SLIPPERY SLOPE? NAH WE MUST BE INVENTING THINGS AGAIN.

So let's see a raise of hands from all those who thought we were wearing tinfoil hats when we said that once you give in to one type of government encroachment the rest will follow...one by one.   

Are you willing to also let this one be adopted without putting up a fight? 

Read the article:  

Ontario doctors urge junk food warning labels and taxes

And watch a video:   

 

Scenes from the Nanny State: Marlhaven Lights

It would be hilarious if it wasn't so frightfully close to the truth.

If the video doesn't play ''Scenes from the Nanny State: Marlhaven Lights'', a 2 min 18 sec. short film, please view it right at youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQAvLim7PgI 

 .

NANNY BLOOMBERG

In case you haven't yet heard, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, now wants to ban sugary drinks sold in formats bigger than 16 ounces.  For some comic relief here's an ad in the New York Times depicting Bloomberg for the nanny he is. 

Source:  http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/01/nanny-bloomberg-wears-dress-in-full-page-new-york-times-ad/

News Digest May 17, 2012

Coffee

It’s healthy, it’s healthy not, it’s healthy, it’s healthy not, it’s healthy…according to this umpteenth study on the issue:   

NIHstudy finds that coffee drinkers have lower risk of death

  

---------------------

Efforts by anti-smoking campaigners to reinstate a smoking ban in small cafes and bars failed on Wednesday when judges in The Hague ruled the law does allow exceptions.

In theNetherlands customers can continue to smoke in small bars, judges rule

                                                      --------------------------

It Officially Costs More To Be Overweight Than A Smoker In America

So let’s fix that with yet more government control and taxation!  Hate to tell you we told you so. 

‘Fat tax’ would have to be a whopper to work, study says

                                                      ----------------------------

All plain cigarette packaging as adopted in Australia and under consultation in the UK will accomplish is to make tobacco more affordable since with nothing else to stand out except their name in identical fonts, the only way the tobacco companies would be able to compete with each other is through prices.  Case in point:

BAT launches budget Tobacco brand in Australia row

                                                     ----------------------------

Experts are surprised that the number of asthma sufferers continues to rise while the number of smokers falls.  Perhaps they should start looking elsewhere for the solution to the problem as some researchers have found that being subjected to smoke prevents allergies by making the immune system stronger. 

Number of Asthma Sufferers Sky-Rockets; Doctors are Puzzled

 ---------------------------

It is frequently claimed that consumers of ‘unhealthy’ products place an excessive burden on public services and that this justifies additional taxation.  This is not true according to a report from The Adam Smith Institute: 

The Wages of Sin Taxes: The True Cost of Taxing Alcohol, Tobacco and Other "Vices"

                                                        ---------------------------

‘’ To be sure, obesity is a public health problem that should be addressed with scientific discipline. Instead, as the current campaign illustrates, activists are politicizing obesity -- using it as a vehicle to try to remake the American way of life.’’

Opinion: Obesity forecast is overblown

                                                        ---------------------

Evidence based public health policy?  Yeah right! 

Government-Funded Medical Research Is Hazardous to Your Health

                                                        ----------------------

California food police gone wild: LA County health enforcers conduct door-to-door raw milkconfiscation operations

‘’ In a bombshell revelation of the depth of the food police state that now exists in LA County, California, NaturalNews has learned that the LA County health department has unleashed door-to-door raw milk confiscation teams to threaten and intimidate raw dairy customers into surrendering raw milk products they legally purchased and own.’’

''FREAKINITUS PINOCHIOTUS'' EXPLAINED BY Tom Naughton

Fat Head' writer/director Tom Naughton's speech about how to tell good science from bad science.

Whether one agrees with Tom Naughton's theories on paleolithic dieting or not, this video on epidemiological studies is a must watch both for the accurate information and the entertainment his explanations provide.   

TAKING THE HAPPY OUT OF THE HAPPY MEAL

San Francisco health authorities voted 8 - 3 to take the ‘’happy’’ out of the happy meal by forbidding McDonald’s to offer a toy with any meal that contains more than 600 calories and does not contain at least half a cup of fruit and 3/4 cup of vegetables.

Parents who have/had to raise children with their very own likes and dislikes, finicky tastes and stubborn personalities, know first hand how they have to struggle to get their children to ingest a few calories to supply them with the energy they need. Are San Francisco legislators sending parents the message that kids who totally refuse to eat fruits and vegetables should be punished and sent to the naughty stool with nothing to play just because they will not let their taste buds be dictated by their parents and legislators?

Fact: Some children will not eat what we as parents feel is best for them and we would rather see them eat less healthy than not eat at all.

Fact: It is counterproductive to punish a child because he won’t eat according to his own preferences and penalizing him for it only reinforces his refusal to comply to our dictates.

Fact: We know our children better than the state and if we feel that they won’t stubbornly refuse and pout over eating what the state deems best, we will gladly choose another place than McDonald’s to take them, toy or no toy!

But there are also some children who are the complete opposite. Inveterate gluttons who will be willing to sacrifice the toy just as long as they get to eat what they want and…more of it. So if the toy incentive to convince them to eat a reasonable size meal is no longer there, they will simply go for 2 cheeseburgers instead of one, a soft drink instead of juice and medium or large size fries instead of small. Who will this legislation have helped then? Neither the child’s health, nor the parent’s wallet.

The bottom line is that children have their own personalities, strengths, weaknesses, likes, dislikes and who better than their parents to know how to deal with that? It is not up to legislators to make the best decisions for our children and they should butt out of the challenges we are faced with day and day out when trying to find a balance between our children’s unique personalities and the need to get them to adopt healthy choices.

McDonald's slams San Francisco Happy Meal ban

SECOND HAND JUNK FOOD

No, this has nothing to do with junk food leftovers from the night before. It pertains to the fumes emitted by the cooking of unhealthy foods according to a study conducted in Minnesota and presented at the 239th National Meeting of the American Chemical Society in San Francisco.

With a stroke of the pen, the ad nauseam anti-smoker industry’s argument that the main thing that distinguishes tobacco smoke from other unhealthy habits is that it is shared with innocent by-standers, has henceforth become null and void.

Brace yourselves grilled and fried food lovers, because this study makes you an inconsiderate, irresponsible and selfish second class citizen. Health oriented citizens who have chosen not to partake in the dangerous habit of eating unhealthy foods now fall victims to your selfish desire to eat a hamburger, fried chicken or French fries at their local eatery which emits carcinogens and other air pollutants because of their hazardous way of cooking. As a matter of fact, after having read this study, a few eateries felt compelled to change their ways towards more responsible cooking. However, if they don’t all adopt voluntary measures fast enough as we might expect they won’t, get ready to be labeled as citizens who encourage air pollution, filthy junk food addicts, paid pawns of the fastfood chains and don’t be surprised if your neighbor summons you to stop grilling or frying in your own home.

''As a hungry consumer,(…) you might want to avoid restaurants with particularly strong food smells, as odor indicates the presence of emissions. If you see grease dripping out of outdoor exhaust fans, that's a bad sign, too. The good news is that advances in ventilation are coming.''

What’s this about advances in ventilation? If the state of the art ventilation that already exists is not good enough for SHS, it won't be good enough for second hand junk food emissions either. Get ready to eat plenty of boiled or steamed food, including your meat if you're still allowed to consume any.

Noone can say that we didn't warn you that that's exactly where we would be heading the day we allowed public health to dictate our daily lives on the basis of junk science!

Fatty Food Fumes Could Be Dangerous

EXPANDING ON THE SIZE OF THE ANTI-OBESITY PROPAGANDA

After being force fed regularly with anti-obesity propaganda including but not limited to obesity being contagious , obesity being a disease, obesity causing global warming, obesity causing dementia, obesity causing cancer, obesity draining the healthcare system, obesity being an addiction, the obese to be banned from fast-food restaurants, obese children taken away from their parents, obese to be denied medical treatment, former U.S. Surgeon General Richard Carmona, - the same one who defied all toxicology principles by declaring that there is no safe level of second hand smoke – and his colleagues, now declare that obesity is A Threat to National Security !

Of course we have to take them on their word and be seriously alarmed because since they are part of the noble and humanitarian ‘’non-profit’’ organization Stop Obesity Alliance , their opinion must be based on scientific unbiased studies by independent third parties! And who would dare after all argue with not one but two former Surgeon Generals? The fact that the Stop Obesity Alliance is funded by Big Pharma is of course only a coincidence. That one of their pharma funders is aggressively marketing anti-obesity drugs such as Symlin and Byetta, and another was marketing Acomplia that has now been banned, is only a very happy stroke of luck that has absolutely nothing to do with any marketing ploys through astroturfing, or that’s at least what they want you to believe!

Richard Carmona and al working for a front group in full action to ostracize the obese for money? You decide!

THE YEAR THE CUPCAKE BECAME A KILLER

It is mind boggling how public health can justify their outrageous fear mongering using vulnerable children. Children take at face value anything they hear, see or read and can’t tell the difference between propaganda and fact. As if parents didn’t have enough in their hands to properly educate their children against a number of real dangers in society, they now have to fight exaggerated public health messages coming from their own government paid for with their own taxes.

Where, oh where will all this lead and when oh when will we see some measure and common sense return? No matter how hard we try to educate our children against hyperbole, no matter how forcefully we try to push back the message of extremists, our children are being indoctrinated by school, governments and their peers to be fearful of anything that is deemed unhealthy by public bureaucrats regardless of how counterproductive such messages have become. All one has to remember is how bulimia and anorexia now afflict children in their pre-puberty years.

In the following link you will read one example of such fear mongering tactics. C.A.G.E. has filed official complaints to different advertizing ethics commitees in the past for similar Canadian advertizements, but they somehow found a way to spin their way out of the necessary sanctions to be taken against the advertizers. Massive complaining however, can and will eventually make a difference. Please do not hesitate to officially complain to the proper authorities any time you consider that a message, public or not, has gone too far.

Knives out for 'death by fairy cake' advert

FIRST THEY CAME FOR THE SMOKERS

We repeatedly warned about the slippery slope once you have allowed government to dictate your lifestyle choices even on unpopular issues such as smoking. Many people listened but only very few made the effort to be heard. Some didn’t believe us because it couldn’t possibly happen to anyone but the ‘’filthy’’ smokers who had it coming to them. Many others were and still are too happy to let government dictate their choices and meddle as far as in the intimacy of their family lives because it gives them a sense of security they cannot or will not seek on their own. Obviously they never fully grasped the meaning of Benjamin Franklin’s famous words: Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.


Well folks, the ‘’fat tax’’ will very shortly cease to be ‘’do-gooder’’ rhetoric and will sooner than you realize become the hard reality facing you on your grocery store shelf day in and day out.


With the usual do-gooders -- our southern neighbors -- setting the trend, it will not be too long before our Canadian politicians will be copying their American counterparts in taxing fatty foods in an effort to coerce you and your family to adopt the government stamped lifestyle choices. And who knows what will follow after the ‘’fat tax’’. Perhaps one measure will be that if you’re over the ideal weight limit you will not be allowed to enter MacDonald’s or Burger King for your own good of course but especially to protect children from the bad example you would be setting for them. Say what? Was that a laughter in the background? Oh yes indeed it was! It sounded like it came from the same folks who thought it could never be forbidden to smoke in a bar!

What is even more alarming about the CNN article we link to below, are the comments from some of the readers which clearly make our point that there are unfortunately far too many people who will give up freedom to gain a false sense of security, sacrificing everybody’s freedom in the process. If you know of one such person, please remind him of what the notion of personal responsibility is, for everyone’s sake including his own.

Commentary: Why we need an obesity tax

LEAVING THEM NO CHOICE SO THEY CAN LEARN TO MAKE CHOICES. CAN WE SAFELY SAY NEWTHINK?

High schools are supposed to be institutions that help develop the human potential in the new adult generation of citizens to face the challenges in life. To have a chance at obtaining meaningful results that will assist adolescents to become responsible adults and citizens, they must be taught the skills of critical thinking, autonomy, decision making, emotional stability and harmonious interactions with the rest of society.

We learn from the article linked at the bottom, that not content to have removed the food choice from high schools, the UK is now thinking of forbidding the students from leaving the school premises during lunch time so that they are not tempted to eat junk food outside the school! In MP’s Ed Ball’s , Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families, own words: "Temptation can be hard to resist but we owe it to future generations to help young people make the right choices about how they want to live their lives." How exactly do we ‘’help young people make the right choices’’ when we make them for them by imprisoning them in school so that they are left with no choice but to eat whatever the school cafeteria serves? How can we expect to instill personal responsibility in our future adults when we subtract them from their own free will and impose our ways onto them? Have we lost all faith in our teaching methods that we don't believe that educating them towards healthy habits will help them make good choices in life sooner or later? Is this the type of adults we wish to breed for our future societies?

Let’s be very clear. Of course we know that many adolescents given the choice will be tempted to eat the forbidden fruit and many of them will. However, it is certainly not by holding them prisoners for their own good that they will learn how to use critical thinking and make the right choices by themselves for themselves. In fact anyone that understands a minimum of adolescent psychology knows that they will most certainly be twice as tempted to stuff themselves with everything but healthy food once they’re set free from their sterilized school cage.

We become truly troubled when we see how so many people and especially politicians can be so far wrapped up in their monolithic ideology, they can no longer (or refuse to) see the forest from the tree! Troubled times we live in, very troubled!

Link to the Telegraph article:

Schools 'should keep pupils on premises at lunchtime to fight obesity'

FOOD ADDICTS

An interesting paper by Dale M. Atrens Nicotine as an Addictive Substance: A Critical Examination of the Basic Concepts and Empirical Evidence , analyses the many definitions of addiction and how defining addiction has become more politically than scientifically based.

Stretching the definition of addiction to its maximum, everything can be considered addictive. When the public is influenced and brainwashed by incessant propaganda from interested politically and financially motivated lobbies, it becomes an excellent opportunity for business oriented individuals to jump on the gravy train. In the process, targeted groups of citizens live under fearful emotions, de-normalization, social stigma and many will spend their money thoughtlessly in an effort to rid themselves of their ''newly discovered addiction’’.

Could you have a hidden addiction?

by ANDREA PERRY, femail.co.uk –

We all joke about being addicted to chocolate.

But how many of us crave certain every day foods without realising we have developed a dependency?

An increasing number of health professionals claim that many of us are unwittingly addicted to some of the apparently harmless products we eat - from curry to sugar, potatoes and bread.
Scientists at Nottingham Trent University recently discovered that spicy foods arouse and stimulate the senses - causing people to become curry addicts.

PROMIS, a company which specialises in rehabilitating people with addictions, deals with a whole range of obsessive behaviour. Alongside patients addicted to drugs and alcohol they are now treating people dependent on certain foods.

Founder of the group, Dr Robert Lefever says food addiction is caused by chemicals in food, which create a mood-altering effect.

'Some foods, such as sugar and refined, white flour, have a mood-altering effect which act as a drug in some people,' he said.

'Food addiction is no different from any other addiction, such as to alcohol or gambling. People with an addictive nature commonly discover a whole range of mood-altering substances and processes and may choose several at once because they find them equally effective.'

Althea Hayton, who wrote the Food Addicts Diet and more recently Food and You, holds group-counselling sessions in Hertfordshire for men and women who are addicted to food.

'There are definite reactions the body has to certain addictive foods,' she said. 'They create cravings and gets you hooked.'

Althea has identified four ingredients in everyday foods that cause cravings. They are wheat, dairy products, potatoes, and sugar and with the exception of sugar all are nutritious and healthy.

Foods such as potatoes - and even tomatoes and peppers - contain a natural poison called solanine just underneath their skin. In some people this chemical causes a natural high - and can therefore be addictive.

Sugar can also create a natural high in the body, followed by a slump. Sugar addicts crave more sugar to repeat this lift.

Finally there are the foods that can cause intolerance in the body: wheat, sugar and dairy products.

As we ingest food to which we are intolerant, the body has an addictive stress reaction.

Endorphins are released giving a rush of adrenaline, but these short-lived highs lead to cravings for more of the same food.

If you are suffering from the symptoms of food intolerance you may be addicted to certain foods. If you think this is the case, keep a food diary listing what you eat for breakfast, lunch, snacks and evening meals.

If you find you are eating a lot of one type of food you may be able to identify your addiction, then go on to eliminate that food from your diet.

Althea has devised a three-week diet called the Four Zero Experience to help food addicts cut out these elements.

She claims it can boost your energy - and confidence.

'Anyone can benefit from this change of diet,' she says.

'It brings a few days of hardship as you begin to discover your food addictions, but within a week you will begin to feel the many benefits of eliminating these four ingredients from your diet.

'Your increased energy will get you moving, your increased willpower will amaze you and your increased confidence will see you making changes in your life as well as your diet.

'As you rediscover real food, you will probably begin to take more interest in eating fish, natural ingredients and less processed food.'

ARE YOU CONFUSED YET ?

As if parents weren’t already confused enough about what is good or not good for their children’s health, here comes more from the wonderful world of research. Too much wholesome food isn’t good for children’s health ! As long as funds will be continuously poured into research that really leads us nowhere but to hypochondria and unnecessary stress and worrying, citizens will continue being at a total loss as to who and what to believe.

When in doubt always remember that not one individual is alike and as long as our child is healthy, playful and happy just as most of us were in our childhood, our grandmothers’ and mothers’ loving instinct is about the only thing that has become worthy of any trust when bringing up our own offspring. Anything else should be taken with a grain of salt. Preferably sea salt!

Too much healthy eating is as bad for children as too much junk

It is no surprise that children love junk food. Its makers go to great lengths to make sure that their offerings deliver a full-on, unsubtle assault on taste buds, with plenty of salt or sugar to create the sense that it is “tasty”.

But a significant proportion of our nation's children are worryingly chubby and heading for potential obesity problems in later life, it seems that others are suffering from “muesli belt malnutrition”: the overzealous application of “healthy eating” rules imposed on their daily food intake. A recent study warns us that too much fibre and too little fat can lead to vitamin deficiencies and stunts growth in the under-fives.

This means that young children who have wholemeal bread, brown pasta and piles of fruit imposed on them are getting too full too quickly and do not have room for enough foods such as dairy products, meat, eggs and fish, which have vital nutrients for growth and development.

So how do we strike a balance? Children thrive on a good variety of foods, which includes grains and potatoes such as bread, pasta, noodles, rice and all varieties of potatoes; calcium-rich foods such as milk, yoghurt, fish canned with edible bones such as pilchards; protein-rich foods such as eggs, chicken and turkey, red meat and Quorn products; plus a variety of different fruit and vegetables. The million-dollar question is how much should they have of each at various ages.

This to some extent varies with the size and appetite of your child. The World Health Organisation has provided some useful parameters.

Lower-fat milk

You can start giving toddlers semi-skimmed milk from the age of 2. Fully skimmed milk is not suitable as a main drink until they are 5, because it doesn't contain enough calories for a growing child.

Fish

Because oily fish such as mackerel, salmon and sardines contain residues of pollutants such as dioxins and PCBs, the Food Standards Agency advises that you can give boys up to four portions a week, but that girls should have no more than two a week, because the residues can build up in their bodies over the years and can affect reproductive functions in later life. Shark, swordfish and marlin contain relatively high levels of mercury, which may affect a child's developing nervous system, so these should be avoided.

Eggs and nuts

Toddlers should have their eggs well cooked until the white and yolk are solid to avoid salmonella, while nuts for children under 5 should be given only crushed or flaked to reduce the risk of choking.

Wholegrain foods

Definitely do not add bran to children's foods and avoid giving very young children wholemeal pasta and brown rice. Too much fibre can sometimes reduce the amount of minerals, such as calcium and iron, that they can absorb and leave them feeling bloated and too full to finish their meal. By the time they are 5, young children can gradually be weaned on to wholegrain versions of cereals.

What about salt?

There is no need to add salt to the food of children under the age of three. Children in the UK manage to chomp their way through as much as 10-12g of salt daily and yet under the age of 7, children should have no more than 3g of salt each day and those between 7 and 10 no more than 5g. Once over 11, like adults, they should have no more than 6g of salt daily. Current high intakes can damage their developing kidneys and store up potential blood pressure and heart disease problems.

How much sugar?

Our children are getting about 17per cent of their daily calories from sugar when they should, like adults, be getting no more than 10per cent. This means that four to six-year-olds should eat no more than 40g of sugar a day; seven to ten-year-olds no more than 46g and 11 to 14-year-olds no more than 50g.

If you limit children's consumption of sweets, chocolate and biscuits, along with fizzy drinks and squashes, you will cut their sugar intake. But honey in flapjacks, fruit syrup added to “orange drinks”, glucose syrup in breakfast cereals and dextrose in fromage frais all also count towards sugar intake and also need to be watched.

A good rule of thumb is to look on the nutrition label. Foods and drinks with less than 2g per 100g of sugars (this figure will include all the various forms in which sugar comes) is low in sugar, while any with more than 10g is high.

LET KIDS BE KIDS

A click to Sandy Swarcz’s blog Junkfood Science takes us to a very powerful article about a woman who has had it with schools indoctrinating our children with the ‘’ordre du jour’’ and what is deemed healthy and not healthy.

She goes on explaining how anti-obesity campaigns aimed at children are actually doing a lot of harm to vulnerable minds who cannot decipher the message.

We have denounced repeatedly in both French and English this anti-obesity hysteria and the harm it causes our children in an era where eating disorders start in children as young as 8 years old. We are of the strong opinion that pharmaceutical corporate interests are very instrumental in this anti-obesity campaign and we urge citizens to hold government accountable for the free-passes they give corporate interests who meddle in our personal lives and family dynamics.

The lady in question sends out a cry to all citizens: parents need to stand up and say “Enough!” We couldn’t agree more.

The analysis is complete with comments from experts who are also denouncing public health’s exaggerated anti-obesity message. Please take the time to read it.

OBESITY EPIDEMIC CHALLENGED BY EXPERTS

When reading an article such as the one from Pennlive.com we tend to think that perhaps there is hope that the anti-obesity campaign will not corrupt public opinion to the level the anti-tobacco fear mongering campaign did.

The article exposes exactly the same points we have been bringing up for the last three years on the obesity issue. There is a very important factor that the article doesn’t highlight however, but that must be emphasized at every opportunity because it has changed the ‘’technical’’ perception of obesity, overnight: ‘’ In 1998, the U.S. National Institutes of Health brought U.S. definitions into line with World Health Organization guidelines, lowering the normal/overweight cut-off from BMI 27.8 to BMI 25. This had the effect of redefining approximately 30 million Americans, previously "technically healthy" to "technically overweight". (source Wikipedia). As for Health Canada, they made their ‘’adjustment’’ in 2003. In Quebec alone, that ‘’adjustment’’ created an additional 1 million obese people from one day to the next.

Excerpts from the long but most interesting read: Some experts doubt obesity epidemic

LONDON (AP) — Go on, have another doughnut. According to some experts whose views are public health heresy, the jury is still out on how dangerous it is to be fat.
"The obesity epidemic has absolutely been exaggerated," said Dr. Vincent Marks, emeritus professor of clinical biochemistry at the University of Surrey.
…….

But obesity contrarians say that there's no data proving why being fat — in itself — would be dangerous. "There's no good causal connection," said Eric Oliver, author of Fat Politics and a political science professor at the University of Chicago.

Blaming obesity for diabetes and heart attacks, Oliver says, is like blaming lung cancer on bad breath rather than on smoking. Excess weight may actually be a red herring, Oliver says, since other factors like exercise, diet or genetic predispositions towards diseases are harder to measure than weight.

In addition to questioning the dangers of being fat, researchers like Marks also criticize oft-repeated alarmist projections about the rise in obesity — like the British government's warning that nearly half of Britain will be obese by 2050.

Those simply aren't based on good evidence, they say.
……..

In 2005, Katherine Flegal of the United States' Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association, finding that overweight people typically live longer than normal-weight people. More than a dozen other studies have come to the same conclusion.

Outrage ensued. Prominent health experts called the research flawed and worried that people would gleefully supersize their meals.
………

Some obesity skeptics question the motives of experts who make dire predictions about obesity.
With millions of dollars for obesity researchers, an industry of anti-fat drugs, and a boom in the number of doctors offering surgeries like stomach-stapling, the more fat people there are, the more profits there will be in selling them solutions.

Experts on both sides of the obesity debate have often criticized WHO's overweight and obesity measures, saying they are too low.

When WHO defined the body mass index scores constituting normal, overweight and obese, they appeared to be the result of an independent expert committee convened by WHO.

Yet the 1997 Geneva consultation was held jointly with the International Obesity Task Force, an advocacy group whose self-described mission is "to inform the world about the urgency of the (obesity) problem."

According to the task force's most recent available annual report, more than 70 percent of their funding came from Abbott Laboratories and F. Hoffman La-Roche, companies which make top-selling anti-fat pills.

The task force remains one of Europe's most influential obesity advocacy groups and continues to work closely with WHO.

The blurred lines between pharmaceutical money and obesity groups have also caused concern in Britain. In 2006, one of the country's top obesity doctors quit the organization he founded to combat obesity, the National Obesity Forum, complaining that its goals had been skewed by drug money.

"There's not a lot of money in trying to debunk obesity, but a huge amount in making sure it stays a big problem," said Patrick Basham, a professor of health care policy at Johns Hopkins University.

Still, while skeptics insist that obesity warnings must be taken with a grain of salt, nearly all agree that while a little bit of extra padding may not be too deadly, too much almost certainly is.

"The vast majority of people who get labeled under the obesity epidemic are well under 300 pounds and probably are not facing big health consequences," Oliver said. "It's the morbidly obese people who should be worried."

DAIRY PRODUCTS WILL CARRY SHOCKING WARNINGS

More nanny tactics from the UK. Dairy foods will now carry shocking warnings similar to tobacco warnings. And to think that some didn’t believe that the smoking campaign would set a precedent! How far will this go and how long before public opinion becomes so far corrupted that we would find demonizing the obese perfectly normal? How long before instead of a smoker, this sign

portrays an obese person getting punched? It all depends on how active citizens become in the battle against health nannies and interest group agendas. We have now moved from the anti-tobacco campaign, to the ‘’unhealthy’’ eating habits campaign at a record speed. There are concrete actions happening on banning all ads aimed at children, on getting rid of the happy meal, on taxing junk food, on parents losing custody of their obese children, on making restaurants inaccessible to the obese, on mandatory monitoring of children’s mass index , on refusing to operate on the obese.

And who once again stands out in this anti-obesity hype? None other than the pharmaceutical industry directly, or through their charitable front groups. Let’s take a look at a few sources highlighting the involvement of Big Pharma in this issue.

From Sandy Swarcz’ blog: Sponsors of the obesity crisis , Cradle-to-grave customers

Who funds the Canadian Obesity Network? Following are their industry funders as listed on their website:
Abbott Laboratories Ltd.
Boehringer Ingelheim Ltd.
Glycemic Index Laboratories Inc.
Innovus Research Inc.
Isotechnika Diagnostics
Johnson & Johnson Medical Devices Division
JSS Medical Research
Eli Lilly

Medtronics Inc.
Merck Frosst Canada Ltd.
New Era Nutrition

Novartis
Nutrition

Novartis Pharmaceuticals
Pfizer

Sanofi-Aventis

TM Bioscience
University Technologies International
Wyeth

For $ 3598.00 for a single user license you can buy a book titled: Anti-Obesity Treatments 2007 to 2012 A blockbuster target market , written as a guide to the pharmaceutical industry and the golden opportunity that the obesity alleged ‘’epidemic’’ presents to them. Take a look at the contents here.

It leaves no doubt that anti-obesity is big business and the stakeholders will do anything and everything in their power to make obesity as unacceptable as smoking in order to force people to use their drugs, unless of course they’re stopped before they go too far. How can they be stopped? Politicians should be made to feel the heat from concerned citizens, by writing or phoning them regularly. Obese people should not bow their head in shame but stand proud of their bodies and warn the government that their body is personal property and government should keep out of their lives. That universal healthcare means that everyone should be covered and segregation of illnesses deserving of treatment, will not be tolerated. That children are under their parents’ authority and unless there is undisputable proof that parents are hurting their offspring, government has to get out of the family dynamics and stay out. Citizens who want to lose weight should find natural methods and not give in to the miracle pill solution who have been proven useless unless real will power is accompanying them.


Citizens should learn from the anti-smoking campaign and fight this anti-obesity offensive with all their energy. It will not go away unless we all get involved to make it go away.

Dairy products to carry cigarette-style health warnings as Government uses 'shock tactics'


Popular dairy foods like cheese and butter could soon have to carry cigarette-style warnings in a bid to slash Britain's soaring levels of obesity and heart disease, according to reports.

The hard-hitting government health warnings would be aimed at urging people to cut down on the amount of saturated fat they eat and make their favourite dairy products an occasional treat rather than regular part of their everyday diet.

According to trade magazine The Grocer, the government's Food Standards Agency is considering using shock tactics to persuade Britons to cut down on their consumption of saturated fats.

But the controversial crackdown is set to spark a furious outcry from the dairy industry as it could target a range of regular snack staples such as cheese sandwiches and buttered toast which watchdogs warn are high in saturated fats.

The Grocer says that the food watchdog is also considering asking manufacturers of products high in saturated fat, such as cheese and butter, to put cigarette-style warnings on packs which would urge consumers to eat such products in moderation or as a rare treat.

The move would form part of a publicity campaign developed under the FSA's strategy to cut consumption of fat, says The Grocer.

A consumer study conducted for the agency by CMI Research found that an approach based on shock tactics was considered "successful in challenging complacent attitudes and preconceptions of saturated fat".

It added: "'Shock tactics' show potential to cut through the crowded media environment, are likely to be memorable and could potentially have talk value."

The researchers said that graphic images of fat - the kind shown on popular TV shows about food and health - had a big impact on the consumers they spoke to.

"Dramatising the amount of saturated fat in foods in an unexpected and unappetising way proved effective, as almost all were repulsed by the idea of eating lard " said the researchers.
"Furthermore, it created a strong emotional response via the shocking visual images and so acted as a wake-up call to many."

The FSA which presented the findings to industry stakeholders last week, insisted any plans for a campaign were at "an early stage".

"Any activity in this area is not due until 2009, " an agency spokesman told The Grocer.
"As part of its planning process the FSA is likely to undertake further research and discussions with a wide pool of stakeholders to explore how best to proceed.

"At this stage it is too early to speculate about the form such activity may take."

However, The Grocer says that it is understood the agency is about to test messages designed to reveal that everyday foods - primarily meat, dairy, snacks and confectionery - are much higher in saturated fats than people may realise.

These include the claim that two slices of buttered toast contain more saturated fat than four doughnuts, and that one cheese sandwich contains more than half an individual's guideline daily amounts of saturated fat.

The FSA is also to consider messages that illustrate the damaging effect saturated fat can have on the body.

But reports that the FSA is contemplating such a high-profile approach has caused consternation among supplies of dairy products likely to be targeted amid fears that their sales would be hit.
Ed Komorowski technical director of Dairy UK said there was a danger that simple messages could switch people away from balanced diets that included healthy food such as cheese, which is high in calcium.

He told The Grocer: "Tactics designed to shock people could actually mislead them. Comparing the saturated fat content of hot buttered toast with doughnuts is not giving the full picture of the nutritional qualities of these products."

He also warned that such an advertising campaign could fall foul of the Advertising Standards Authority.

Clare Cheney director general of the Provision Trade Federation told The Grocer: "Diet is a complex thing. It's not like cigarettes, where you either smoke or you don't and if you do it's bad for you.

"With diet, it's about eating a combination of different things in different quantities."

IT STARTS WITH THE HAPPY MEAL

It seems that the same city council that introduced smoking bans in England, will not stop with kicking smokers out in the streets. Happy Meals at MacDonald’s is their new target hoping to set another trend for a state-wide ban. Doesn't it always start with the ''for the children'' excuse? And since this city council does not trust parents to make the right decisions for their children whether they treat them to a happy meal once a week or once a month, why stop with MacDonald’s? Why not totally forbid giving any food the state has declared unhealthy to children in a ''public'' place to eventually extend it to the car and the home? And since we have seen that epidemiology has now declared that obesity is contagious, why not forbid parents to eat or drink anything unhealthy in the presence of children?


How far down do you feel we are on that slippery slope we predicted only 3 years ago? What have you done to express your discontent with this global political healthist movement to your government this week? Anything? Please don't assume it won't happen in Canada. Please don't assume that your voice can't help to prevent such encroachment in your life. It can if you get involved and you take action. Visit, phone or write your MP and your MPP today! You will find their contact info here.



Liverpool set to ban McDonald's Happy Meals in a bid to cut childhood obesity



McDonald's Happy Meals are to be banned in Liverpool over claims they are contributing to the epidemic of childhood obesity.


The city council is planning to outlaw the meals on the grounds that they are damaging the heath of children - particularly as they offer free toys in order to encourage parents to buy junk food for their children.


The Liberal Democrat-controlled authority claims the credit for taking the lead in the campaign that led to the ban on smoking in public places.


Members of Liverpool City Council's Childhood Obesity Scrutiny Group want a bye-law that would forbid the sale of fast foot accompanied by toys.


Councillors say the promotional items are used to boost sales through the "Pester Power" phenomenon - children pestering parents for Happy Meal toys.


The scrutiny Group has ordered a report from town hall officials that would pave the way for the bye-law that would be the first of its kind in the UK.


Lib Dem councillor Paul Twigger said: "The Scrutiny Group is recommending that a bye-law be enforced to stop the circulation of free toys associated with junk food promotions.


"We consider it is high time that cash-hungry vultures like McDonald's are challenged over their marketing policies which are directly aimed at promoting unhealthy eating among children.


"Childhood obesity is a dire threat to the health in this country and it needs to be nipped in the bud urgently.


"Children are directly targeted with junk food and McDonald's use the Happy Meals to exploit Pester Power of children against which many parents give in.


"In most Happy Meals the toy is sold with a burgers containing four or five tablespoons of sugar, along with high-calorie fries and milkshakes.


"These fattening meals are being shamelessly promoted through free toys and it is clear that it is going to take legislation to combat the practice.


The most calorific Happy Meal - cheeseburger, small fries and chocolate milkshake - has 740 kcals, almost half of children's recommended daily allowance of 1600.


The healthiest meal on the menu comprises carrot sticks, nuggets, and mineral water, with 200 Kcals.



But Lib Dem Cllr Twigger said: "They know that most children won't want carrots and water but put them on the menu to stave off the criticism from health campaigners."


Toys that have been dished out include the board game Twister, Top Trump cards and football-related collectables.


"By offering these toys they are preying on the needs and desires of children in order to cash-in on the sale of junk food," said Cllr Twigger, 26.


Healthy eating campaigners are backing Liverpool council's move.


Food Commission spokesman Ian Tokelove said: "McDonald's are very skilled at getting children into their restaurants and know how to tug on the purse strings of parents.


"But a lot of the food on the Happy Meal menu can put children health at risk if eaten too regularly."


Sustain spokesman Richard Watts said: "We would support every effort to stop toys being sold with junk food. It will be see how Liverpool Council fares.


"We need to take radical action against the massive junk food-related health problems we have got with child obesity and heart disease."


In 2004, Liverpool sought a bye-law to ban smoking in public places and it is widely acknowledged that the move played a significant role in leading to the ban imposed last year.


Cllr Twigg believes the new move in Liverpool could begin locally and lead to a similar nationwide ban.


He said: "The Liverpool smoke-free team had a great success with their campaign and their ideas played a massive part in the nationwide blanket ban last year.


"There's no reason why we can't achieve a similar feat."


The plan to impose the bye-law banning Happy Meals will be put to a Select Committee of Liverpool Council at the end of the month.