Are your children fat? Why are they fat?

chinacup

Tail Docker wrote: »

I've three - all skinny yokes and they eat all around them, crap included. They exercise though and are on the go all day. Could just be jammy genes though.

I'm sure someone's replied to you already I haven't clicked to page 2 yet. But I seriously hope you don't actually let them eat crap all the time. That's a recipe for disaster right there (excuse the pun). Mood swings, personality disorders and susceptibility to other diseases later in life. Get educated there's no excuse any more. I don't see how you think that's something to be proud of. I was raised by a laxy daisy father with junk food too and also have the skinny genes but believe me I still paid for it in other ways later on. Junk food can lead to other addictions too. Sorry if it seems overly judgmental but I doubt I'm alone in the opinion that its utterly thick to let your kids eat whatever they want.

conorh91

This appeared on my timeline today. It's an American fitness instructor going on a rant about "repulsive" fat people raising fat children, and the damage they are doing to their children's health and life quality.

What do you think? Probably a bit harsh, but difficult to contradict, in my view. Education clearly isn't working, everybody knows the dangers of unhealthy eating. Maybe it's time to stigmatize this behavior, like drink-driving and cigarette smoking?

http://www.theladbible.com/articles/a-stupid-drill-sergeant-and-fitness-motivator-has-gone-on-a-rant-about-fat-people?utm_source=lboz&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=lboz

John Burk is an American Drill Sergeant and self proclaimed 'fitness motivator' who has been doing the rounds on Facebook after posting a video blasting 'lazy' and 'repulsive' fat people.

Needless to say, some people are not feeling very motivated by his 5-minute rant. Here's a snippet to help you make you're own mind up:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXDEe_bg9lM

JacquesSon

Irish kids are doomed to fatness.

Parents keep them indoors with tv and internet, shovel feed them crap food and would rather buy them a replica shirt for X-mas than a pair of boots/[insert practical sports equipment here].

Is this one issue that Irish people can own up to being responsible for?

osarusan

Neither of my kids have even a speck of excess fat on them.

Slim and fit as fiddles, both.

JacquesSon

osarusan wrote: »

Neither of my kids have even a speck of excess fat on them.

Slim and fit as fiddles, both.

I reckon I, and everyone I grew up with, did 4-5hrs minimum physical activity everday.

I doubt kids these days go anywhere close to that.

NachoBusiness

conorh91 wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXDEe_bg9lM

He'll have a stroke if he doesn't chill.

FaganJr

Are my children Fat? NO

Why are they Fat? Are you ****ing deaf?

Pherekydes

My daughter tried on a debs dress today. Size 10 was too big.

conorh91

Yes, there are lots of parents whose children are not fat.

But one quarter of nine-year olds are too fat. That suggests to me that there are a lot of parents of fat children shuffling away from this thread, ignoring the truth they know, that their dietary policy is endangering the health of their children.

You can shuffle but you can't hide.

Where are the parents of the fat children? 25% of the child population? Put down the cake and tell us why you're letting this health epidemic happen to defenceless children?

RandomName2

conorh91 wrote: »

This appeared on my timeline today. It's an American fitness instructor going on a rant about "repulsive" fat people raising fat children, and the damage they are doing to their children's health and life quality.

What do you think? Probably a bit harsh, but difficult to contradict, in my view. Education clearly isn't working, everybody knows the dangers of unhealthy eating. Maybe it's time to stigmatize this behavior, like drink-driving and cigarette smoking?

http://www.theladbible.com/articles/a-stupid-drill-sergeant-and-fitness-motivator-has-gone-on-a-rant-about-fat-people?utm_source=lboz&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=lboz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXDEe_bg9lM

He's "gonna attack society's bullsh*t view that we should accept everybody for who they are"

And is he not right? Fat people are "disgusting". They are not a true reflection of how the nordic race should look.

The underclass who get excessively drunk and who smoke should be reeducated. Television should be more strictly controlled as it is the medium of moralistic instruction - nothing that promotes bad behaviour should be permitted.

Parents who are incapable of raising their children in the true style of the arian should be replaced as custodians by the state! The state, as the highest source of wisdom will always be more correct than the mob - the fact that many people look a certain way, do a certain thing, or believe a certain falsehood does not make it right. Only those with the knowledge to say what is right or what is wrong should be listened to in such matters.

People are generally weak and not to be trusted with big decisions. Therefore we should treat education only a partial tool in the sculpting of society. What sort of parent allows a child to behave however it wants? And as the state is the parent of the polis, so it should intervene with a strong hand, and force its offspring to behave in a correct manner.

The burden of society may shuffle, but they cannot hide from the piercing gaze of those faithful to the party and the state!

But how can the state be strong when its people are sick - a sickness that is a consequence of the freedom of decadent consumerism. For too long have we sat idly by and allowed people indecent liberty to abuse themselves and their offspring, when their duty is to safeguard the health of themselves and the next generation. What is more, an impure body leads to an impure mind. That is why we have so much discontent in our country; a people who are at their wits end, and beyond the capacity of seeing the strength that a unified will would achieve.

Am I getting the gist of it right?

conorh91

RandomName2 wrote: »

They are not a true reflection of how the nordic race should look.

Television should be more strictly controlled as it is the medium of moralistic instruction - nothing that promotes bad behaviour should be permitted.

Parents who are incapable of raising their children in the true style of the arian should be replaced as custodians by the state!

When you cannot turn to reason, turn sarcastically instead to straw men.

Nobody suggested anything racist; nobody suggested that totalitarianism is a solution.

This is an issue of public health: child public health, in particular. One in Four children in this country are too fat for their age.

The responsibility for this health crisis lies with parents.
The solution to this health crisis is better parenting.

There is nothing racist or totalitarian about that. It is inexcusable for parents to expose their children to serious health problems and diminished quality of life through obesity.

Hammer89

I honestly can't stand people like that bloke in the video. Everybody with a six-pack is an expert when it comes to eating disorders. But only over-eating, oddly enough. They wouldn't dare say a word about anorexia. We live in a society where it's okay to tell fat people to stop eating, but to tell an anorexia suffer to start eating would be deemed insensitive. Am I wrong? It's bull****.

If you reach the 'morbidly obese' or 'obese' category then you need a therapist a lot more than a f*cking gym membership. If you've got that much fat on your body it suggests a very real and very serious problem that, believe it or not, Mr Motivator can't help you with. He can't.

Sure, he can put you on a treadmill, knock up an eating plan, but he's absolutely not going to remove the reason behind your excessive eating, is he? Do you know why? Because he doesn't have those skills. It's so simple. I'd trust him to transform a skinny bloke into somebody who looks like him - barring the hilariously sh*t tattoos - but I'd never in a million years trust him to transform an obese person into a slim one.

Red21

Government should put warning on ****ty foods, every time MacDonalds and coca-cola etc imply that there junk will make you happy, there should also be a warning saying this junk is gonna make you fat and unattractive. Just like they did with smoking.

Samaris

conorh91 wrote: »

Yes, there are lots of parents whose children are not fat.

But one quarter of nine-year olds are too fat. That suggests to me that there are a lot of parents of fat children shuffling away from this thread, ignoring the truth they know, that their dietary policy is endangering the health of their children.

You can shuffle but you can't hide.

Where are the parents of the fat children? 25% of the child population? Put down the cake and tell us why you're letting this health epidemic happen to defenceless children?

Yep, that should definitely draw them out of the woodwork for a good pillorying.

DEFTLEFTHAND

It's up to you as a parent to feed them properly, it's nothing of the State's concern. Personal responsibility for your own. A kid needs his/her parents to give him/her three square healthy meals a day.

Coopaloop

Was at an in laws kids birthday party yesterday, we have an 18 month old so his awareness to the whole thing was low, but we went for appearances sake, anyway, everyone kept asking what will he have, will he have a bun, crisps, jellies, chocolate, nah I said, he might have a taste, but would end up on the floor. Then the fried food came out, Oh will he have some chips, chicken nuggets, onion rings, again I said the same thing will happen, it will end up on the floor. This was met by strange looks, and someone saying, Oh does he not eat solids, to which I replied, yes indeed he does but he doesn't get ****e like this. I know it's a party but he's too little for all that crap, he'll get enough of it in years to come. But honestly, the looks I was getting, and then the 'Grandma' saying ah give him this and that, the poor mite wants some (he didn't even know). So to my complete delight when she gave him a fork full of a cake she made he spat it straight out and did a big shiver all over. Ha.
I know I probably sound like one of those over protective parents, but really I'm not, I just don't want my kid unhealthy with rotting teeth, before they are two, as far as I'm concerned, letting kids eat whatever they want and then them being overweight is a form of child abuse, it's not the child's fault they are overweight, they aren't going out and buying the food, the parents are.

strelok

Coopaloop wrote: »

Was at an in laws kids birthday party yesterday, we have an 18 month old so his awareness to the whole thing was low, but we went for appearances sake, anyway, everyone kept asking what will he have, will he have a bun, crisps, jellies, chocolate, nah I said, he might have a taste, but would end up on the floor. Then the fried food came out, Oh will he have some chips, chicken nuggets, onion rings, again I said the same thing will happen, it will end up on the floor. This was met by strange looks, and someone saying, Oh does he not eat solids, to which I replied, yes indeed he does but he doesn't get ****e like this. I know it's a party but he's too little for all that crap, he'll get enough of it in years to come. But honestly, the looks I was getting, and then the 'Grandma' saying ah give him this and that, the poor mite wants some (he didn't even know). So to my complete delight when she gave him a fork full of a cake she made he spat it straight out and did a big shiver all over. Ha.
I know I probably sound like one of those over protective parents, but really I'm not, I just don't want my kid unhealthy with rotting teeth, before they are two, as far as I'm concerned, letting kids eat whatever they want and then them being overweight is a form of child abuse, it's not the child's fault they are overweight, they aren't going out and buying the food, the parents are.

you are such a nazi

Menas

strelok wrote: »

you are such a nazi

Not really. The kid is 18 months old and at that age has no interest in eating crap.
It brings no pleasure to a kid of 18 months and as the poster said, plenty of time for eating crap when they are older.

Coopaloop

strelok wrote: »

you are such a nazi

Ha, Oh I sure was yesterday, was the meanest, cruelest parent in the whole wide world.

IvyTheTerrible

My young lad is 3.5 years old, and he hasn't an ounce of fat on him.
He's a bit of a freak of nature though, he loves all fruit and veg (he'll actually request broccoli and spinach) and hates chips and fried food (we've given it to him but he won't eat it). He's only half Irish and I'm wondering what happened to his Irish genes, he won't eat spuds at all!

Little CuChulainn

It just feels wrong telling my 6 month old that he can't have his bottle because he is looking chunky.

Qualitymark

Kids are fat because they no longer cycle to school and friends'. They don't cycle because there isn't a proper network of separated cycle lanes where they're not in contact with cars, like New York's http://www.streetsblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/2014-09-03-bicycle-path-data-analysis.pdf.
If kids learned to cycle young, and cycled regularly to school, they'd quickly learn that you can do 80km in a day and take possession of your own space and your own country. They could cycle to Brittas Bay in a day! They could own the Dublin Mountains and the Wicklow Hills!
But kids are probably also fat because their parents are fat.

Penny Tration

Pherekydes wrote: »

My daughter tried on a debs dress today. Size 10 was too big.

My little sister is the same. Bought her debs dress yesterday in a size 10 (they had no 8s left), and is having to get it taken in in the waist and bust. Most of her friends though, are in size 14-16 dresses.

ToddyDoody

Too many burgers.

DJD

Qualitymark wrote:

Kids are fat because they no longer cycle to school and friends'. They don't cycle because there isn't a proper network of separated cycle lanes where they're not in contact with cars. If kids learned to cycle young, and cycled regularly to school, they'd quickly learn that you can do 80km in a day and take possession of your own space and your own country. They could cycle to Brittas Bay in a day! They could own the Dublin Mountains and the Wicklow Hills! .

Dunno if I agree with this. Cycle lanes weren't there when we were kids, cycling on the footpath was also a no-no back then too. We shared the roads with all other traffic. I think something has changed in peoples perceptions of danger and in their willingness to let their own kids take risks. (It isn't easy, I find it very difficult to let my 5 year old head off on her scooter more than 20 foot away from me. Haven't even got to the stage of letting her off on her own)

RandomName2

conorh91 wrote: »

When you cannot turn to reason, turn sarcastically instead to straw men.

Sarcastic. Sure. Straw man. What straw man? That the idea of citizen action, public shaming and the ideal model of citizenship have certain connotations?

conorh91 wrote: »

Nobody suggested anything racist; nobody suggested that totalitarianism is a solution.

Who said anything racist? But totalitarianism is indeed the obvious solution to the conundrum that you describe.

conorh91 wrote: »

This is an issue of public health: child public health, in particular. One in Four children in this country are too fat for their age.

It seems you are indicating a crisis where there is not one. Too fat does not equal obese. What percentage of these 25% are obese? It means that 25% are above an ideal weight. Presumably there are some (albeit less) who are below an ideal weight. Conflating an issue into a crisis for the purpose of a moralistic crusade? Hm.

conorh91 wrote: »

The responsibility for this health crisis lies with parents.
The solution to this health crisis is better parenting.

There is nothing racist or totalitarian about that. It is inexcusable for parents to expose their children to serious health problems and diminished quality of life through obesity.

And here is the inherent contradiction in your jeremiad. You on one hand say that the responsibility is that of parents, but you simultaneously say that it belongs to the public. Hell, why else would you otherwise attempt to expose such parents?

Bring them into a public place and cut off their hair.

Why "racist"? Now there's a straw man. Racism was always second to the proletarian nation among fascist groups.

Qualitymark

DJD wrote: »

Dunno if I agree with this. Cycle lanes weren't there when we were kids, cycling on the footpath was also a no-no back then too. We shared the roads with all other traffic. I think something has changed in peoples perceptions of danger and in their willingness to let their own kids take risks. (It isn't easy, I find it very difficult to let my 5 year old head off on her scooter more than 20 foot away from me. Haven't even got to the stage of letting her off on her own)

Driving has changed, though. People drive faster, and more people can afford to drive, many drivers are stressed, some are stupid - look at the use of indicators; and some are hostile to anyone on a bike, adult or child.
When we were kids (me, certainly), most drivers were either professionals or a certain age. Someone having a car at the age of 21 or even 17 was almost unknown.

strelok

Qualitymark wrote: »

Driving has changed, though. People drive faster, and more people can afford to drive, many drivers are stressed, some are stupid - look at the use of indicators; and some are hostile to anyone on a bike, adult or child.
When we were kids (me, certainly), most drivers were either professionals or a certain age. Someone having a car at the age of 21 or even 17 was almost unknown.

was born in 83 and i remember quite clearly up until the 90's at some point, i was able to play football, hockey or even just rollerskate around the main road of my little village/town at any hour of the day as there was just so little traffic on the road. they had to install traffic lights in the town shortly after the new millenium, the traffic just exploded in no time at all

Qualitymark

strelok wrote: »

was born in 83 and i remember quite clearly up until the 90's at some point, i was able to play football, hockey or even just rollerskate around the main road of my little village/town at any hour of the day as there was just so little traffic on the road. they had to install traffic lights in the town shortly after the new millenium, the traffic just exploded in no time at all

And it's lunacy. We're coming rapidly to the end of the world's oil reserves

http://www.worldometers.info

and we're using a fuel that's estimated to run out in under 40 years to drag us around in one-person vehicles for short journeys. Insanity! Without oil, there'll be no plastic, no electrical wiring (unless we go back to covering the cables with cloth), no computers, no phones, no cars…

But getting back to fat kids - we're bringing up a generation of passive people who sit on couches playing computer games. What do we expect.

DJD

strelok wrote:

was born in 83 and i remember quite clearly up until the 90's at some point, i was able to play football, hockey or even just rollerskate around the main road of my little village/town at any hour of the day as there was just so little traffic on the road. they had to install traffic lights in the town shortly after the new millenium, the traffic just exploded in no time at all

Qualitymark wrote:

Driving has changed, though. People drive faster, and more people can afford to drive, many drivers are stressed, some are stupid - look at the use of indicators; and some are hostile to anyone on a bike, adult or child. When we were kids (me, certainly), most drivers were either professionals or a certain age. Someone having a car at the age of 21 or even 17 was almost unknown.

Agree with both points here, but...
Just on my own experience of cycling to school in the late 80s early 90s, in a school of ~1000 kids. During that time I remember an increase in traffic too. At that point maybe 50% of the school cycled. Very few would have got lifts in. Sometime after I left they put in cycle lanes along the road towards the school and yet about 10 years ago, so few kids cycled, they closed the bike shed permanently and put in a one way system in the car park to cope with all the parents dropping kids off.

Tar.Aldarion

Most people are overweight these days with the trend getting worse and worse, this shifts perception of what a healthy weight is. Most people that think their children are not overweight, they actually are (study I saw said 95% of parents) http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/chi.2014.0104
78% of people thought their obese child wasn't overweight. If everybody is overweight, you think everybody is normal, it's just natural. People have started bringing their children to doctors saying they won't eat and they are wasting away, just because they are not overweight.


It's all pretty much diet, about 5% of people I know eat healthily, majority don't exercise either but the diet is the main thing for weight.
You can't out train your diet.

"childhood overweight and obesity have been shown to predict adult weight status and the health problems associated with excess weight in adulthood."

Fukuyama

Qualitymark wrote: »

But getting back to fat kids - we're bringing up a generation of passive people who sit on couches playing computer games. What do we expect.

That's quite dismissive of kids today.

There's no school at the minute and my area (Dublin estate) is overrun with kids playing football and hanging around. Plenty of em on bikes too.

I think people remember their childhood with rose tinted glasses as though they were some kind of olympian, never sitting still.

I was a kind in the 90's, early 2000s. And a teenager in the late 2000s. I did a lot of exercise like football and cycling. I remember matches that literally went on for 8 or 9 hours. And on slow days just heads and vollies to keep busy.

However, there were plenty of times we just sat around playing Xbox, going the chipper or lying on the grass in a park.

I'm not knocking your point entirely. Kids are growing up with Facebook, Netflix and YouTube that offer a never ending stream of entertainment that kids of even 7/8 years ago wouldn't have had. So responsibility lies with the parents to get them active just as much as it lies with the parents to teach them about healthy food. One of the best ways is to lead by example but upon surveying the average Irish person in their 30s/40s it's painfully obvious that they're as guilty as their kids.

QuinDixie

fatties are increasing in numbers due to the huge drop in food prices in the last 2 decades, the explosion of tv channels and computer games and failure of government to put a extra tax on sugar and fast food.
Parents should also take some of the blame, not preparing healthy meals is pure laziness.

Fukuyama

strelok wrote: »

was born in 83 and i remember quite clearly up until the 90's at some point, i was able to play football, hockey or even just rollerskate around the main road of my little village/town at any hour of the day as there was just so little traffic on the road. they had to install traffic lights in the town shortly after the new millenium, the traffic just exploded in no time at all

Most definitely. Recently came across a picture of my road taken in the mid-90s. A few cars parked around sure but nothing like today. Everyone has a driveway and more often than not it has space to hold 2 cars. Some houses around here even have 3/4 cars.

Ireland's road network has improved considerably. Anyone who thinks playing football is as easy as throwing two jumpers on the ground is having a laugh. The young lads on my road can barely keep a match going with all the cars driving past. I can understand if they get frustrated and just opt for FIFA multiplayer instead.

I'd like to say that it'd be enough to just create more playable green areas but sadly, they just get overrun with junkies, skangers, broken glass and knacker drinking.

Maybe we need more organized sports and extra cirricular activities like American Highschool where NOT participating looks bad on college applications.

Wibbs

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

If everybody is overweight, you think everybody is normal, it's just natural.

I've definitely noticed that trend alright. What we perceive as "fat" is a lot larger than it was 20, 30, 40 years ago. The "fat bloke" in my year at school was a good bit away from fat by today's standards and he was the Fat Kid(™). The only one. The other thing I noticed down the years is "middle aged spread" seems to be hitting people earlier than it did. I don't mean obesity as such, just more men and women thickening up in the gut fifteen, twenty years before they should kinda thing*. More car use, more sedentary careers?

On the food front, yes we went overboard on the "fat is bad" while adding more sugar, but thinking back to my childhood in the 70's we damn near ran on sugar and now banned chemicals.:D However one thing was different, about the only carbs we got in "proper meals" were spuds and bread and portions were smaller. There were no macdonalds and few enough takeaways and they generally weren't regular visits. We saw little enough pasta and the like, "Chinese"(takeaway shíte) food was very rare too. Meat and two veg were the staples. No soya or any of that shíte to be seen.





*I read an interesting study into the stats on women's sizes by age and country(European). Basically it found that at 50 the size of an average say Italian or Spanish woman was the same size as the average British or Irish woman at 50, but at 20, 25, 30 the Latins were most certainly less fat. Then again currently the fattest children in the EU are Spanish.

316

The internet has a lot to answer for this.

strelok

Wibbs wrote: »

On the food front, yes we went overboard on the "fat is bad" while adding more sugar, but thinking back to my childhood in the 70's we damn near ran on sugar and now banned chemicals.:D However one thing was different, about the only carbs we got in "proper meals" were spuds and bread and portions were smaller. There were no macdonalds and few enough takeaways and they generally weren't regular visits. We saw little enough pasta and the like, "Chinese"(takeaway shíte) food was very rare too. Meat and two veg were the staples. No soya or any of that shíte to be seen.




.

remember those little jelly wrestler figures you used to be able to get? full of e numbers. e numbers made everything better

mikom

My kid is better than yours.

Half this thread.

Qualitymark

I don't know that it's true that we've discarded fat. Look at fast food. I was on a train the other day and opposite me was sitting a handsome man buried inside the mountain of fat that was his obese figure and head. He'd brought a snack onto the train - some kind of fried chicken pieces and chips, and a milkshake.
But mainly I'd blame the fact that we use the fast-disappearing supplies of fossil fuel to haul our immense bottoms from couch to another.

mariaalice

mikom wrote: »

My kid is better than yours.

Half this thread.

It one of the reason for having children and its a sort of madness that take over otherwise sensible people, it starts with ..my children wont be getting sweets except five chocolate buttons every forth Friday, plus they will be given books, all media will be strictly rationed they will study and do well academically and so on followed by the opportunity to judge other parents...she is getting them dinner out of the chipper gasp.. we never give our children chips ( its usually she and never he when give out but its always 'we' when talking about how well your dong as a parent )

Cold War Kid

Fukuyama wrote: »

That's quite dismissive of kids today.

There's no school at the minute and my area (Dublin estate) is overrun with kids playing football and hanging around. Plenty of em on bikes too.

I think people remember their childhood with rose tinted glasses as though they were some kind of olympian, never sitting still.

I was a kind in the 90's, early 2000s. And a teenager in the late 2000s. I did a lot of exercise like football and cycling. I remember matches that literally went on for 8 or 9 hours. And on slow days just heads and vollies to keep busy.

And that's only a few years ago - you can be sure people would have been saying you and your peers, when you were teens, never bothered going out playing, and were spoilt, and just sat on the couch all day, etc.

It's been said about all generations since TV became the standard in every home and video-games became available, so that's about 40 years of it being said.

Young kids always playing outside where I live too.

I don't think the physical activity thing is a factor - well not much of one anyway; there is probably a bit of a decrease in it - there's bound to be. But the weight gain is virtually all down to food I think. There's no question about it that it's the norm to eat far, far more today than 20 years ago.

Qualitymark

It would be interesting to have a poll: a) what weight are you; b) what weight are your kids. When I see fat kids they're usually with fat parents. Not always, but usually.

syklops

fleet_admiral wrote: »

Oh I know that, he eats very well but we allow him one treat a week, he is a fecker for baby stem broccoli and pink lady apples. he is just coming up on 3 so I intend to get him involved with the cooking very soon

Hang on a second, he is coming up on 3 and gets a McDonalds once a week? :eek:

strelok

nothing wrong with that, provided the rest of his weeks eating is reasoanble

mcdonalds isn't bad food by and large, it's just quite calorific so it's not something the average person wants to be eating every day or even several times a week

beks101

I think historically and traditionally, good parenting is about keeping your child well fed, fit and healthy and anything weight-wise that deviated from the norm would set off parental alarm bells.

These days, the default is to be overweight. Definitely for Irish adults and it's increasingly common among kids too. It varies - dare I say it - among different classes and backgrounds, but take a stroll through any city or town centre and your average person is a good few notches above a healthy BMI. Factor in age and slowing metabolisms and middle aged spread and it just gets worse over time.

Working off that sort of a template, it's no wonder parents don't worry if their kids are looking a bit more "cherubic" than is probably healthy. It looks normal to them: it looks healthy. It's "puppy fat", they'll "grow out of it".

I went through various 'chubby' stages myself as a teenager, nothing major, a few pounds here and there, but nothing that ever was met with any negative or critical comments. Losing weight though, was always met with criticism.

Even now. BMI-wise I'm smack in the middle of things, 5 feet nothing with a healthy dose of curves, but frequently in conversation it's "you wouldn't get it though you're skinny". "Eat a sandwich!" "I bet you're one of those people who never eats." This is comical. I'm nowhere near underweight. But in certain circles, I'm the slimmest. Whereas at the same weight in other countries, I'd be the most 'cherubic."

It's strange. And unsettling. I know the BMI thing is the long contested debate, but when it gets to the stage that people's perceptions of what is healthy and what is not has been flung so far out the window by what they see around them, I think these yardsticks are essential. If you have a BMI over 28 or 29, unless you're some sort of professional rugby player, no two ways about it - you are overweight.

syklops

strelok wrote: »

nothing wrong with that, provided the rest of his weeks eating is reasoanble

mcdonalds isn't bad food by and large, it's just quite calorific so it's not something the average person wants to be eating every day or even several times a week

He's "coming up on 3" and is "quite active". When I read the first post I assumed he was 8 and was playing football 3-4 times a week. How active can a three year old be? Terrorising you not withstanding.

Qualitymark

lightspeed wrote: »

A sugar tax does not work. They tried a soda tax in Denmark and reversed it after Danish business's suffered as people went to bordering countries such as Germany.

The tax was in place for over 70 years, though

Penny Tration

strelok wrote: »

nothing wrong with that, provided the rest of his weeks eating is reasoanble

mcdonalds isn't bad food by and large, it's just quite calorific so it's not something the average person wants to be eating every day or even several times a week

Having worked in a fast food place, I wouldn't worry about the calorie content of a weekly McDonalds, but I'd definitely worry about the high salt content.

Qualitymark

Jenny Thalia wrote: »

Having worked in a fast food place, I wouldn't worry about the calorie content of a weekly McDonalds, but I'd definitely worry about the high salt content.

And the fact that it's served with a "soda" (Coke or whatever) or milkshake. I like the occasional one - maybe every nine or ten months - but as a diet they're not great.

strelok

Jenny Thalia wrote: »

Having worked in a fast food place, I wouldn't worry about the calorie content of a weekly McDonalds, but I'd definitely worry about the high salt content.

sodium isn't actually that dangerous at all unless you already have hypertension, the whole salt scare thing of the last few decades was as baseless as the fat fearmongering.

i'd still be wary of it with children alright but i can't think of a good reason, im pretty sure it's just a hangover of being beaten over the head with 'salt is dangerous' all my life