Diabetes will bankrupt the NHS
Discussion
The trouble is that modern people don't want to be told that anything they do, or want, or are is wrong. It has to be someone else's fault or better still blamed on some ill-defined "thing" like "big food", "the elite", "structural something-ism".
A return to shame and an idea of what constitutes normal might help, but that way also lies a great deal of bigotry and suffering, so it's not simple.
The reality, of course, is that there are no fat people in labour camps (except the guards). No one has some kind of magical metabolism that stops them being thin, but most people lack the discipline to eat as little - and as healthily - as their largely sedentary lifestyle requires. After all, you can eat anything you like - although ultra-processed foods will still be bad for you in other ways - if you do enough exercise. Just look at pro cyclists, who eat something like 7000 calories a day when racing, and most of that is carbs. Indeed a fair share of the carbs are sugar.
But for most of us, who aren't digging ditches or carrying hods of bricks for a living, we need fewer calories than even the daily recommendation *and* we need to get off our backsides more often. The value of exercise seems continually to be questioned by all sides but all I can say (apart from reference to the first law of thermodynamics) is that when I was doing 200 miles a week on my bike I could (and did) eat whatever I liked and stay at 80kg. Now that I mostly sit in aeroplanes I have to constantly watch my diet and am nonetheless up to 86kg. By the same token I challenge anyone to do 12 hours of hard physical exercise a week and stay fat unless they actively try to.
The only thing we can do is fight back against the "fit at any weight" nonsense with public health campaigns that are as aggressive and uncompromising as the ones we ran for AIDS, heroin and cigarettes. Even then we needed legislation to make a real dent on smoking - but legislating in that way on food is much more complicated.
A return to shame and an idea of what constitutes normal might help, but that way also lies a great deal of bigotry and suffering, so it's not simple.
The reality, of course, is that there are no fat people in labour camps (except the guards). No one has some kind of magical metabolism that stops them being thin, but most people lack the discipline to eat as little - and as healthily - as their largely sedentary lifestyle requires. After all, you can eat anything you like - although ultra-processed foods will still be bad for you in other ways - if you do enough exercise. Just look at pro cyclists, who eat something like 7000 calories a day when racing, and most of that is carbs. Indeed a fair share of the carbs are sugar.
But for most of us, who aren't digging ditches or carrying hods of bricks for a living, we need fewer calories than even the daily recommendation *and* we need to get off our backsides more often. The value of exercise seems continually to be questioned by all sides but all I can say (apart from reference to the first law of thermodynamics) is that when I was doing 200 miles a week on my bike I could (and did) eat whatever I liked and stay at 80kg. Now that I mostly sit in aeroplanes I have to constantly watch my diet and am nonetheless up to 86kg. By the same token I challenge anyone to do 12 hours of hard physical exercise a week and stay fat unless they actively try to.
The only thing we can do is fight back against the "fit at any weight" nonsense with public health campaigns that are as aggressive and uncompromising as the ones we ran for AIDS, heroin and cigarettes. Even then we needed legislation to make a real dent on smoking - but legislating in that way on food is much more complicated.
NHS is only just dragging itself out of the "all fat is bad" era. Absolutely no advice on bad fats and essential for health fats. Fat is neccessary for repair of both body and brain.
Complete lack of understanding between the very important release speed of different sorts of carbohydrates.
No good basic advice that, if you shouldn't be eating it, you should even buy it; i.e. avoid, completely, the cake, chocolate and biscuit isles of the supermarket.
No advice that any meaningful change takes at least 6-12 months or f sticking to plan and that progress is seldom easy or linear.
Complete lack of understanding between the very important release speed of different sorts of carbohydrates.
No good basic advice that, if you shouldn't be eating it, you should even buy it; i.e. avoid, completely, the cake, chocolate and biscuit isles of the supermarket.
No advice that any meaningful change takes at least 6-12 months or f sticking to plan and that progress is seldom easy or linear.
smn159 said:
It's the environment that they live in that's the major difference
People with cars drive locally to the supermarket and backPeople without cars get a taxi back from the supermarket.
I walk as taxis aren't cheap. I walk home as taxis aren't cheap. When Iived in London - tube and then walked between areas and bars.
People drive to the drive thru.
People get their takeaway delivered (yes it's always happened) but it seems to have gone into convenience overdrive.
My sons friends get dropped off and picked up from school daily 400ms from their house.
Supermarkets food is 90% wrapped in plastics and with vast fridges covering upto 40% of the store of pre-prepared food.
Takeaways, kebab shops, burger places side by side competing for business on every shop strip in every town on every street.
Everyone is tired, stressed and time poor with no time to prepare and cook.
Maybe treatment for preventable conditions such as type 2 diabetes shouldn’t be free on the NHS; we could require people to contribute 25% towards the cost for example. Or there could be conditions associated with free treatment continuing, eg one has to get to a BMI below 25 within x months/years, or whatever. Or we could add a (further) sugar/fat/processed tax on unhealthy foods.
Ultimately it’s the National Health Service, not the National Pick Up The Pieces For An Unhealthy Lifestyle Service. If people can’t take responsibility for themselves, other methods need to be put into place.
Alternatively we can just avoid taking difficult decisions, keep paying and ultimately bankrupt the NHS, which is of course the path society/politicians will take.
Ultimately it’s the National Health Service, not the National Pick Up The Pieces For An Unhealthy Lifestyle Service. If people can’t take responsibility for themselves, other methods need to be put into place.
Alternatively we can just avoid taking difficult decisions, keep paying and ultimately bankrupt the NHS, which is of course the path society/politicians will take.
Hugo Stiglitz said:
smn159 said:
It's the environment that they live in that's the major difference
People with cars drive locally to the supermarket and backPeople without cars get a taxi back from the supermarket.
I walk as taxis aren't cheap. I walk home as taxis aren't cheap. When Iived in London - tube and then walked between areas and bars.
People drive to the drive thru.
People get their takeaway delivered (yes it's always happened) but it seems to have gone into convenience overdrive.
My sons friends get dropped off and picked up from school daily 400ms from their house.
Supermarkets food is 90% wrapped in plastics and with vast fridges covering upto 40% of the store of pre-prepared food.
Takeaways, kebab shops, burger places side by side competing for business on every shop strip in every town on every street.
Everyone is tired, stressed and time poor with no time to prepare and cook.
Hugo Stiglitz said:
People with cars drive locally to the supermarket and back
People without cars get a taxi back from the supermarket.
Of course they do. Supermarkets generally aren't located near where people live and it can be a pretty miserable experience walking along a dual carriageway or a main road to get to one.People without cars get a taxi back from the supermarket.
Towns and supermarkets are generally designed around car use. Maybe put smaller shops with supermarket prices on new build estates with decent walking routes and people will use them
IroningMan said:
Unfortunately anything that encourages walking is now pounced on as a new front in the 'War on the Motorist', hence the recent slashing of active travel budgets and projects.
Sad, because of all the various exercise I do, I genuinely feel walking is the most important and significant. I am sure it is also a key reason why dog owners, as a subset, tend to be healthier.Sure, I can do a 3hr mtb thrash that my Garmin says burns off over 900 calories (not 100% accurate, but ball park) but then a.) it makes you quite tired and hungry, b.) not everyone can do that or has the time.
Weights, very important for overall condition, but you're not burning more than 100 to 200 calories in the gym unless you are very strong.
smn159 said:
Hugo Stiglitz said:
People with cars drive locally to the supermarket and back
People without cars get a taxi back from the supermarket.
Of course they do. Supermarkets generally aren't located near where people live and it can be a pretty miserable experience walking along a dual carriageway or a main road to get to one.People without cars get a taxi back from the supermarket.
Towns and supermarkets are generally designed around car use. Maybe put smaller shops with supermarket prices on new build estates with decent walking routes and people will use them
sugerbear said:
Ok. let's ban takeaways and ready meals. Job done.
Enforced exercise...Get be everyone an exercise bike. National Grid looks a little slack, get a couple hundred watts into the grid.
My personal expectation is a culture of people that move more. Yes, obesity has health impacts, but obesity an inactivity have even wider issues. People of most shapes and sizes can be seen doing 5k at most parkrun events.
Hugo Stiglitz said:
smn159 said:
Hugo Stiglitz said:
People with cars drive locally to the supermarket and back
People without cars get a taxi back from the supermarket.
Of course they do. Supermarkets generally aren't located near where people live and it can be a pretty miserable experience walking along a dual carriageway or a main road to get to one.People without cars get a taxi back from the supermarket.
Towns and supermarkets are generally designed around car use. Maybe put smaller shops with supermarket prices on new build estates with decent walking routes and people will use them
Personal responsibility tends to be ignored, sadly.
I guess they could bring in rationing. Irrespective of your income, this is all you're permitted to eat based on your age and BMI (because it DOES work because YOU are most likely not a bodybuilder or professional rugby player!).
It's very 1984-sounding but, well, what's the alternative? f
k the NHS, let it crash and burn, and poor people can go fk themselves because they can't afford healthcare!! 
TBH I have no idea what the answer is so read the above as being flippant.
I guess they could bring in rationing. Irrespective of your income, this is all you're permitted to eat based on your age and BMI (because it DOES work because YOU are most likely not a bodybuilder or professional rugby player!).
It's very 1984-sounding but, well, what's the alternative? f
k the NHS, let it crash and burn, and poor people can go fk themselves because they can't afford healthcare!! TBH I have no idea what the answer is so read the above as being flippant.
Edited by Hoofy on Monday 20th November 17:31
Evanivitch said:
ScotHill said:
Unless there are a few primary schools where every lesson is a pie-eating exam, I kind of think that's bks, or at least grossly misleading. Thinking of all the children in my son's primary school, and all of the primary age children I see around, a tiny number of them have noticeable weight problems, and this is in Glasgow where chips are known as a side salad.
Must have been a large increase in the proportion of sugar and refined carbs eaten over the last fifty years though, if finger pointing is necessary. Secondary school children will happily quaff a half litre can of energy drink on the way to school, which won't be offset by exercise.
I think we've lost our frame of reference of what a healthy weight is for a child. Fat has been normalised throughout our society.ks, or at least grossly misleading. Thinking of all the children in my son's primary school, and all of the primary age children I see around, a tiny number of them have noticeable weight problems, and this is in Glasgow where chips are known as a side salad.Must have been a large increase in the proportion of sugar and refined carbs eaten over the last fifty years though, if finger pointing is necessary. Secondary school children will happily quaff a half litre can of energy drink on the way to school, which won't be offset by exercise.
If you teach parents that they need to double their child's weight every month what exactly do you expect when they are older.
IroningMan said:
Unfortunately anything that encourages walking is now pounced on as a new front in the 'War on the Motorist', hence the recent slashing of active travel budgets and projects.
Nothing wrong with encouraging walking and cycling. The problem has been with targeting motorists. Vanden Saab said:
How far back are you going. 60 years ago my mother had terrible problems because I was a normal not fat baby while babies with rolls of fat were considered healthy. 40 years ago I had the very same issues with my daughter. fast forward another 20 years and my daughter had the exact same thing with my grandkids. Until we accept that fat babies are not healthy and that feeding babies excessively is wrong nothing will change.
If you teach parents that they need to double their child's weight every month what exactly do you expect when they are older.
I don't think this is true in the NHS today where WHO health charts are used.If you teach parents that they need to double their child's weight every month what exactly do you expect when they are older.
But yes, often formula fed babies have significant fat roles.
Electro1980 said:
98elise said:
Poor people can't afford fruit and veg? Fruit and veg is very cheap, and normally it's right at the front of the store. We cook the majority of our food from fresh and it's cheaper than processed crap.
It's not big food that's the problem. They sell what people want.
It’s not cheap though. Not for an actual balanced diet. A few potato’s and carrots might be cheap, but that’s not all someone needs to live. It also requires time and work. The fundamental issue is lack of time and resources. Too many hours working, too much stress. People struggle to cook because they simply don’t have the time. They eat too many carbs because that’s what you crave when you’re tired and stressed.It's not big food that's the problem. They sell what people want.
Continuing to treat it as a moral issue
None of the long-hours workers I’ve met over the decades have been fat.
I rather suspect it has ZERO to do with time and 100% to do with inclination.
IroningMan said:
Hugo Stiglitz said:
smn159 said:
It's the environment that they live in that's the major difference
People with cars drive locally to the supermarket and backPeople without cars get a taxi back from the supermarket.
I walk as taxis aren't cheap. I walk home as taxis aren't cheap. When Iived in London - tube and then walked between areas and bars.
People drive to the drive thru.
People get their takeaway delivered (yes it's always happened) but it seems to have gone into convenience overdrive.
My sons friends get dropped off and picked up from school daily 400ms from their house.
Supermarkets food is 90% wrapped in plastics and with vast fridges covering upto 40% of the store of pre-prepared food.
Takeaways, kebab shops, burger places side by side competing for business on every shop strip in every town on every street.
Everyone is tired, stressed and time poor with no time to prepare and cook.
JagLover said:
IroningMan said:
Unfortunately anything that encourages walking is now pounced on as a new front in the 'War on the Motorist', hence the recent slashing of active travel budgets and projects.
Nothing wrong with encouraging walking and cycling. The problem has been with targeting motorists. It's certainly nothing to do with cost. I went to a motorway services over the summer. 2 Burger King meals and 2 KFC was around £40, which could probably keep the 4 of us in fresh meat and veg for a week going canny. It was also disgusting. Though admittedly the initial impression was a pleasing array of salt, sugar and spices (I had some sort of King Whopper Texas Ranch bks Burger) that masked crap beef, limp lettuce and miserable processed cheese in a soggy bun. The chips were OK but left a nasty aftertaste of burned vegetable oil.
ks Burger) that masked crap beef, limp lettuce and miserable processed cheese in a soggy bun. The chips were OK but left a nasty aftertaste of burned vegetable oil.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff