groups awash in government and/or pharmaceutical company money.

    I grew up quite poor and ‘disadvantaged’. I first tried smoking out of curiosity. I carried on smoking – in moderation – because I enjoyed it. It’s as simple as that. But now I’m expected to believe that really, I smoke because evil geniuses at Philip Morris ‘hooked’ me with clever ‘marketing strategies’ and ‘glitzy packaging’. Didn’t Orwell say something about some ideas being so ridiculous that only an intellectual could believe them?

    • waltc says:

      Reminds me of a line in Bergman’s “Seventh Seal” which I saw again a few nights ago. A knight returning from the crusades sums it up: “our crusade was so stupid only an idealist could think it up.” I thought as I heard it of the Ant’s crusade

  3. Mark Jarratt, Kyoto, Japan says:

    These paternalistic bullies seem to believe the emotive and divisive “public nannying” argument “you cost us money, we therefore have the right to control your behaviour”. This stance has astounding implications for social engineering and authoritarianism, as with few inferential steps almost all illness and “related” conditions can be linked to individual behaviour. The time for revolution is upon us!

    • Barry Homan says:

      You like to ski? You need to be taxed. Skiing is a risky activity, it can result in serious and costly injuries, so you have to pay for those possible bodily injuries (paralization, head injuries, hip damage) that you may incur. It’s not the public’s responsibility to pay for your foolhardy choices and risk-taking activities.

  4. waltc says:

    In a prescient 2009 non-fiction book, “Survival Writing,” a friend wrote a satiric example of a memo summarizing a meeting at which Health Dept rules affecting restaurants were given. Here’s an excerpt:

    ” No portion of any single food may contain more than 321 calories and no combination on a plate may exceed a limit of 962. Finally, no individual customer may order a full meal (including appetizer and dessert) whose total calories exceed 1200… Menus should prominently warn diners of the 1200 calorie limit and the fines to be imposed for exceeding it. Further, they should warn that portions of inherently calorie-laden food will be proportionately smaller ( ice cream portions, in most cases, may consist of no more than 2-3 teaspoons, though those who’ve ordered only shredded carrots for an entree may receive 4-6.)… Tables must provide either pencil and paper or a solar-powered calculator…Wait staff must double check the customers’ calculations or, if requested, calculate for them. In case of disagreement, the decision of the waiter shall be deemed to be final. If the 1200 calorie limit is exceeded, both customer and waiter will be fined $50 with a jail term not to exceed 7 months for persistent offenders.”

    Just wait long enough in this cockamamie world and satire becomes reality.

  5. Timothy Goodacre says:

    If i pay to go out for a meal i don’t want some Nanny State tosspot telling me how much i can eat !!!

    • nisakiman says:

      Nor should any nanny state tosspot dictate the recipe to the restaurant. This has gone beyond parody. They would have us believe that every restaurant experience is like this:

  6. Pingback: Compulsory anhedonia | Propagoose

  7. Rose says:

    I wonder what single issue fanatics have been briefing Jeremy Hunt?

    Lying by omission seems to be part of their stock in trade, witness the children with rickets after the frightening and forceful anti-sun campaign using advice suitable for Australia not cloudy England.

    A little perspective before it goes too far, which it undoubtedly will.

    Sugar and the Brain

    “Glucose, a form of sugar, is the primary source of energy for every cell in the body. Because the brain is so rich in nerve cells, or neurons, it is the most energy-demanding organ, using one-half of all the sugar energy in the body.

    Brain functions such as thinking, memory, and learning are closely linked to glucose levels and how efficiently the brain uses this fuel source. If there isn’t enough glucose in the brain, for example, neurotransmitters, the brain’s chemical messengers, are not produced and communication between neurons breaks down. In addition, hypoglycemia, a common complication of diabetes caused by low glucose levels in the blood, can lead to loss of energy for brain function and is linked to poor attention and cognitive function.

    “The brain is dependent on sugar as its main fuel,” says Vera Novak, MD, PhD, an HMS associate professor of medicine at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. “It cannot be without it.”

    If you can make people afraid of sugar, and they are already suggesting it’s addictive, people who start shunning foods that the body turns to sugar may do themselves considerable harm.

    An essential nutrient turned to a source of shame.

    Anti-smoking drugs could stub out your sugar cravings: Common treatment that targets brain’s ‘reward pathways’ may be used on people who are addicted to sugar
    10 April 2016

    “Because Champix is already approved by the Food and Drug Administration, the team hopes that clinical trials to approve it as a treatment for sugar cravings could not be far off. Champix is already prescribed to 340,000 patients on the NHS.

    Lead researcher Masroor Shariff, of Queensland University of Technology, said: ‘Sugar affects the reward pathway in the brain, as do all other drugs of abuse.”

  8. Good free marketing to be had here as in, “We’ve been named and shamed by the guv’mint because our puddings are too big”.

  9. DP says:

    Dear Mr Davis

    I suspect naming them won’t be shaming, but free advertising to those looking for value for money.

    Having seen a ‘stoptober’ advert on Facebook, I shall now smoke an extra four cigarettes this month. My second regular smoke of the year (National Smokers’ Day – 1 July) produced an interesting appreciation of the experience. Perhaps all those cigarettes (up to 6 a year) I’ve smoked under extreme provocation from the anti-smokers, are beginning to kindle an addiction. Who knew that ash et al were such an effective marketing tool for the tobacco industry?


  10. Pingback: Octabber Resistance | Frank Davis

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.