City of Ottawa Encourages Exercise As An Excuse to Eat Junk Food?

Sure, I get it. I'm sure I've even done it. I've eaten indulgently, "because I exercised", but when I was driving behind the bus that told me, "Less Sit, More Whip", with a photo of what looks like a mocha frappuccino, I did a double take.

Honestly, it said, "Less sit, more whip".

Yes, if you actually bother finding the www.ibikeihike.ca URL and heading to it you'll learn it comes from a City run campaign encouraging active commuting and indeed, if your commute to work includes a brisk walk of 1hr and 20mins each way you'd burn off the Quarter Pounder worth of calories in a Grande Mocha Frappuccino with Whip. Cycling's a bit better - there it'd just take you a fair paced 30 minutes each way.

Unfortunately this campaign does two things wrong. It implies exercise burns far more calories than it actually does, and it basically serves as free advertising for junk food.

Off the top of my head couldn't the campaign have focused on things like coming off medications, playing with grandchildren, going on dream active vacations?

Yes junk food's part of our modern day world. And yes, even I sometimes indulge in it, but my double take had to do with the fact that there's no question in my mind cities (and my tax dollars) shouldn't be encouraging the consumption of junk food or suggesting that exercise buys people a free pass to the candy store.

[Also of note - Ottawa's Public Health (OPH) department had privately criticized this message before it was unleashed on the public. In speaking with them yesterday they noted, "it's counter-productive to everything we're trying to do", and that they are, "very disappointed that they (the folks who commissioned the ad) didn't feel strongly enough to change their visuals". Makes me wonder why the OPH isn't given more clout in City sponsored public health messaging?]

House Republicans - "American Kids Don't Eat Enough"!?

For some this might seem right out of the bizarro files. America's in the midst of rapidly rising rates of childhood and adolescent obesity and the House Republicans have introduced a bill to repeal the maximal school lunch calorie limits put in place by the new USDA guidelines.

Amazingly the bill has been named the, "No Hungry Kids Act" (I swear I thought the article I was reading was an Onion piece when I first saw it).

So just how badly kids would starve if the limits were left in place depends on their age.

If they're in kindergarten through fifth grade they'd be stuck with a paltry 650 calories a meal; sixth through eighth grade - 700 calories; and ninth grade and up 800 calories.

The horror!

But wait, 650 calories is more calories than I have for lunch.

So what do you think is driving the Republicans' desire to feed American kindergarteners larger lunches than mine?

My money'd be on Big Agriculture and Big Food lobby dollars.

How about yours?

Canadian Government Will No Longer Police Accuracy of Food Labels

Just in case you need another reason to cook more frequently, the Canadian government has given the Canadian food industry the biggest birthday present ever - the end of oversight.

Yup, with our most recent budget the Harper Conservatives have elected to stop funding the Canadian Food Inspection Agency to oversee the accuracy and integrity of our food labels.

According to the budget document,

"The government will change how the Canadian Food Inspection Agency monitors and enforces non-health and non-safety food labelling regulations. The CFIA will introduce a web-based label verification tool that encourages consumers to bring validated concerns directly to companies and associations for resolution"

According to veteran Postmedia health and public affairs reporter Sarah Schmidt, "non-health and non-safety" includes, "net quantity" and "size".

So what does that mean for you?

It means the food industry has just been told that Mom and Dad are going away on vacation and they've left the liquor cabinet open and $200 cash on the dining room table to, "use as you kids see fit".

What do you think is going to happen? Do you think the food industry's going to ensure it reports calories and sizes accurately?

Given that it doesn't even do so now, I'm thinking whatever small amount of trying they once did is about to be shuttered.

But here's my question for the Government. How are "net quantity" and "size" both "non-health" regulations? Canadians with diet related chronic diseases including obesity, diabetes, kidney failure, hypertension and more count on labeling accuracy in quantities and sizes to help them make more thoughtful and healthful decisions.

Daniel Tencer from the Huffington Post managed to interview Bob Kingston, the President of the Agricultural Union that represents food inspectors on this recent announcement.  His quote on the matter pretty much sums it up,

"it's a total farce"

Indeed. A sad one at that.

Here's hoping the vague language of "non-health and non-safety" allows for backpedaling.

Britain moves to pay MDs to shame their "fat" patients

I hope my British readers forgive me, but over the course of the past few years, your country has rapidly surpassed the rest of the developed world in a bizarre quest to become the world's most backwards in regard to obesity policy.

And pip, pip, cheerio and all that rot, good chaps, your government's done a smashing job.

I used to blame it all on the asinine decisions of your Secretary of State for Health, Andrew Lansley, who among other brilliant decisions has helped to abolish your healthier school lunch program, scrap your front of package labeling program, turn over control of your national obesity strategy to the food industry, strip your food standards agency of their food labeling oversight, and has helped to include such things as processed cereal bars as part of your "5-a-Day" fruits and vegetables campaign.

Then there was your Under Secretary of State for Health, Anne Milton, who recommended doctors quite literally call their overweight and obese patients "fat", to "inspire" them to take more "responsibility" for their health.

Well your country's gone and done Anne's call to action one better.

Apparently now your physicians are not only encouraged with words to call their patients "fat", starting next year, they'll literally get paid to do so.

Never you mind that the vast majority of physicians the world over don't have a clue what to do with their obese patients. Never you mind that the weight loss industry is an unregulated morass of snake oil and false hope. Never you mind that there is as of yet no gold-standard, reproducible treatment program. Never you mind that studies show obese patients already face cruel discrimination by health professionals, and already receive substandard care.

Nope. Instead your country has determined it's in your best interests for your physicians to formally take on the role of the school yard bully in the presumptive hope that finger pointing, shame, and a free coupon for Weight Watchers is the solution.

I've got news for Mr. Lansley, Ms. Milton and the NHS. If obesity were truly treatable as a disease of personal responsibility the world would already be much skinnier. Obesity is a disease of the environment, and you folks across the pond are doing a dandy job making your environment more, not less, conducive to obesity with your 2012 Cadbury Olympics, your regulatory free food marketplace, your pulverized flour and sugary school lunches, and your food industry funded "healthy active living" campaigns - because guaranteed, in Britain, it won't be about modifying intake with Big Food at the helm, it'll be all about exercise.

Shame indeed.

ParticipACTION's Kelly Murumets explains their partnership with Coca Cola

ParticipACTION's Kelly Murumets accepting her Live Positively Award from Coca Cola's Nikos Koumettis

I've blogged about it many times before, but recently the Ottawa Citizen's Joanne Laucius decided to tackle the oxymoron that is the ParticipACTION/Coca-Cola partnership.

The deal Coca Cola made with ParticpACTION is worth $5,000,000 over 5 years. Hardly a huge amount of money to be partnered up with one of the most recognizable and well respected brands in Canada. In fact I'd venture that companies would have been lined up out the door trying to attach themselves to ParticipACTION's heritage brand coattails.

But apparently ParticipACTION was picky. They didn't want to partner with just anybody, they wanted to partner with Coca Cola. ParticipACTION's President and Coca Cola award recipient Kelly Murumets calls Coca Cola, "a responsible, effective partner". Never mind the fact that improving Coca-Cola's brand image will help to sell sugar sweetened beverages - a causal factor in childhood obesity. Never mind the fact that Coca-Cola and ParticipACTION's recent co-branded advertising campaign purposely misdirects people about calories. Coca-Cola knows what kids want (sugar-sweetened beverages?) and so they're the perfect partner?

How so Kelly?

"If we had partnered with an insurance company, we would not get kids' attention and get commitment to behaviour change"

Why not? Doesn't ParticipACTION have the brand awareness necessary to make advertising headway?

According to Laucius' article, ParticipACTION's own partnership strategy document spells out what's in it for Coke,

"an effective partnership will leverage and extend each partner's assets (and partnerships) will further your own mission, but will also offer a return on investment for your partner organization."

So while ParticipACTION is as unlikely to impact on childhood obesity rates this time around as last (during the original 30 year reign of ParticipACTION childhood obesity rates rose by nearly 300%), one thing they'll certainly be able to do. They'll be able to offer Coca-Cola a return on their investment.

Translation?

ParticipACTION will help Coca Cola sell more Coke.

Sarah Palin brings on the nutritional stupid.

Remember a few days ago when I commented on San Francisco Mayor Newsom's adoption of Big Food's demonizing position - that government shouldn't tell people what to eat? That legislation like banning the sale of toys with nutritionally bereft food or posting of calories somehow tramples on your civil liberties?

Well good ole Sarah Palin, she's done gone one better.

Not only did she parrot the whole, government shouldn't tell people what to eat bit (this in reference to the government simply providing nutritional guidance),

"Who should be deciding what I eat? Should it be government, or should it be parents?"

That wasn't enough.

Nope.

Instead she also brought cookies to give to the students and explained in her Twitter feed,

"2 PA school speech; I’ll intro kids 2 beauty of laissez-faire via serving them cookies amidst school cookie ban debate;Nanny state run amok"

Because what could be more laissez-faire than pushing cookies on school children as a prop to promote your own political aspirations?

Who should decide what American kids eat? Their parents or Sarah Palin?

She's a gem alright. A regular American Andrew Lansley.

[Hat tip to Martin Collis via MEDIAite and great photo illustration by Mario Piperni]

OMG, OMG, OMG!

An exceedingly rare Sunday post.

A quickie.

I've blogged before about England being the dumbest place on earth when it came to health policy.

Well here's another statement. Andrew Lansley is the stupidest Health secretary or minister that the world has ever seen. Or the most corrupt.

Because only intense stupidity or deep corruption can explain his plan to allow folks like PepsiCo, McDonald's and KFC to write actual governmental obesity prevention policy in England.

I had already predicted that due to the decisions of Andrew Lansley in 20 years or so Britain will be crowned the fattest nation on earth. Perhaps he's trying to hit that goal in 10?

From this day forward on my blog (and other bloggers, feel free to come onboard), anytime an elected Health official makes a wantonly stupid decision, I'll be reporting it as a Lansley!

Nutrition policy in Britain hits bottom and digs.

Good lord.

First they abolished their national school lunch program.

Next they killed their front of package labeling plan.

Then they turned over control of their anti-obesity public health campaign to the food industry. Then they promised them they wouldn't regulate them.

After that they stripped their Food Standards Agency of their labeling oversight.

Then the British parliamentary under-secretary of state for health recommended that GPs start calling their obese patients, "fat".

Now?

Now they've recommended that basically anything that has a fruit or vegetable in it be counted towards the goal of their "5-A-Day" campaign for fruits and vegetables.

Stuff that'll be included now?

Godawful processed cereal bars, salty tomato sauces, sugar syrupy fruit salads and lots and lots of potatoes.

My prediction?

A decade or two from now Britain will overtake the United States for the title of the world's most obese nation, because while the States is far from perfect, public policy when it comes to nutrition and obesity, albeit slowly, is improving, while in Britain it seems it's free falling down the nutritional poop chute.

[Hat tip to Twitter's @evidencematters]

England's health officials continue to prove they're among the dumbest in the world.

Hat tip to my friend and colleague Arya Sharma for his tweet which pointed me to the latest from across the pond.

Apparently Anne Milton (pictured up above) the British parliamentary under-secretary of state for health, has called upon GPs to start calling their patients "fat" so as to "inspire" them to take, "personal responsibility" for their weight.

Of course the notion that obesity is a disease of the individual, of "personal responsibility" and not a disease of a toxic, obesogenic environment is one near and dear to the food industry's so-called heart.

As I've reported this week on my blog, the messages the food industry want shouted from the rooftops include:

- There's no such thing as a bad food.
- Obesity is caused by inactivity and treated through exercise.
- It's about "balancing" energy in vs. energy out.
- It's about taking "personal responsibility".

And lately British health officials have been singing all four.

I know I have some British readers and wondering if you folks might know - is there a transparent means whereby money spent by the food industry lobby on your politicians can be tracked? Given what's come out of the mouths of your officials these past 2 years, I'd be willing to wager tens of millions of pounds are involved.

To add to Anne's crystal clear clarion call of stupidity, here's a quick recap of what were once only the wet dreams of British food marketers yet now are their daily realities:

Jan. 2009 - England's government launches 3 year "Change4Life", food industry funded and government overseen program replete with useless messages of the, "Eat less, exercise more" camp with emphasis on the "exercise more".

June 2010 - England's Health Minister Andrew Lansley slams Jamie Oliver inspired school lunches campaign that led to the removal of processed garbage from middle schools.

July 2010 - England's Health Minister Andrew Lansley spews the food industry party lines of, "there's no such thing as a bad food", to the Faculty of Public Health in London while informing them of the British government's divestment of any involvement in Change4Life. He then tells them he's turning over direct control of Change4Life to the food industry and in return for their continued funding he's promised not to regulate them.

July 2010 - England strips their Food Standards Agency (FSA) of their food labeling responsibilities because they had been pressing for the adoption of front-of-package traffic light labeling. Now that labeling's been formally returned to the hands of industry's best friend Andrew Lansley, guess what? No traffic lights.

All I can say is good thing they've no longer got an exclusively socialized medical system over there for so long as the likes of Anne Milton and Andrew Lansley are at their health system's helm, that system's in big trouble.

England - the stupidest country in the world (when it comes to obesity)?

Wow.

Wow, wow wow.

How's this for the dumbest thing you've ever heard a country do to help combat obesity - England has just turned over the reins for it's already crappy Change4Life program (I've blogged about it before) to the food industry and in return for Big Food's help the government's already promised not to mess with them anymore when it comes to things like labeling, taxes or other nutritional regulations or reforms.

I have no words and as regular readers know, it's tough to render me speechless.

Wow.

As Marion Nestle put it on her blog,

"Moral: Expect no public health messages about eating less, or further restrictions on health claims from this campaign."

[Here's The Observer's scathing editorial about the decision.]