Eat Right, Earn an iPod

TheMster writes "The BBC is reporting on the UK government's latest policy to tackle obesity - through offering iPods and XBoxes to pupils. The lucky lads and lasses of 29 Glasgow secondary schools will be part of the pioneering scheme, which utilises the newly introduced swipe-card canteens to create a system of the 'better you eat, the bigger the treat'."

Comments

Runners Up?

[LiquidCoooled]

Runners up in the competition get XXL t-shirts as prizes ;)

pioneering scheme...

[k4_pacific]

Nutrition... Free iPod...

Would this be a food pyramid scheme? /ducks

Re:pioneering scheme...

[Muhammar]

in school cantina, you often do not want to eat stuff that looks like it dropped on the bottom of the food pyramid. Haver you seen what goes there under name of fruit, salad?

In Limburg, Belgium, they have pilot program trying to swich kids from Cola to ...beer. Low alcohol low calory version of it. The dark kidbeer is especialy popular. iPods are not included.

Re:pioneering scheme...

[Big Mark]

This is Glasgow. The parts of it they are talking about are the most deprived regions in Scotland and probably rank amongst the most deprived regions outside the Third World. Light beer won't work as the dobbers are already on 15% "tonic wine" and have impregnated someone by the time they're sixteen.

This is just the first step. Giving kids status symbols for not being fat-guzzling, booze-swilling louts will do more for the crime figures and life expectancy than any amount of "zero tolerance".

Re:pioneering scheme...

[Anonymous Coward]

> Would this be a food pyramid scheme? /ducks

Good thing you ducked, I just spewed Lagavulin 16 all over the fookin' monitor! (+6, wasn't ready for that)

sounds easy

[sven_eee]

sounds like fun, first you take a packed lunch, second you use your card for all the apples you can throw

Re:sounds easy

[ikkonoishi]

Or you beat up the class nerd and steal his card to buy your junk food.

Free Xbox?

[filterchild]

Here, kids, we'll give you a reason to sit on your ass all day if you get up and excercise!

Outside food

[tmbg37]

Hmm, what happens when kids buy healthy food from the cafeteria, but also eat unhealthy snacks from home?

Re:Outside food

[Kinky Bass Junk]

The schools introduce bag searches upon entry.

I don't wanna know where kids are gonna hide their fudge, though.

Re:Outside food

[MolBiolDoc]

There was an interesting study done with overweight kids in a metabolic unit that says a lot about how we eat and what it is doing to us. They split the kids into two groups, fed them all exactly the same amount of fat, carbohydrates, and protein during regular meals, but let them eat whatever they wanted between meals (and recorded it).

The difference between the two groups was high vs. low glycemic index....in other words, one group got carbohydrates that were absorbed fast (think prepared foods, instant oatmeal, etc.) and the other good complex carbohydrates (e.g. steel cut oats). Remember, the absolute composition of the diet was otherwise the same.

The kids that ate the simple sugars ate 500 - 600 more calories a day between meals, since the simple sugars induce a "stress response" and induced the urge to eat prior to the next meal. Those unhealthy snacks prime susceptible kids to eat more, and 500 calories/day in 7 days (3500 cal) is another pound of fat.

In Australia, they have the glycemic index on food labels. Our kids could benefit from that here.

Re:Outside food

[John Seminal]

Hmm, what happens when kids buy healthy food from the cafeteria, but also eat unhealthy snacks from home?

At least they won't turn as fat as quickly.

Say the school cuts out a 200 calorie pepsi out of the diet, and saves another 300 calories by baking the chicken instead of frying it, and offering a salad instead of fries. That is 500 calories, a pound of fat a week.

Toss in some vigerous PE classes, and that will burn another pound of fat a week.

Under those conditions, the kid could eat a big mac and suck down a milkshake, and he will still have a chance of not balloning to 300 pounds.

Plus, if the school encourages extra curricular activites, anything, the kid will have more of a chance to burn calories. Join track or basketball or even band. March around for an hour, or stand up for an hour. It is better than sitting in front of a TV with a bag of Freto's and a six pack of Old Style.

Re:Outside food

[John Seminal]

Truthfully, why should I care if a child weighs 300lbs.

You are gonna pay, directly or indirectly. There ain't no way around it. The kid turns 40 and has a heart attack, insurance or not. Who pays? In one case, premiums go up for all. In another case, the state pays.

Will we ever have a society where someone is dying and the doctors say "FUCK YOU, NO TICKEY, NO WASHY"???

I hate to tell you, but not everything is measured by the dollar. It is a poor measure of happiness. It is a great shiny thing that people chase. But you'll be suprised when you catch it, there is no big red bow, no party, no instant coffee.

What is it? Freedom to go places. Sure. But weather or not people like you in the new place, the money has little infuance over that.

So, you should care if the guy next to you ballons to 300 pounds.

Also, the same reasons why he turns 300 pounds could happen to you. Maybe you have a faster metabolism. Maybe your kids won't.

Thinking from the perspective of "me, me, me" is why so many hate Bush. Did you ever see the story of Scruge?

Re:Outside food

[HaloZero]

They already do this.

Not kidding, either. I'm not sure about the UK (though I probably should know better...), but one of thw two high schools I went to prohibited students from bringing backpacks of any size smaller than X - unless they returned a waiver signed by the student, and the students legal guardians (i.e. parents) stating that while on school grounds they had absolutely no reasonable expectation to privacy - were prohibited. Bags of or larger than size X were absolutely prohibited. I do recall being searched on my person more than once. I was even suspended for a week for having wire cutters (I was taking basic electronics and introduction to engineering design at the time). Being an AP/Honors student sucked when all you were allowed was a dinky little bag.

Searching for, finding, and seizing snacks wouldn't be a major step.

Re:Outside food

[mongbot]

In Australia, they have the glycemic index on food labels. Our kids could benefit from that here.

No they don't. There is no legal requirement, and even most foods that _are_ low GI don't have the actual GI figure stated, just "Low GI".

Also, FAT MAKES PEOPLE FAT. It's that simple. Under normal conditions, carbohydrates are not converted to fatty acids, even if they are high GI. Study after study (check Google Scholar) has shown that de novo lipogenesis (DNL) only occurs if very excessive levels of carbohydrate are ingested (i.e. 600g+ per day).

Regardless, explain why Asian countries are healthier and leaner than Americans and Europeans even though they have a high calorie intake, don't exercise much more and the staple of their diet is a high-GI starch (white rice). It's because they eat less fat.

I'm so tired of this ridiculous hysteria about carbohydrates.

Rewarding healthy eating isn't inherently bad ...

[daviddennis]

but I would think this scheme would be exploited mercilessly by kids who simply brought their candy bars in from home, ordered the "good" food and threw half of it away.

If I can figure out that kind of scheme, a kid surely can.

D

Great

[Doomstalk]

So they can eat right, and then sit on their asses when they get their new Xbox. That's not self-defeating at all.

How smart

[ucblockhead]

Giving kids XBoxes so they don't get fat? That's a bit...counterproductive.

Now if it was an XBox wired so it only got power from an exercise bike...that'd be genius!

Re:How smart

[Kinky Bass Junk]

They keep off their weight by playing violent video games, then entering the real world and running away from the cops! It's the perfect combination.

clearly....

[kinzillah]

the way to encourage keeping trim is to give kids video games

Interesting

[vga_init]

I think it would be interesting if this works out.

With a system based on incentive, the kids are going to have to buy certain foods in order to earn a nice toy. This can a child's eating habits on the basis of one or two meals a day, but that does nothing to preven them from filling up on junk at other times. Many overweight people who diet fail for this reason: they eat healthy foods IN ADDITION to extra junk on the side.

Eating healthy has lots of incentives that aren't obvious. People have a hard time realizing some key benefits of eating right, such as better health, more energy, and a thinner body, which is why these incentives tend not to work.

Substituting those for something like an iPod or XBox could give kids more drive, but only to earn the prize; the real benefits may only come as side effects, if at all.

We can only hope that such a program will help kids to develop a taste for healthy foods. I know from personal experience that eating something you find unappealing enough times will not only build tolerance, but actually lead to preference if done enough.

Re:Interesting

[LiquidCoooled]

Rmemember,

Eating healthy foods is not just for those who are obese.

I was 6 foot tall and weighed under 8 stone for a long time (into my 20s). Thankfully now I am more stable and have gained a few stone, but I know I'm not the only one.

I too hope it works, and that there aren't any side effects.

Another slight side issue, there is a famous English chef called Jamie Oliver, he has pushed for better school meals (because currently they are utter shite), and it is having major effects up and down the country, and those kids who have changed their school diets also push for better food at home.

I don't think in the majority of cases this will be a problem.

Re:Interesting

[nb caffeine]

my mom fed me brocolli when i was a baby. Its one of my favorite vegetables. Try to get friends of mine to eat it, however, hasnt been so successful.

Re:Interesting

[MHobbit]

No kidding.

People tend to forget that eating right isn't the only part of losing weight/staying healthy. Exercise is an integral part. Now, if the people who were conducting the study added on exercise to this little "experiment", they'd hopefully get better results.

Re:Interesting

[Alioth]

No, the original poster didn't use it to sound 'lighter' than 112lbs, the stone has been the colloquial way of talking about a person's weight in Britain probably for centuries.

Doctors in Britain (or anyone formally weighing you) will use kilograms, but in convesation, no one talks about kilos or lbs for people's weights, it's always stones. (Bloody hell, look at that fat bastard, he must weigh at least 25 stone! But him over there is so skinny he can only weigh 8 stone soaking wet)

XBoxes?

[Mensa Babe]

"The BBC is reporting on the UK government's latest policy to tackle obesity - through offering iPods and XBoxes to pupils."

XBoxes? To tackle obesity? What else? A new TV set? Why not offer bikes and musical instruments instead of XBoxes and iPods? This is the most stupid idea I have ever heard.

Re:XBoxes?

[EnsilZah]

Wait 'till they unvail the Fucking For Virginity campaign next week.

Re:XBoxes?

[tintub]

Wait 'till they unvail the Fucking For Virginity campaign next week.

Well they've been "fighting for peace" for a while now

Why XBox's???

[QuietLagoon]

I can see the point of offering an iPod. iPod is mobility -- walking, running, exercising, not sitting on your gluteus maximus.

But what's an XBox about? Spending endless hours sitting in front of you TV.

Reward the correct behaviour.

Government and Obesity

[linguae]

Even though an iPod or XBox would be a very nice incentive if I were a kid participating in this program to eat healthy, where does the prizes come from? That kid's parents' taxpayer dollars. As a Libertarian, why should the government have to use the possibility of an iPod in order for them to eat healthy, or, better yet, why should the government even be involved in health issues such as obesity? The rise of obesity is a societal issue and it is best dealt with by society, not government.

In this particular case, if I had a choice, my taxpayer dollars should go toward the replacement of the school's unhealthy food items with healthy food. No bribes necessary; the kids would eat better. Besides, there are plenty of healthy foods; one can snack on fruits instead of chocolate candy bars, for example.

Re:Government and Obesity

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

"why should the government have to use the possibility of an iPod in order for them to eat healthy, or, better yet, why should the government even be involved in health issues such as obesity"

Because they have the power to do something.

That's what separates liberals and liberatarians. Liberals believe that the government has a responsibility to serve the public, and that it should do so by funding programs that are effective.

Things like standardized healthcare, public roads, public schools, police services, fire departments, and many other government services are both necessary and effective ways of increasing the standard of living.

We're not hearless bastards. We shouldn't act like it for some foolish ideological belief in what government "should" do.

Next time you turn on the lights, you can be damned glad that the government bothered to subsidize the deployment of the power grid that makes them work. The next time you want to drive to the store, you can be damned glad that the government bothered to build roads. And the next time you get in an accident, you can be damned glad that the government will ensure that you get the healthcare that you need.

Unless, of course, you live in the United States. In which case, I hope you have good health insurance.

Re:Government and Obesity

[linguae]

You might be shocked when I say this, but I actually have no problem with basic health care, public roads (other than they can use some repair, widening, and better planning), public schools (even though it is long overdue for a dramatic reform), police and fire protection, and some other government services. That's when "state's rights" and the idea of state/county/city government steps in. When we Libertarians speak of "big government," we speak of the federal government providing every service under the sun. If we had a Libertarian-controlled congress and presidency, some of the federal programs will be removed, but the states will decide whether to fill in the void with state/county/city government programs or not. (Now, a Libertarian as a state governor would take a different approach since s/he can't cut any federal programs, but can start making the state adopt some of the society-related Libertarian issues; the economic aspects of Libertarianism are more geared toward the federal government, even though state governments can use a bit of financial conservatism these days).

You stated that the government should be involved in health issues because "they have the power to do something." However, power can always corrupt. For example, we don't mind the government requiring public schools to only give out healthy foods for meals. Their schools = their rules. However, I have a problem when the government tries to act like my parents. For example, I would be upset if the government told me that I can only have so much food per day, and that it was against the law to eat more than the legal limit of "junk food" per day. All of these restrictions on my liberties because they claim that "stopping you from eating 'too much' would result in saving lives like yours."

I personally believe that the government should just let people be free, and stay out of people's private lives. If I want to eat so much that I'm 600 pounds and close to death, well then, the government should let me. I just don't expect the government to pay for my medical bills, and I expect to be fully responsible for my own actions. That's why I'm a Libertarian.

In the case of this iPod for eating right thing, I still believe that since the government controls the schools, the government should change the schools' meals to healthy choices. They don't need to attach iPods and XBoxes in order to convince people to pass on chocolate bars and switch to fruit; rather, the schools should stop serving junk food and start serving healthy meals. In fact, as I think about it, this argument isn't about libertarianism vs. [insert other political ideology here]; that's irrelevant now. This is about attaching incentives in order to get kids to eat healthy foods versus the school just offering only healthy foods in the first place.

Thanks for making me think.

Re:Government and Obesity

[Strontium-90]

Something to keep in mind is that *if* this program works, the cost of the iPod/XBox will easily be offset by the health benefits. And I'm not talking about the "Yay, people are healthier!" type of health benefits. I'm talking about the "Yay, people are healthier and thus my insurance costs are lower and the government has to spend less of my tax money on keeping our overweight population alive" type of health benefits. I agree that schools should provide healthier foods, but that won't always be enough. An active incentive like this program would have certainly gotten me to eat healthier as a kid. Forcing me to eat healthy food would probably just have resulted in me eating unhealthy food later on. However, making it *my choice* to eat healthy teaches me something that I can continue to do throughout life. Of course, multiple approaches to the problem is probably the best way to go.

Re:Government and Obesity

[arkhan_jg]

In this particular case, if I had a choice, my taxpayer dollars should go toward the replacement of the school's unhealthy food items with healthy food. No bribes necessary; the kids would eat better. Besides, there are plenty of healthy foods; one can snack on fruits instead of chocolate candy bars, for example.

This is already happening - in no small part due to a campaign by a celebrity chef, Jamie Oliver who basically started revamping some school's menus as an experiment.
The biggest problem he encountered is the kids are used to their unhealthy foods, and won't even try the healthy options - they just bring in snacks and junk food. Incentives are one way to get them to switch.

As for the Government getting involved; the nation's health has a direct impact on productivity. In the UK, we also have a nationalised health care scheme, the NHS, because we rather like the idea of everybody getting healthcare, not just the wealthy. Obesity is shaping up to be one of the biggest killers with heart disease. Healthier kids means healthier adults. Healthier adults mean better quality of life, and longer life, and less expense for the NHS.

The purpose of government is to improve the life of a country's citizens, and the health of those citizens is a big chunk of it. It's certainly no worse than farming the issue out to corporations to make profit on.

Re:My problem is that I eat excellent food --

[Anonymous Coward]

You are probably giving me the weight through some inter-dimensional wormhole. Just wait until I figure out how to reverse the polarity on my caloric intake manifold, and boy will you be sorry.

iPod-onomics

[clem]

And so the world takes another step towards an iPod-based economy.

Re:iPod-onomics

[YouHaveSnail]

Having recently returned from a trip to London, I can tell you that they're pretty close to an iPod-based economy already. Seemed like every third person I passed on the street had a MP3 player, and I only noticed one MP3 player in an entire week that wasn't an iPod.

A better way?

[Jane_Dozey]

How about eliminating unhealthy foods from schools? Sure, the kids can get it elsewhere but why spend a load of money (taxpayers money) on a scheme that has so many obvious holes it's unlikely to DO anything?

Every action...

[Crash Culligan]

...has an equal and opposite government program. Or at least that's what it feels like.

Any day now, I look forward to hearing how the music and software industries are trying to discourage P2P piracy by giving away candy.

Eat right in whose definition?

[iamacat]

I hope they don't give out iPod photo for eating only grains and vegetables, because then many children will eat diet unhealthy for them just to get a shiny toy. Low carb diet is over-hyped, but it sure worked for some people. And if you are an athlete or have an iron deficiency, you don't want to skip red meat. I would never be in reasonable shape or have a good energy level if I followed the stupid food pyramid. Better to reward exercise and knowledge of health issues rather than specific food.

Re:Oh fuck you!

[timmyf2371]

If you pay your Council Tax to Glasgow City Council then yes actually it is.

Being a Glaswegien myself and having read all about this in our local press I think it's a truly brilliant idea. For those of you who are unaware of the reasons behind this, Glasgow and most of the west of Scotland is commonly called the "sick man of Europe" due to the high amount of fatty and junk foods we consume. By junk food I'm not talking about McDonalds, BK and their ilk but in fact such delicacies as deep fried Mars Bars and friend pakora suppers.

This scheme is designed to encourage Glasgow's school children to start eating healthier and to raise the average life expectancy of Glaswegiens which is currently the worst in the UK at 72.9 years, compared to the highest of 82.4 years.

In short, you might not like your taxes going towards incentives for Glasgow's kids to eat healthier but then again I'm sure many other citizens don't like their taxes going towards services that you use and they have no use for. Guess it's a two-way street, hmm?

WARNING

[Espectr0]

Do NOT eat IPod Shuffle!

XBoxes can help

[77Punker]

Is there a DDR game for XBox? If so, that'll tackle the fat! They should make it a bundle!

It's not counter-productive...

[Mister Impressive]

XBOX IS HUGE. Therefore it will be a weight lifting exercise getting it home, assuming their arms don't fall off. Also, having an iPod will also have to improve their cardiovascular capacity, having to run for their life when being mugged for being recognised with the white earphones.

I don't know what you guys are thinking, this DOES help the kids.

Point is being missed

[Turn-X Alphonse]

Okay this is misleading. The idea is NOT to make them lose weight, it's to get them to EAT BETTER. The idea is this way kids will at least try fruit and other healthy options and hopefully stick with it. Most news channels covering it today had kids saying they liked fruit and would stick with it.

So this isn't "go on a diet you fat fucks" it's "try this, it's nice".

Re:How about some COMPETITION???

[Cruciform]

the whore from Desperate Houswifes get bannged by a black,

James Earl Ray, is that you?

If you think interracial sex is a threat to today's children, don't let any of them see what you do with your sister. :)

Its Simple.

[nighty5]

1) Just get rid of all junk food in school canteens.
2) Only deal with food distributors that embrace healthy eating.
3) Get rid of soft drink vending machines - period. (replace with water & fruit juice)

Re:The Schools are the PROBLEM!!

[blahplusplus]

You said: " But back to fat kids. Why do they get fat? Is PE so value-less that the bright kids no longer want to take it. Is PE a time when 50 kids sit around for 10 minutes waiting for the teacher to set up the game, play for 15 minutes, then get 10 minues to go back and change?"

I say:

Kids hate PE for a number of reasons, but many kids in PE are teased and bullied to death and thats why they want out of Phys-Ed in the first place. You got to keep the culture of fucked up and dominant asshole kids in the first place from from picking on those and shunning those less athletically inclined then they are.

Re:The Schools are the PROBLEM!!

[Chrispy1000000 the 2]

So let me get this straight:
You had a shot with the system, and you said screw it.
You *think* you are smart, yet you don't want to learn.
So why are you complaing? You never even gave it much of a chance.

Just remember, a lazy bastard who has a +160IQ is still a lazy bastard who will never amount to anything.

In France...

[ElGanzoLoco]

In France you can't get anything but a 3-course meal (salad - main dish - cheese OR dessert) + a slice of bread at the school restaurant. Most school meals taste like crap, depending on which private company is responsible for the restaurant (my school was lucky ;) but they are healthy at least.
During meal, you can only have water, no Coke, diet Coke, Dr. Peppers, or any of all that crap.

Snacks & sodas are available in the school through vending machines, but they are rather expensive, which limits the consumption. Also, the legislators are thinking about forbidding the vending machines, and they probably will succeed. We saw some fruit vending machines appear, which I think is rather nice.

There is no such thing as a "cafeteria" in schools.

Also, no school is sponsored by Coke, Pepsi, or anyone at all for that matter (forbidden).

The obesity rate is extremely low, albeit rapidly growing among the youngest (due to unhealthy meals at home & junk food everywhere, which is much more difficult to control).

Re:The Schools are the PROBLEM!!

[empvirus]

This is true. Back in my middle school days, almost everyone hated P.E. Except for those who were already in sports like basketball and whatever. This is why we need to think up funner ways to exercise than just making the kids run around the track or college style wrestle until they fall over. I mean, is it that hard to see that the kids aren't having any fun?