I thought it was April 1st for a minute ...

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
And then kill Moo the Dairylea Cow !!
 
and the Milka cow, but only because big purple cows on skiis give me nightmares
 
I used to really like the Liquorice allsorts ads because they were tongue in cheek, but I suppose some might think of them as a bit creepy- people having said sweets & then turning into huge Bertie Bassett; like something of 'invasion of the bodysnatchers'
 
Hi
we all agree that Mcd's is not the best food in the world. and most people are aware of that is is trying to avoid such places.
But, but, how many of us know how energetic is bowl of cornflakes with milk? how many kcal's is in slice of cheese? Do you know that two slices of toast bread with butter and slice of ham and cheese and say leaf of lettuce is all our kids should have for breakfast?
What I want to say is that children's characters are used to promote food that is not bad at all - in reasonable amount. You can tell your children why you are not eating in McD's but how to tell them that they shouldn't have fourth boul of cereals? Frosties make children strong and healhy. Don't you want me to be healthy and strong, Dad?
What I am sayiung is that sum of good healthy food turns around and becomes another bag of junk when eaten excessively and it is difficult for our children to understand that.
Hope I didn't make it to confusing...
 
Anyone who considers Maccy D's a treat is seriously deluded. Usually full of chavs and utter slop for sale.

The unspeakable buying the uneatable.

Mind you, comes in handy if there's no public loos around. Just nip in and use theirs. This is known as a McDump. But, if you are challenged by a member of staff you simply say that you are using the facilities before you go and buy food. This becomes a McDump with lies.

On a more serious note, I think that TV series where they tried loads of families on wartime rations and ingredients was most enlightening. Processed food has a lot to answer for, as do E numbers etc. Fast food is probably close to the top of the "bad" list.

I do wonder about things like Indian and Chinese food though. If you believe the stuff in my wife's weightwatchers book you are likely to die within hours of eating them, probably from a heart attack. My regular Indian meal comes out at something like 110 points. I wasn't too fussed about that until the wife told me I should be on 25 points a day. Hmmmmm.
 
My wife worked at a school kitchen and complained about the food. Problem was that the winning contractor who won the contract did so on price. Consequently, food purchases was the cheapest they could get. Prior to the Jamie Oliver thing, meals could have been better had the caterer bought quality food not the cheapest. Beefburgers are ok if you buy quality as are sausages, fishfingers etc. Jamie Oliver introduced his selection and the kids rebelled. School meal numbers reduced dramatically which meant the kids now brought in their own lunch box which consisted of crisps, chocalate bar and bread and jam because that what the kids wanted. So the school meals improvement IMO did little or nothing for obesity.

Obesity. The food eaten now is vastly superior to the food I was given when I was young. School meals consisted of chips or roast potatoes both cooked in fat. Afters was semolina, rice pudding, tapioca or something with custard, none of which was very good for you. The big big difference, I walked or rode my bike everyday to and from school, 6 miles each way. We did cross country running again 6 miles or so, I played football with my friend at the local park or played hide and seek or, yes I admit it, knock out ginger all of which involved running. Now, the parents take their kids to school, the kids after school sit in front of computer screens and do little or no ecercise. That IMO is the culprit for obesity not the food they eat. When I was at school, there were always the fat boys and girls as there was tall boys and girls. Usually, the fat children did not join in the games, the seem to spend all their time learning. Probably why all the fat kids seem to be in the top class:D :D
 
I'd go along with the banning of the cartoon characters IF it also outlawed the Ronald f'in McDnoald clown and the aethetic travesty that is the gawdy "Golden Acrhes" logo that offends the eye in so many places in GB.

(phew, needed to get that one off my chest:devil: :D )
 
What about the parents being responsible and saying ' No Johnny , you can't have that ! ' Blaming the fat kids of this country on Moo the Dairylea Cow is just laughable.

Instead they take the easy option , give the kids what they want and they will shut up.

When i was young , if i hassled my parents that i wanted something , i either got a clip round the ear ( can't do that now , or you might get sued ) or they strengthened their resolve to not let me have it.

I learned pretty quickly that keeping on about something is a sure way to go without it.
Actually this isn't about your parents. It's about irresponsible marketing.

These things are killing our young - slowly but surely. And yet we allow them to be marketed on TV with big attractive cartoon characters that even adults will laugh at.

Once upon a time tobacco was marketed and encouraged with doctors promoting it. We found out what tobacco does to us, and we banned that kind of advertising.

I think things like Dairylea should have big health warnings on the side like cigarettes do now. "Warning: eating more than one piece of this per week is likely to lead to premature death".
 
I never said it was about my parents :confused:

I was using my experience as an example. We know that this sort of food is unhealthy and will eventually kill you , so why do people give it to their kids ? to shut them up and give them an easy life , that's why.

They know that fags will kill their kids, so they don't give them to the children.

I certainly don't buy things that i know will kill me even though they are advertised , it all comes down to the parent taking the easy way out. Just because things are on TV / Billboards / Radio etc , doesn't mean you HAVE to run out and buy them.

Sorry to disagree.
 
I didn't mean *your* parents per se, I meant "parents" in general. People give the food to their children because they don't *get* just how bad it is for them.

Your statement "we know that this sort of food is unhealthy" may be true on an intellectual level, but most people don't actually *get* that. "Oh it's unhealthy but it won't hurt just once". "Oh it's a treat for them on the weekend once a week". "Oh it's unhealthy but it's not every day their Granny comes over from Scunthorpe to buy them some sweets".

Does this sound familiar? It will if you're an ex-smoker. "Oh I know it's bad for me, but just one more with coffee won't hurt". "Oh I know it's killing me, but I always want one after I'm drunk". "Oh I know it's destroying my lungs, but everyone else is having one".

Crazy huh? And yet the industries are making a fortune out of it. The tobacco industry makes a fortune out of the people who just don't get it will actually kill them and they will actually die. The food industry makes a fortune out of the people who just don't get that they need to eat healthily or they will expire prematurely, and they will actually die.

I really think that the *biggest* problem is the marketing. People subconsciously believe that something associated with a big laughing cow on television simply *can't* be that bad - if it were that bad it wouldn't be allowed! Right? Except that it is. These things are marketed and therefore successful because people just don't believe they could possibly be as bad as they are.

Stop the marketing. Save the children.
 
But, if you want to correlate these cartoon characters with obesity, surely the starting point is some data that shows these characters appeared at the same time as obesity levels started to rise. Were that data presented then I would be all for banning the characters since they were shown to be a cause of the problem.

What I cannot reconcile, however, is that many of these characters were busily representing their respective products right through the 70's when I was a kid and there were no fat kids around then. If there were really a link between the two then we would all have been fat in the 70's.

I think what the consumer groups are saying - but dare not (sadly) - is that: These characters have always encouraged unhealthy eating but this was previously kept in check by parenting. Now that parenting is no longer actively practiced in Britain amongst large sections of society, it is now the responsibility of cartoon characters on TV to shape and form the dietary and social parameters of children. Therefore, these characters should promote healthy eating.

On that basis - and mainly because I have given up on Britain as a dump full of idiots - I agree. In fact, it should be taken to its logical conclusion with Tony the Tiger (my personal favourite) giving post-school lectures not only on healthy eating but also on drug use and and gun control.

"Now kids, don't use Cocaine and Smack, the after-affects are just not GREEEAAT!"
 
just imagine no cartoon characters in adverts - wouldn't that mean that kids are going to eat what we think is good not that what adverts are saying. Would that mean kids stop moaning after something what they have seen on telly?
some time ago my son was crying to buy him some canned pasta with tomato sauce just because there was his favourite character on a can - scooby doo.
I knew it's going to be awful but I let him found himself-now hi knows it's rubbish and not everything that glows is gold
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom