worried about sugar...

[Yamin151]

I don't advocate portraying everyone as slim and beautiful. But a healthy weight and all kinds of shapes and looks, beautiful and not so beautiful. Short, tall, shapely and not shapely. Just not overweight.

Mind you, interesting idea about having a hugely obese person advertise mcdonalds! Not sure mcdonalds would go for it, and of course to be employed because you are overweight suggests a kind of freak show about it.

[Proud_Dad]

I don't advocate portraying everyone as slim and beautiful. But a healthy weight and all kinds of shapes and looks, beautiful and not so beautiful. Short, tall, shapely and not shapely. Just not overweight.

Mind you, interesting idea about having a hugely obese person advertise mcdonalds! Not sure mcdonalds would go for it, and of course to be employed because you are overweight suggests a kind of freak show about it.

Yes I agree that in general it would be best to portray normal looking people with a healthy weight.

Problem is advertisers either want their product to appear ultra glamorous and sophisticated or they want it to appeal to 'everyday' folk, so 'normal' healthy looking people sometimes get left out...

[doodles]

I think we need to be a lot less judgemental about people's shape. I know that for the majority of overweight people the food consumption / exercise balance is out of kilter and that is why they are unhealthily overweight. However, not every overweight person gorges themselves on the sofa every day sometimes there are other reasons.

Perhaps we need to redefine "healthy" so that those who don't fit the 5'10 tanned, toned and long blonde hair criteria are still acceptable

In the meantime reducing sugar is a great idea as long as it is not replaced by those vile artificial chemical sweeteners which scare me even more

[Amber]

I shall probably make enemies for saying this, but I think there is too much tolerance of 'fussiness' in children. Small children are naturally very cautious in their tastes and won't naturally go exploring for different and new flavours and textures. As parents it is part of our job to ensure that they will eat a wide range of foods. When my youngest was small I bought a book called 'The Food our Children eat' by Joanna Blythman. In it she says that a child needs to taste a food 7 times before they will take to it. I am constantly amazed by parents who are held to ransom but the food preferences of children well beyond toddlerhood. Otherwise sensible parents holding their hands up helplessly to declare that a 9 year old 'won't' eat a whole range of everyday foods. Incredible; and very much a first world problem, as my daughter would say. One friend's child was sent to my house for dinner and I was told she would only eat a particular brand of pasta sauce. I never buy pasta sauce so made my own to look the same colour (red!). Child consumed no fewer than 3 helpings and when I told mother what it contained (about 6 vegetables) she almost fell over.

It is unbelievable to me that there is a market in 'children's foods' - chicken nuggets, special bland pizzas, ready made pasta dishes etc. One of my children would naturally have been rather fussy I feel - I recall and still tease said DC about the conversation which went 'I don't eat green food' (answer - 'yes you do') but I wasn't going to spend my life avoiding tasty curries and stir fries and challenging vegetarian pulse-based foods because my children wouldn't have them. It wasn't always easy but I can honestly say that all 3 of mine now will eat pretty much anything and I can take them to any restaurant anywhere and they will try new stuff. In fact they have driven us to a low-GI, largely vegetarian diet by getting involved in meal planning and cooking. I won't make any claims for stunning beauty or tans on here, but I think we all look pretty healthy and no one is overweight. Like doodles, we don't buy ready meals or processed food, but do use butter and chocolate. I bake lots of cakes. My rule of thumb is that the closest a food is to its natural state the better it is likely to be. Treats are great and allowed, but for me a treat wouldn't involve anything processed.

Agree with diabetes labelling - I feel it is really misleading to lump T1 and T2 together and must be hugely frustrating for T1 diabetics to be made to feel they somehow caused their illness.

Sorry if anyone finds this offensive but while we are challenging taboos I think fussy children are fair game.

[mad?]

I can take them to any restaurant anywhere and they will try new stuff.

Mine do that. Once I was very proud as they ordered a seafood platter at a restaurant whilst on the next table three DC had to order off menu plain spaghetti with a bowl of cheese on the side. Then we got the bill. Karma for having been vile and smug I guess

[Proud_Dad]

It is unbelievable to me that there is a market in 'children's foods' - chicken nuggets, special bland pizzas, ready made pasta dishes etc.

What annoys me is that when going out to eat somewhere, even when the main menu includes decent food, the children's menu is often limited to this sort of stuff. Why can't they just provide smaller/cheaper portions of the adult menu for children?

I recall and still tease said DC about the conversation which went 'I don't eat green food'

Would they eat it in a box? Would they eat it with a fox?

[mad?]

What annoys me is that when going out to eat somewhere, even when the main menu includes decent food, the children's menu is often limited to this sort of stuff. Why can't they just provide smaller/cheaper portions of the adult menu for children?

Quite right Proud Dad. We have just returned from France where this is the norm, just smaller portions, they would weep with disdain if they saw a UK 'childrens' menu'

[Tinkers]

I also despair at the children's menus. We would encourage DD to look at the starter menu to see if anything on there appealed and order that as a main course for her when she was younger. I think a lot of children go through a phase of being picky, but encouraging them to at least try stuff helps. Since I was a picky child but was forced to eat food I really don't like, I've taken a different tack. The foods I hated but were still forced to eat, I still won't eat now and hate with a passion. The foods I hated but it was accepted that maybe as a child I wouldn't like, so not forced to eat, I now eat quite happily. The tack we've tack with DD has been, try it, if you don't like it then fine. As a rsult she has always tried new stuff.

The 'try it seven times and then they like it' doesn't always work though. Due to nut allergies in the family I was advised at the time to keep her off nuts for some years. As a result she doesn't like them much. We tried to make her eat a cashew every day for two weeks a couple of years ago. She understood why and was willing to give it a go. She still doesn't like them though. I think for her though it's a texture thing rather than a taste thing.

One thing she has never liked (just to bring this back on topic ) is fizzy drinks, not even fizzy water.

[doodles]

Like you Amber, butter, cream, chocolate, cheese and sugar all come into this house. They surely have to be better than the manmade alternatives but they are not eaten every day. About 15'ish years ago I had a bit of a daily "thing" about Diet Coke giving it up was incredibly hard and I'm sure it was all the nasties in it. Now I would rather have the occasional can of "fat" Coke.

I'm a huge believer in children getting involved in cooking and knowing where their food comes from. I'm sure a lot of fussiness can be overcome with allowing them to be involved in preparing food. I've just shown ds2 this thread and he reckons we eat well but could cut down on our sugar intake.

Believe me I haven't always been such a real food advocate and in my student days and twenties I consumed more than my fair share of ready meals and takeaways, only cooking at the weekends and for occasions. However an illness and the medication I needed to take made me think a lot. A lot of people argue that cooking from scratch is more expensive, but I'm not so sure I think the cost is probably about equal or less, but I do concede that it is time expensive.

Sorry this is a bit off topic from sugar but I think it is all probably tied in together.

[Tinkers]

Artificial sweeteners and margarine do not enter this house either. I noticed quite early on that DD complained of headache every time she had a drink (got elsewhere not at home) with aspartame in. Since she couldn't read at the time it wasn't because she knew. She never complained of headaches at other times. Personally I just can't stand the taste. I despaired at ten supermarket on one occasion, because I couldn't find tonic (even the non diet stuff) that didn't have artificial sweeteners in. sorry but it just ruins a G&T for me.

DDs food tech teacher always lists margarine as an ingredient rather than butter. When DD listed butter in her costings once, she was ticked off for it. Unfortunately, due to my profession I know how margarine is made, which is why we don't have it. DD learnt to write margarine in her food tech evaluations instead, even though that wasn't what she used.

DD also bakes a lot at home, she can also cook main meals from scratch and has been able to for quite some time. However that has been down to us, rather than food tech. I'd like the sugar tax to go towards education of proper cooking skills in schools.

(PS another bugbear of mine, people who say 'this is natural with no chemicals in it' or similar. If something hasn't got 'chemicals' in, you're basically trying to eat a vacuum. Everything is made of chemicals. )