It appears that more and more experts and government officials want to force certain dietary restrictions on the populations - usually the poor - of western countries. Cassandra Wilkinson in The Australian writes
But this didn't stop the House Standing Committee on Health and
Ageing from concluding that government should act to end fatness noting
it, "has the tools: legislation, policy and regulation".
The
committee compared losing weight to rolling a ball up a large hill and
suggested that while government couldn't change the size of the ball it
could "reduce the environmental gradient".
To see what is
contemplated to slim the fatness slope we can look to the Obesity Policy
Coalition, a group of diabetes and heart health charities, which wants
to regulate food composition (changing recipes to remove, for example,
trans fats); pricing and availability and marketing (including food
advertising, promotion and labelling) as well as urban planning and
transport.
This affects everything from changing the recipe for
Tim Tams to deliberating removing parking spaces from new housing
developments to make you walk to the bus stop.
More extreme
"solutions" proposed by other fat-ivists include making "fat towns"
compete in weight loss contests tied to government funding for sporting
and recreational facilities.
And this
Rachel Davey, the Director of the taxpayer-funded Centre for Research
& Action in Public Health at the University of Canberra bas just
written a piece in the taxpayer funded The Conversation arguing not just
for the usual policy clap trap of banning advertising and introducing
fat taxes, but has actually gone so far as to advocate food rationing.
That’s right, food rationing.
But its funny when these schemes fall flat on their face like this pet project of Michelle Obama:
New rules on school meals inspired by
Michelle Obama were intended to wipe out hunger and malnutrition among
American students - but some are complaining they have had the opposite
effect.
High schools
are now forbidden from giving pupils more than 850 calories for their
lunch - even if they are fast-growing teenagers or even student
athletes.
One
enterprising group of adolescents channelled their anger at the policy
into a parody YouTube video promoting their cause entitled 'We Are
Hungry'.
So they think a bunch of growing teenage boys are going to be filled on a few pieces of lettuce and rice?
Wilson also describes more government idiocy:
Less than two years ago, Denmark introduced the world's first fat tax.
Foods
containing more than 2.3 per cent saturated fat like sausages, butter
and syrup waffles (which I personally would risk a small infarction for)
were subject to the surcharge. The results? Danes crossed the border to
buy delicious treats in Germany, and Denmark lost jobs instead of
kilos. The tax was rescinded and a decision taken not to proceed with a
sugar tax.
No comments:
Post a Comment