Do some parents NEED telling about what they feed their children?

[34064 Fighter Command]

You get told subliminally what to eat by the Supermarkets every time Oliver, Hammond, or Delia bloody pop's up on the adverts, so where's the difference?

The trouble with personal responsibility is that it only works for situations where the risks and consequences are fully understod by the person making the decision, in the case of children they're not, and some guidance is required, or they'd all be picking up dog poo from the pavement and wolfing that down.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Yes, they do.

Sadly, a lot of children are just given money to buy whatever they wish. They must have a great deal of disposable income. Close of school in London signals a visit to the chippy and then discarding their waste on the floor.

 

[Tricky Dicky]

I think lack of education, laziness and money come into play. Some friends of ours have a 3 year old daughter and the only food she eats in beige coloured - so basically chips,waffles,cheap chicken nugget's, crisps and bread - and ive never seen her eat more than 2 bites - she basically gets her energy from the 3/4 bags of sweets she has during the day.

When i asked if she ever eats any veg or fruit they say she doesnt like it - now there is no way you can tell me a little kid doesnt like starwberries/banannas with a dollop of custard for example. Even veg can be tarted up for kids - for these friends personally i think its beacuse they dont have much money so fresh food is way down the list - but also they just dont have a clue how to cook anything other than ready made meals.

Too true. If people knew how to, and could be bothered, fresh food is cheaper than the packaged preprocessed stuff. It's obvious ... aside from the fact that the packaged stuff is the cheapest, lowest quality available, every time you add any extra process, packing or middleman to anything you increase the cost of it.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

So amongst all the other influences, I blame the introduction of a National Curriculum which replaced proper Cookery with half-arsed Food Technology.
.

It's still called Food Tech, now. This term, my 11 year old boy, has made [and brought home] pineapple upside-down cake, pizza, cheese and vegetable pasta bake, and flapjacks.

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

Who tells you what you can and can't eat ? If people are telling you anything, it is to educate you on what you "ought" to be eating. At the end of the day it's your choice - but you need the information to make an informed choice.

It's a fine line I admit but what I suppose I object to the most is the arbitarily imposed targets. E.g. Five a day, alcohol limits etc The stupidest thing was the constantly changing guidelines on women drinking during pregnancy. They know it is safe for women to drink a little in the latter stages, but because some people would drink to excess they decided that the advice should be not to drink at all

Why can't it just be simple messages like Greens are good for you, Don't booze too much.

That would surely achieve "education" without ramming it down peoples throats and giving them more responsibility for deciding what is good for them.

 

[Tricky Dicky]

It's a fine line I admit but what I suppose I object to the most is the arbitarily imposed targets. E.g. Five a day, alcohol limits etc The stupidest thing was the constantly changing guidelines on women drinking during pregnancy. They know it is safe for women to drink a little in the latter stages, but because some people would drink to excess they decided that the advice should be not to drink at all

Why can't it just be simple messages like Greens are good for you, Don't booze too much.

That would surely achieve "education" without ramming it down peoples throats and giving them more responsibility for deciding what is good for them.

I'm not sure that they are arbitary targets, many scientific people spends years on research to come up with these things. Surely, information is never a bad thing, would you not want to know that five portions a day are better than 1, but 10 is unnecessary - then you can make your choice. The problem is we have too little information.

There are added complications though of the "right" information. You get all the TV ads giving pseudo scientific info, e.g. the pro-biotic yoghurt ones, which are scientifically non-sensical. You also get vested interests, e.g. super-foods - there is no such thing as a super food, it will be one of the impoprter jumpiong a bandwagon, which is what happened to, say, Cranberry juice - no scientific evidence for it whatsoever, but some good PR but a wholesaler.

Can't comment on the pregnacy drinking issue, but these things are bound to change as more research is done and data gathered.

 

[sydney]

yes,yes they do.........some people feed their kids utter tripe,mackers for breakfast,5-er for lunch probably mackers again if unsupervised , and something quick for tea like cheese on toast or or baked beans .....this coupled with a lack of excersise,will consign those kids to a life of obesity and all the associated problems,so yes they do.

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

I'm not sure that they are arbitary targets, many scientific people spends years on research to come up with these things. Surely, information is never a bad thing, would you not want to know that five portions a day are better than 1, but 10 is unnecessary - then you can make your choice. The problem is we have too little information.

There are added complications though of the "right" information. You get all the TV ads giving pseudo scientific info, e.g. the pro-biotic yoghurt ones, which are scientifically non-sensical. You also get vested interests, e.g. super-foods - there is no such thing as a super food, it will be one of the impoprter jumpiong a bandwagon, which is what happened to, say, Cranberry juice - no scientific evidence for it whatsoever, but some good PR but a wholesaler.

Can't comment on the pregnacy drinking issue, but these things are bound to change as more research is done and data gathered.

I heard that apparently the actual answer was that 7 portions a day was best, but that the Government advisers thought that the public wouldn't buy that so set it at 5.

The difference between company and Government adverts is that the Government is inherently in a bigger position of trust so the population expects to believe that what they say is true without question.

And in answer to your question; No, I don't need to be told that having 5 portions is better than having 1. Anyone with an IQ above 55 could work that out.

 

[Lady Bracknell]

It's still called Food Tech, now. This term, my 11 year old boy, has made [and brought home] pineapple upside-down cake, pizza, cheese and vegetable pasta bake, and flapjacks.

Delicious! This happy state of affair almost certainly exists because you have an eleven year old boy. At the very stage it'd be useful to continue the cooking habit (Year 10 onwards) Food Tech becomes some sort of GCSE project that separates the cooking from the making of something realistic that can be brought home for yer teas.

To return to the issue of what children do and don't eat. I was a fascist in this respect too. Nobody was allowed to eat three or four bags of sweets a day. Let alone after picking through an all-beige selection of lard and reconstituted unmentionable bits that might once have been attached to an animal.

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

'Home Economics' round our way.

An inedible Shepherd's Pie (as it was called - it was really a Cottage Pie) was the sum total of my cooking experience within D8 at Dorothy Stringer.

I once got in TROUBLE for writing a recipe about cooking Miss Pickering. It involved finely dicing and all sorts. PICKLED Pickering it was called.

Me and Mark Elphick used to draw sperms with faces all over her cookbooks.

Miss Dixon also commented on the beautifully presented dish I had made. Yes the FAT cow was being sarcastic.

Maybe it was shit but your no doubt STILL fat and ugly.

 

[The Large One]

I once got in TROUBLE for writing a recipe about cooking Miss Pickering. It involved finely dicing and all sorts. PICKLED Pickering it was called.

Me and Mark Elphick used to draw sperms with faces all over her cookbooks.

Miss Dixon also commented on the beautifully presented dish I had made. Yes the FAT cow was being sarcastic.

Maybe it was shit but your no doubt STILL fat and ugly.

I'm impressed you remembered their names.

I only recall one looking like Mr Logic form Viz, and the other looked like a treacle sponge. But it was 28 years ago.

 

[Lady Bracknell]

My friend Tessa and I got kept in for detention after the illustrated "Alternative Dishes of the Day" menu was traced back to us. I suspect the "Toasted Turd de Chien" was what gave it away.

 

[Tricky Dicky]

IAnd in answer to your question; No, I don't need to be told that having 5 portions is better than having 1. Anyone with an IQ above 55 could work that out.

It would be nice if that were true, but I'm not sure it is. I remember being quite staggered a few years back, when my Brother-in-law, who is not stupid, said he didn't realise that chocolate wasn't good for him. I thought he was taking the p*ss for a minute.

I still maintain that having knowledge is never a bad thing, if you then choose to ignore it, it makes people look more stupid or just lazy.

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

I'm impressed you remembered their names.

I only recall one looking like Mr Logic form Viz, and the other looked like a treacle sponge. But it was 28 years ago.

Yeah the Mr Logic lookalike was Miss Pickering. She used to wear the 1960s POINTY BRAS. Cant forget the person to sent me to Mr Catchpole.

Oh and the treacle sponge was Dixon definitely. Fat, squat and definitely a dyke.

Cant remember which one drove the morris minor tho

 

[BLOCK F]

I'm rather evangelical about junk/crap food and there's no doubt that it helps no end if parents can cook halfway decent nosh. That way they know it is as cheap as dishing up potato waffles with chips and a side order of chips.

So amongst all the other influences, I blame the introduction of a National Curriculum which replaced proper Cookery with half-arsed Food Technology. Round our house, this latter subject meaning, in practice, that A Boy cooked about 200 chicken kormas over a period of two years. None of them ever came home for tea because they had to hang around being marked for presentation and nutritional quality and this could involve curries being in school fridges for godaloneknows how long. As it happens, the Boy In Question grew up to be a damned fine cook but school had little to do with this.

I despair of this new Government. When they say "give people responsibility", they actually mean "they can f*** off and die of lard poisoning for all we care".

Agree with you re Food Tech,but I think your last para is untrue.It is not in the interests of any Government of any political persuasion to have an unhealthy,sicknote society.

 

[BigGully]

I find it totally tiresome how people feel they have a duty to impose their own flawed views on nutrition to the perceived poorly educated and lazy 'lower classes'.

Whilst acknowledging the right the middle classes to choose which diet they wish.

We all know that todays cutting edge science is tomorrows inaccurate research.

So yes offer education if you want, but lay off the patronising manner at which you really want educate the fat Mum with tatoos that waddles down processed food isle at Asda with her 5 unruly kids, after all her family genes mean she is likely to live a longer and healthier life than you anyway.

Offer the information

 

[skipper734]

Actually a lot of us pensioners, (well almost) have eaten a lot of Lard. Dripping sandwiches, mmm.

 

[BLOCK F]

I find it totally tiresome how people feel they have a duty to impose their own flawed views on nutrition to the perceived poorly educated and lazy 'lower classes'.

Whilst acknowledging the right the middle classes to choose which diet they wish.

We all know that todays cutting edge science is tomorrows inaccurate research.

So yes offer education if you want, but lay off the patronising manner at which you really want educate the fat Mum with tatoos that waddles down processed food isle at Asda with her 5 unruly kids, after all her family genes mean she is likely to live a longer and healthier life than you anyway.

Offer the information

Don't follow you re genes,longer,healthier life....can you elaborate?

 

[hans kraay fan club]

To return to the issue of what children do and don't eat. I was a fascist in this respect too. Nobody was allowed to eat three or four bags of sweets a day. Let alone after picking through an all-beige selection of lard and reconstituted unmentionable bits that might once have been attached to an animal.

Neither sweets or animal bits are much of an issue in our house. The kids [and my wife] are vegetarian, and they are so brainwashed regarding NOT gorging on sweet stuff, that they have not yet finished their EASTER EGGS. [this is the honest truth ]

 

[Simster]

Neither sweets or animal bits are much of an issue in our house. The kids [and my wife] are vegetarian, and they are so brainwashed regarding NOT gorging on sweet stuff, that they have not yet finished their EASTER EGGS. [this is the honest truth ]

Ours are a bit like this. They get sweets of course, but not huge quantities. Our kids (8 & 6) are equally as happy being told they're going to the market with mum and will be allowed to choose what fruit we're buying for the week.

I'm really not sure why to be honest. I don't notice an awful lot of advertising of sweets these days on TV so I tend to believe it's all about the parents really.