Diabetes will bankrupt the NHS

[Bathroom_Security]

JagLover said:

I think you are defining "encouraging" something by making the alternative more difficult or expensive, as you are citing the example of LTN's whose sole purpose is to block side streets to create more congestion on main roads. All this does is make life more difficult and stressful, it doesn't encourage anything.

So you can encourage walking and cycling by making the built environment for both more pleasant and accessible. In relation to which it should be pointed out that very many people drive to the place they will carry out this activity.

There's a good thread that's basically car drivers vs cyclists somewhere on here that would give you a good idea of how far away from having a pleasant cycling environment we currently are is.

[Digga]

Bathroom_Security said:

JagLover said:

I think you are defining "encouraging" something by making the alternative more difficult or expensive, as you are citing the example of LTN's whose sole purpose is to block side streets to create more congestion on main roads. All this does is make life more difficult and stressful, it doesn't encourage anything.

So you can encourage walking and cycling by making the built environment for both more pleasant and accessible. In relation to which it should be pointed out that very many people drive to the place they will carry out this activity.

There's a good thread that's basically car drivers vs cyclists somewhere on here that would give you a good idea of how far away from having a pleasant cycling environment we currently are is.

In fairness to both parties, the UK roads are barely large enough to carry modern cars with ease, let alone safe space for cyclists. I 'could' cycle commute by road within about 45 mins but don't because a.) the A road is busy and narrow and bikes are both a danger and delay to traffic and b.) I doubt I'd live long.

Other European nations have done things far better, with regard to the providion of dedicated cycle routes. The UK, by contrast, has been one of the lowest spending on major roads for the last 40 years within it's economic and geographic cohort.

[JuanCarlosFandango]

markymarkthree said:

Digga said:

Kermit power said:

It has sod all to do with a "diversity matrix". Go and look at the food available to hospital staff, especially when they're working a night shift. It's generally woeful, and often comes out of vending machines.

Take a healthy packed lunch then, like every other that doesn’t need have state sponsored, spoon fed help to figure their life out.

Before you get uppity. I have 3 friends who are nurses. None are fat. It’s not compulsory.

Spot on Digga. Mrs Marky (band 6) has done nights for most of her working life and has always taken in healthy home cooked food to work. It really isnt hard or expensive to do this.

True, however I think it's a great shame and indicative of a wider problem with our attitude to food that you can't get a decent, healthy meal at a reasonable price in a hospital.

[king arthur]

Kermit power said:

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that you and your wife were taught to cook by your parents, or at the very least set an example to follow by them cooking at home?

Far too many people today just didn't have that advantage. Both parents worked and often haven't been taught to cook themselves, so there is an increasingly large sector of society who just wouldn't have a clue what to do with fresh vegetables and raw meat.

I do think this accounts for a large part of the problem.

However, note that during the panic buying stage of the early lockdowns in 2020, food aisles were stripped bare and the fruit and veg aisles didn't escape that. So people can figure out what to do with proper food when they really want to.

Edited by king arthur on Tuesday 21st November 08:30

[Digga]

JuanCarlosFandango said:

True, however I think it's a great shame and indicative of a wider problem with our attitude to food that you can't get a decent, healthy meal at a reasonable price in a hospital.

Agreed, but the mere existence of quite so high a density (sorry) of obese workers within a workplace is also incongruous and speaks of a systemic lack of understanding of the issues and what is required to tackle them.

[Derek Smith]

Kermit power said:

sugerbear said:

JagLover said:

98elise said:

Again I cannot see how that's true. Even when my wife and I were both working, and had teenage kids doing multiple after school activities we still managed to cook and eat. A lot of the time we simply used a slow cooker and cooked in batches. Our home cooked meals came in at about £1 per serving.

What fruit and veg in a balanced diet is expensive?

Yes

It is very possible to eat well for £2 a serving, which is much cheaper than a ready meal for one, or a takeaway.

It is more a change in mentality and training that is needed.

Ok. let's ban takeaways and ready meals. Job done.

Then cue a queue of Daily Wail readers queuing up in NP&E to whine about the Nanny State and tell everyone how they shouldn't be disadvantaged just because some working class oiks can't be trusted to make sensible choices, all without recognising that most people don't have anything remotely like the money required to buy healthy takeaways.

My son works for a charity that assists those who are struggling financially, particularly those with children. He helps them with diet particularly - cheap, healthy, easy to prepare food. I've never known him to make judgements. Most, he says, have reasons for their ignorance which have nothing to do with being lazy, etc. He's into a healthy diet - and was when he was at home.

He said once that what he thought of as the norm for being brought up is nowhere near reality. Given the right help, the help they perhaps should have had as a kid, most are only too eager to work their way out of their problems.

He's all about raising horizons.

[JagLover]

Digga said:

In fairness to both parties, the UK roads are barely large enough to carry modern cars with ease, let alone safe space for cyclists. I 'could' cycle commute by road within about 45 mins but don't because a.) the A road is busy and narrow and bikes are both a danger and delay to traffic and b.) I doubt I'd live long.

Other European nations have done things far better, with regard to the providion of dedicated cycle routes. The UK, by contrast, has been one of the lowest spending on major roads for the last 40 years within it's economic and geographic cohort.

I am moving back to an area that has excellent provision for both cyclists and walkers in the next few weeks. So part of the solution is to require that new build estates are built to this standard. No driver is affected by this as you have a nice dual carriageway to get out of the area once you have left the local roads.

For longer distance you could expand dedicated cycle ways that are away from roads, on a similar basis to how they have made use of old railway track.

Making things better for walking and cycling does not automatically equal making things worse for motorists and often the latter gives no benefit to the former.

[DannyScene]

I've always wondered why Type 1 diabetics don't pay for any prescriptions at all, I get the insulin being free and even the freestyle libre sensors to alleviate the need for finger pricks multiple times a day but literally every prescription they're exempt from, Surely that costs the NHS a huge amount!

[Wills2]

Derek Smith said:

Wills2 said:

Derek Smith said:

There is no instantaneous solution that will put everything 'right'.

Education might be the answer, but I somehow doubt it. Can anyone in the public eye mention obesity without generating waves of criticism on various social media platforms and risking their career? An accusation of fat-shaming can be a problem. It's lucky the campaigns to reduce road deaths caused by drink-driving didn't start in the era of social media. The tobacco companies put up a stalwart defense (thrusting money at people) against those who, quite rightly, highlighted the dangers of smoking. What chance now?

People will ignore facts that criticise their way of life. The harm alcohol does to the body and the mind have been known of for years, but does that stop anyone who only has a few drinks each week, and refuses to acknowledge the scientifically arrived at limits? Does that stop you?

Fast food tastes nice. It's a day out for many. In my town, the queue for the drive through for MacD's often blocks a roundabout on the main road through town.

Or, to put it another way, I have no idea how to reduce obesity. Nor, it appears, does anyone else. Don't forget, any solution will have to be palatable to those who eat fast foods and indulge in sugary substances. That's not to mention the bigger hurdle of those companies who fund them and various political parties and lobbyists.

Given that nearly 75% of the adult population aren't obese it's safe to say it's not an impossible task and that despite everything the food industry is throwing at us the vast majority are managing to keep a reasonable grip on their waist line.

So clearly there are plenty of good practice models out there, the sugar tax has done nothing other than increase the amount of industrialised lab derived food additives we're consuming, but you don't need to be a rocket scientist to know that you shouldn't hydrate yourself with diet coke.

There's around the same percentage of those who ignore the units of alcohol guidelines as are obese. There were circa 1m alcohol-related admissions to hospitals in England last year. Alcohol is closely linked to many, many cancers as well as anti-social activities, such as criminal damage. With domestic abuse, there's a strong relationship.

Even non rocket-scientists will have read about such problems with alcohol.

Do you think it is possible to reduce the costs, damage, injuries and abuse of alcohol abuse?

I am tee-total. The most difficult hurdle to overcome for those like me is the social pressure to drink. Not that difficult for me as I'm alcohol-intolerant, but for those merely avoiding it because of the harm it can, and probably will, cause it must be very difficult. I would assume there's considerable social pressure for children to conform as well, and Big Macs must be pushed to many by their peers.

No idea what that has to do with the fact that the vast majority of people are not obese, therefore the solution is all around us walking amongst us you might say, people know Macdonalds etc...isn't good food (better than none obviously but we're talking about people that over eat so that's a moot point)

There are issues around food labelling as it's misleading and being gamed by the industry just like the afore mentioned sugar tax which has done nothing but increased the quantity of unnatural ingredients people consume and there has never been as many "ingredients" in our pre prepared food, however the continual infantizing of the adult population has to stop the notion that everyone is too poor and too thick to help themselves is grotesque and isn't helping, people know but some choose to consume bad food in large quantities despite knowing it's not good for them.

[Tankrizzo]

DannyScene said:

I've always wondered why Type 1 diabetics don't pay for any prescriptions at all, I get the insulin being free and even the freestyle libre sensors to alleviate the need for finger pricks multiple times a day but literally every prescription they're exempt from, Surely that costs the NHS a huge amount!

As a T1 I have wondered this too, my GP told me it would be a logistical nightmare to change everything so you only get the stuff you need for free and the rest you pay for, but I wonder how much of that is just "well it's always been like that so that's how it is".

Conversely I very rarely need prescriptions for anything else not related to either diabetes or Addison's Disease so I don't feel too bad.

[HTP99]

king arthur said:

Kermit power said:

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that you and your wife were taught to cook by your parents, or at the very least set an example to follow by them cooking at home?

Far too many people today just didn't have that advantage. Both parents worked and often haven't been taught to cook themselves, so there is an increasingly large sector of society who just wouldn't have a clue what to do with fresh vegetables and raw meat.

I do think this accounts for a large part of the problem.

Yep, you learn and pick things up from your parents and upbringing, in my case I cooked alot when younger, picking it up from my dad as he did most of the cooking at home, subsequently I enjoy cooking, I would say 90% of our meals are from scratch and cooked by myself, I actually use cooking to wind down after work.

Both of my daughters have cooked and do cook, I guess picking it up from me, my youngest more so than the eldest, she is always putting up pictures on the family WhatsApp of her latest meal, from a young age she'd happily dive into the cupboards and create something for herself.

My grandson loves to get involved with cooking or baking when he's with us.

Day off today, so it's a home cooked from scratch shepherd's pie, I also quite often prepare for 4, dishing up for me and the wife and freezing the spare portions for later in the week or the next.

I also cook with a view to lunches too, I always make a salad; leaves, tomatoes, onion, sweetcorn, peppers etc with usually chicken, one of my meals for the week is air fried tandoori chicken skewers, I'll cook 4, 1 each for me and the wife and 2 left over for salads for work, which usually can stretch to 3 salads.

Obviously it takes planning, I plan meals for the week which keeps costs down and I know what we are eating, I do the food shop which is being done today.

We do have the luxury now of not having to worry about children (ours flew the nest ages ago), however when our kids were younger we both still worked full time, the kids still had clubs, we still eat well with most meals from scratch.

[DannyScene]

Tankrizzo said:

DannyScene said:

I've always wondered why Type 1 diabetics don't pay for any prescriptions at all, I get the insulin being free and even the freestyle libre sensors to alleviate the need for finger pricks multiple times a day but literally every prescription they're exempt from, Surely that costs the NHS a huge amount!

As a T1 I have wondered this too, my GP told me it would be a logistical nightmare to change everything so you only get the stuff you need for free and the rest you pay for, but I wonder how much of that is just "well it's always been like that so that's how it is".

Conversely I very rarely need prescriptions for anything else not related to either diabetes or Addison's Disease so I don't feel too bad.

It is very strange and probably is a case of its been like that forever so why change it, I'd happily pay for my other prescriptions, quite glad I don't pay for my actual insulin though!

Are you on the freestyle libre sensors? They've been a god send for me

[Tankrizzo]

DannyScene said:

It is very strange and probably is a case of its been like that forever so why change it, I'd happily pay for my other prescriptions, quite glad I don't pay for my actual insulin though!

Are you on the freestyle libre sensors? They've been a god send for me

Yes mate - been on them for a few years now, I was a self-funding early adopter of the sensors before you could get them on general prescription; they are an absolute gamechanger. I've been T1 for 33 years so my poor old fingers had taken a right battering from all the testing over the years!

Interestingly I lost a bunch of weight recently and my insulin requirements have come right down, both my long-acting dose and my bolus to carbs ratio has changed.

[IroningMan]

JagLover said:

IroningMan said:

LTNs, Schools Streets, Cycle Lanes, Bike Hangars, changes to the Highway Code... Perhaps you can suggest some means of encouraging walking and cycling that hasn't been or won't be seized upon as targeting motorists?

I think you are defining "encouraging" something by making the alternative more difficult or expensive, as you are citing the example of LTN's whose sole purpose is to block side streets to create more congestion on main roads. All this does is make life more difficult and stressful, it doesn't encourage anything.

So you can encourage walking and cycling by making the built environment for both more pleasant and accessible. In relation to which it should be pointed out that very many people drive to the place they will carry out this activity.

QED

[DannyScene]

Tankrizzo said:

DannyScene said:

It is very strange and probably is a case of its been like that forever so why change it, I'd happily pay for my other prescriptions, quite glad I don't pay for my actual insulin though!

Are you on the freestyle libre sensors? They've been a god send for me

Yes mate - been on them for a few years now, I was a self-funding early adopter of the sensors before you could get them on general prescription; they are an absolute gamechanger. I've been T1 for 33 years so my poor old fingers had taken a right battering from all the testing over the years!

Interestingly I lost a bunch of weight recently and my insulin requirements have come right down, both my long-acting dose and my bolus to carbs ratio has changed.

I've only been on the sensors a few years and only Type 1 for 7 years now but what a world of difference, working in the motor trade I got sick of having to clean my hands every time I had to test my levels!

I bet the sensors weren't cheap initially?

Congrats on the weight loss, I'm currently trying to do the same over winter ready for next year!

[Sticks.]

IroningMan said:

JagLover said:

IroningMan said:

LTNs, Schools Streets, Cycle Lanes, Bike Hangars, changes to the Highway Code... Perhaps you can suggest some means of encouraging walking and cycling that hasn't been or won't be seized upon as targeting motorists?

I think you are defining "encouraging" something by making the alternative more difficult or expensive, as you are citing the example of LTN's whose sole purpose is to block side streets to create more congestion on main roads. All this does is make life more difficult and stressful, it doesn't encourage anything.

So you can encourage walking and cycling by making the built environment for both more pleasant and accessible. In relation to which it should be pointed out that very many people drive to the place they will carry out this activity.

QED

You're being a bit selective with what you've highlighted there. The point, as I saw it was 'I think you are defining "encouraging" something by making the alternative more difficult or expensive'.

Carrot or stick.

When I used to commute to a town 17 miles away, it was a 10min walk tot he station and 5 mins at the other end. So 30 mins walking a day. I used the train because it was easier and about the same cost. When I went to London that increased to 50mins a day. I really did lose weight then, just by this and moderating my intake. If people were encouraged to use public transport more, activity becomes more normal, habits change. Only part of the solution, not all but better than LTNs imho.

[Hoofy]

hidetheelephants said:

JagLover said:

IroningMan said:

LTNs, Schools Streets, Cycle Lanes, Bike Hangars, changes to the Highway Code... Perhaps you can suggest some means of encouraging walking and cycling that hasn't been or won't be seized upon as targeting motorists?

I think you are defining "encouraging" something by making the alternative more difficult or expensive, as you are citing the example of LTN's whose sole purpose is to block side streets to create more congestion on main roads. All this does is make life more difficult and stressful, it doesn't encourage anything.

So you can encourage walking and cycling by making the built environment for both more pleasant and accessible. In relation to which it should be pointed out that very many people drive to the place they will carry out this activity.

"You must make the built environment better for walking and cycling!"
*an LTN is created*
"Not like that!"

If they banned private car ownership, I'm still not walking. I'd either get the bus or an Uber. Or order food delivered. Like the 30 pack bag of crisps and tins of real ale I'm going to buy later all for me.

Funnily, I'm the opposite of obese, and I'm the wrong side of 50. Might be to do with me occasionally lifting weights but also avoiding food a couple of times a week.

The shame about making it harder to get about is that I'd probably see my extended family a lot less and stop playing tennis.

[Digga]

The people who dream this zero vehicle crap up must live in some sort of intellectual vacuum.

Every single good or service that needs vehicular movement is impacted and, therefore, ends up costing more.

[Kermit power]

Digga said:

Kermit power said:

It has sod all to do with a "diversity matrix". Go and look at the food available to hospital staff, especially when they're working a night shift. It's generally woeful, and often comes out of vending machines.

Take a healthy packed lunch then, like every other that doesn’t need have state sponsored, spoon fed help to figure their life out.

Before you get uppity. I have 3 friends who are nurses. None are fat. It’s not compulsory.

Where are you going to store said packed lunch? My SIL is a hospital doctor who bemoans the fact that she's not allowed to store one in a morgue drawer or with refrigerated drugs, and there's certainly nowhere else she can put it!

[IroningMan]

Sticks. said:

IroningMan said:

JagLover said:

IroningMan said:

LTNs, Schools Streets, Cycle Lanes, Bike Hangars, changes to the Highway Code... Perhaps you can suggest some means of encouraging walking and cycling that hasn't been or won't be seized upon as targeting motorists?

I think you are defining "encouraging" something by making the alternative more difficult or expensive, as you are citing the example of LTN's whose sole purpose is to block side streets to create more congestion on main roads. All this does is make life more difficult and stressful, it doesn't encourage anything.

So you can encourage walking and cycling by making the built environment for both more pleasant and accessible. In relation to which it should be pointed out that very many people drive to the place they will carry out this activity.

QED

You're being a bit selective with what you've highlighted there. The point, as I saw it was 'I think you are defining "encouraging" something by making the alternative more difficult or expensive'.

Carrot or stick.

When I used to commute to a town 17 miles away, it was a 10min walk tot he station and 5 mins at the other end. So 30 mins walking a day. I used the train because it was easier and about the same cost. When I went to London that increased to 50mins a day. I really did lose weight then, just by this and moderating my intake. If people were encouraged to use public transport more, activity becomes more normal, habits change. Only part of the solution, not all but better than LTNs imho.

I could've included Cycle-to-Work schemes, or 15-minute cities, too; all are met with the same petulant derision from people who identify as motorists.

There is a huge stick waved at people who try to cycle or walk to work or to school or for general transport, in the shape of people who drive - often not very well - and only a very small carrot on offer. Every initiative that attempts to make our environment one in which it's fractionally easier to get about on foot or on a bike is met with howls of protest from those who will not look beyond the end of their collective bonnets.

Personally I really don't mind - I have enough opportunity to keep myself in reasonable shape and I don't have to commute or deal with a school run, so if the rest of the nation wants to sit on its collective arse all day, drive 1/2 mile for a pint of milk, drive its kids to school because 'there's too much traffic for them to walk safely' and then wonder why it's obese and unwell then meh.