Keir Starmer’s government has just made itself even more unpopular. This week, Health Secretary Wes Streeting, author of One Boy, Two Bills and a Fry Up, specified which junk foods will be banned from online and TV adverts before 9pm. The prohibition, set to begin next October, is so extensive that it includes lentil-based crisps and seasoned chickpeas. It’s drastic, disciplinarian, and very sensible.
Obesity costs Britain dearly
The ban, which covers adverts promoting foods or drinks that are high in fat, salt or sugar, comes as Britain desperately needs to contain an alarming rise in obesity. Two-thirds of adults are overweight and just under a third are living with obesity, according to the House of Lords Food, Diet and Obesity Committee. Obesity costs Britain dearly. The NHS spends more than £11 billion a year on health problems that stem from the condition, and the annual cost to the economy is in the tens of billions.
The government is intent on both short-term reduction and long-term prevention. A third of children are overweight when they leave primary school, and one in five are obese. Some children will grow out of it, but the stats show that many will not. Britain thus faces the prospect of ever more adults dealing with a condition that is the second biggest cause of cancer (behind only smoking). The personal, social and economic impact of obesity is undeniable.
Critics have, rather predictably, cried ‘Nanny State!’ It would certainly be better if the government didn’t need to meddle, but nanny might be helpful given how many parents are currently unable to keep their children eating healthily. The best general arguments against state interference usually appeal to individual responsibility, but whereas this can be expected of adults, it hardly applies to children. As the government outlined, studies ‘find a clear link between food advertising and calorie consumption’. This is an attempt to break that connection.
Which is not to say the ad ban will be a panacea. In fact, it should only be one part of the government’s strategy to fight obesity. Labour, who took much of this policy from a plan put forward (and then postponed) by Boris Johnson, should look at the Cameron-Osborne levy on sugary drinks, which delivered immediate results. At the end of the first year of the so-called ‘sugar tax’, children reduced their daily intake by almost one teaspoon, and adults consumed more than two teaspoons fewer. The fact the obesity crisis rages despite this broadly-successful measure demonstrates there is much more to be done.
The ban also helps overturn common misconceptions of ‘healthy eating’. Many low fat yogurts (which one might assume to be healthy) are on the blacklist because they are processed and carry added sugars. You might think your body will thank you for shunning full fat, but the brunt is borne by your gut.
The causes of obesity are many – including poor diet, sedentary lifestyle and genetics. Labour’s ad ban is not suddenly going to make every parent prepare fresh meals, get children off the sofa, or rewrite DNA, but it’s a step towards trimmer public spending, a stronger economy, and a healthier Britain. The ban might be strict, but the crisis is severe.
Comments