" The message has got to be..."

"...Tam Fry, go forth and multiply!"

Tam Fry, of the National Obesity Forum, described the rising tide of obesity among pensioners as ‘dramatic’.

He said: ‘This statistic should really make the NHS sit up and think. When we think about pensioners and health, we tend to think of the little old lady starving in a hospital bed because no one is feeding her.

‘But now we are starting to see that it’s about fat elderly women as well. And the sad conclusion is that pensioners really need to take more responsibility for their health.’

Really? I've reached a different conclusion.

It's that we need to stop allowing this ghastly little homunculus to gorge himself on our taxes...

Mr Fry said obesity was so high among the elderly because they tend to be poorer than working-age people, as they have to rely on meagre pensions.

‘If you have less disposable income, you rely on cheaper foods; and these tend to be processed with high levels of sugar and salt,’ he said. ‘They are also less likely to do exercise.

‘The bigger you become, the weaker you are, making exercise more difficult, quite apart from their increasing age. The message has got to be: pensioners, you have got to try harder to keep yourself in shape. It’s a clarion call.’

I fear for little Fry should he ever advance that policy at my mother's active elderly club. Most of the ladies there (and a fair few of the men) are built like sparrows, but they wield a mean handbag...

”And finally, monsieur, a wafer-thin mint £425 handout.”

I noted in a post the other day that ‘incentives matter’; it seems the NHS believes that too, and is using the concept (paid for by the taxpayer, of course) to reduce obesity by…..paying the obese to slim down:

The NHS is to pay fat people up to £425 to lose weight.
Overweight men and women will get the handouts for meeting personal slimming targets.

And won’t immediately spend it all on chips and cream cake, I suppose…?

Most doctors and medical experts aren’t in favour either, pointing out the inherent dangers of ‘yo yo’ dieting that this scheme may encourage, not to mention that it is rewarding people for things that are within their own remit and will bring them health benefits:

An obesity expert said it could put people at risk of heart attack and stroke by encouraging yo-yo dieting and an MP said the idea would enrage patients who struggle to get funding for life-saving treatments.

There were also questions over whether the 'bribe' would have to be returned if the patients put the weight back on.

I’m betting ‘No’…

So why are they forging ahead with this?

The ' Pounds for Pounds' scheme is being run by Eastern and Coastal Kent primary care trust in conjunction with Weight Wins, a private company which runs incentive schemes for firms to persuade staff to lose weight.

If successful, it could be expanded across the country.

Yes, but if Virgin or Sainsbury wants to bring them in, they presumably fund it from company profits. The NHS is expecting us to fund it…

Weights are checked once a month by a nurse in a GP surgery or an assistant at a pharmacist.

There is no time limit but patients will get only half the money for losing the weight. The rest is handed over if they keep it off for six months.

They can decide to take cash or store or holiday vouchers.

What, no ‘McDonalds’ vouchers? No doubt someone will be complaining about that…

But Mark Wallace of the TaxPayers' Alliance said: 'People pay their taxes for the sick to be treated, not for the nanny state to bribe them to do something they should have done off their own bat.

'This is no kind of long-term solution - a temporary financial incentive won't stop people putting the weight back on once they've got the cash.

'When people who are ill through no fault of their own are struggling to get appointments and drugs, it's unfair for money to be allocated to people who simply need to choose to exercise more and eat less.'

‘Unfair’..? You are too generous – it’s frankly criminal!

Grinning homunculus Tam Fry (was there ever a more inappropriately-named spokesman?) popped up to cheer on this opportunity for him to see his picture in even more newspapers:

But the scheme was welcomed by Tam Fry of the National Obesity Forum. He said: 'This is an investment to get people into the right lifestyle.

'The Government has spent an awful lot of money to tackle obesity and it has got absolutely nowhere. Now they are taking a leaf out of industry's book - rewarding people for doing good things.

'Some people will call this a bribe, but I think it's a judicious use of the public purse to prevent a further drain on resources from heart disease and type two diabetes.'

Of course you do – you are, after all, part of the ‘obesity industry’.

Class War Is Busting Out All Over!

Now, how can the ‘obesity war’ be fought and won? I know! On the playing fields of Eton!

Wait. What..?

A widening class gap is likely to be seen in the coming years in childhood obesity, a study suggests.

Funny, just after the government is handed the message ‘Stop banging on about class, it isn’t working’, it gets picked up somewhere else…

Previous research has suggested rates in England may be levelling off.

But the University College London team found this was happening most in children aged two to 10 from wealthier backgrounds.

Well, of course it is!

You are preaching to the converted there – to the worried middle-classes who read the ‘Guardian’ and the ‘Telegraph’ and haven’t yet realised that that most of these government figures aren’t worth the wholemeal rice paper they are written on!

Other people have far greater things to worry about...

They analysed data gathered by the government-funded Health Survey for England.

And definition of ‘obesity’ no doubt based on the faulty BMI. And we’ve seen the crazy consequences of that before…

But the rent-seekers are out in force, looking to ensure they’ll still have a job in the new administration to come:

Lead researcher Dr Emmanuel Stamatakis said: "This highlights the need for public health action to reverse recent trends and narrow social inequalities in health."

No, it doesn’t.

Nothing of the sort, actually.

"The widening socio-economic gap may be partly due to difficulties to reach and communicate health messages to families from lower socio-economic groups."

Yes, it’s because the people who work for a living either don’t care what the government says, or realise that most of it is utter bilge, intended to keep someone in a cozy office job somewhere.

But where’s Tam Fry? Surely that grinning little homunculus heard the ringing of the dinner bell?

Ah! There he is:

Tam Fry, of the National Obesity Forum, agreed awareness was more likely to be greater among wealthier families.
But he added: "It is also often quite expensive and time-consuming to buy healthy food and that puts wealthier parents at an advantage."

And we can’t have anyone having an advantage in the UK, can we..?

Unless it's a troughing politician, that is...

”Rock n roller cola wars, I can’t take it any more…”

Oh, Billy. That was nothing compared to what’s coming up…

The battle to contain the global obesity crisis stepped up a gear yesterday as American public health experts demanded a sugar tax on the country's most popular source of refreshment – sweetened carbonated drinks and fruit juices.

*sigh*

At least these aren’t doctors, though no doubt, they’ll soon get in on the act:

In what is certain to become a world-wide debate on the use of economic sanctions to tackle obesity, a group led by academics from Yale and Harvard universities proposed a "cola war", with a 1 cent tax per fluid ounce on sweetened beverages, raising the price of the average can of cola by 15 to 20 per cent.

In the middle of a recession. Great timing!

They say this would cut calorie consumption from drinks by a minimum of 10 per cent (enough to prompt weight loss) and contribute almost $15bn towards the health costs of obesity.

"The reasons to proceed are compelling. The science base linking the consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages to the risk of chronic disease is clear.

Research suggests a tax... would have strong positive effects on reducing consumption. We believe that taxes on beverages that help drive the obesity epidemic should and will become routine," the experts say in the New England Journal of Medicine.

Of course, this has ears pricking up over here, with the thought of a new tax bringing the usual subjects out of the woodwork:

British nutrition specialists backed the move but said other economic measures, such as a tariff on sugar imports, could have the same impact but be less politically controversial.

In other words, ‘Let’s hide this so the sheep don’t realise what we’re doing..!'

Naturally, this has also brought grinning homunculus Tam Fry out from under his stone to leap aboard the publicity bandwagon:

Tam Fry, spokesman for the UK National Obesity Forum, said: "We have got to start thinking very seriously about taxing unhealthy food and drink as part of the drive to improve the nation's health and cut obesity. The amount of sugar that goes into these soft drinks is staggering and it has a double whammy, increasing obesity and rotting teeth."

Oh, do shut up!

If we’re looking at improving the nation’s health, getting rid of unelected, hectoring little munchkins like you would do wonders for the nation’s blood pressure…

Jack Winkler, professor of nutrition policy at London Metropolitan University, said: "I support this. It would be a massive public acknowledgement about the danger sugar poses to health."

But he proposed raising the price of sugar permanently by reforming the world commodity markets. Imposing tariffs, which are invisible, would be much better than raising taxes, he said.

Eh…?

Help me out here, Jack. How is it possible to simultaneously describe something as ‘a valuable public acknowledgement’ while also declaring your desire to hide it from the public?

Update: Dick Puddlecote has a good post on this too.

Signs Of The Apocalypse...

Doctors are being offered training to improve their bedside manner...

Well, it's about time!

...after dozens of patients complained about being ‘fat-shamed’ by NHS staff.

Wait, what?

Some took exception to being told that they were an unhealthy weight, needed to improve their diet or were too big to fit in scanners or have operations. The Royal College of Physicians said healthcare workers ‘must not be afraid’ to raise the issue because of the ‘very severe risks’ of obesity but they should discuss it ‘sensitively’ and avoid using ‘stigmatising language’.

How the hell do you point out to someone that the only scanner they will fit in is at Seaworld or London Zoo 'sensitively'..?

One doctor at Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust allegedly told a woman she was morbidly obese and it was her fault because of ‘the crap she eats’.

Maybe it was. What else should the doctor have told her? 

Tam Fry, of the National Obesity Forum, said: ‘A lot of people are in denial about their weight and doctors should not shy away from telling them home truths.

‘Some healthcare workers may need to improve their bedside manner but there will be some patients who take offence at being told they are overweight no matter how sensitively it is done.’

I can't believe I'm agreeing with Tam Fry of all people! 

*peers out of window for quartet of eerie horsemen*

And Clearly, You Still Are...

'Calorie intake wasn't explained to me. I was seven, I was a child.'

The words of 17 stone 15 year old Brooke Walker, who went on breakfast TV to demand a gastric band operation. Because she 'can't diet', it 'doesn't work'.

She said: 'When I was younger I would eat chips, pizza, fast food stuff. Curry cheesy chips, I would have them a lot.

'I wasn't going out and burning off the food I ate. Calorie intake wasn't explained to me. I was seven, I was a child.

'Now, it's completely different. I have breakfast lunch and dinner - and small portions.

'Now I would have cereal for breakfast, lunch, a soup or sandwich - it depends each day.'

So....is it not working, then?

Brooke has since moved in with her grandmother, who encouraged healthy eating, exercise and smaller portion sizes.

After this change in lifestyle she was losing weight and enjoyed the feeling, so started skipping entire meals to see a quicker result. She said: 'I noticed the weight coming off me. I started lose more weight when I missed meals.

'I stopped eating breakfast. I stopped eating lunch at school because I didn't like eating in front of people. I was worried about what people were saying.'

Wow! That's great! So.....why on earth do you want a gastric band op?

After years of embarrassment, gastric band operation would allow her to live normally and enjoy her twenties.

She said: 'If I get a gastric band, it's not a quick fix.

'It'll be beneficial in the long run, because the weight is coming off you so you can watch what you're eating.

'Also, soon I'll start to like the way I look and I'll feel confident enough so I'll start feel comfortable going out in public by myself and make friends.'

But....you just said that the weight is coming off you?

Naturally, Tam Fry is quick to get climb aboard this bandwagon:

He said he agreed Brooke should be given the gastric band operation on the NHS, saying it could be 'the game changer' for her.

He said: 'The operation should be the last resort. You should go through the healthy lifestyle steps first. But for people like Brooke, who have been through that, it's got to be the operation by choice.'

Aha! There you have it - choice. Whatever she says, it is a 'quick fix'. Because today's youth have never heard the term 'deferred gratification', much less practiced it...

There Goes Your Core Vote, Diane!

Local authorities should be given stronger powers to ban the spread of fried chicken shops and other fast food outlets, and end the sale of cheap alcohol from corner shops, especially near schools, according to proposals put forward by...

Wizened homunculus Tam Fry? No. No, actually.

...Diane Abbott, the shadow public health minister.

Diane Abbott gives an interview from her beach holiday 

Yeah. I know. Me too...

Discussing the need to tackle obesity and alcoholism, she said: "I am looking at planning legislation to make it easier for local authorities to ban not just McDonald's, but those chicken and chip shops that cluster around schools.

"I certainly think as part of Labour's policy review we should make it easier for local authorities to use public health criteria in planning and to stop the proliferation of chicken and chip shops. For too many children, fast food is not a treat but a dietary staple."

I can only imagine that Abbott's never taken a rush-hour train at the times schools have turned out for the day, and clocked the identity of the kids usually found tucking into the fried chicken.

If she had, she might have held her tongue.