Monday, 26 January 2015

39% Of Parents Should Not Be Parents

The British Heart Foundation - a multi-million pound cash generation and lobbying business posing as a charity - has decided it doesn't like useful and popular businesses advertising. So it is demanding that politicians please, please, think of the children! (natch).
Seven in ten (70%) parents have been pestered by their children to buy junk food they have seen advertised on TV, according to a new survey by the British Heart Foundation ahead of Heart Month this February.
Err, isn't pestering just what kids do, whether it be food, toys, sweets, playing in the park or keeping a snail as a pet? What is wrong with the other 30%? Doped up on Ritalin or something?
The BHF polled over 2,100 UK parents with children aged 16 and under, and found more than two fifths (43%) of those polled say they are badgered by their children at least once a week.
Once a week, eh? By crikey {yawn} it must be hell on earth.

But hold on. That 70% figure wasn't a regular pestering then, just at some point in their lives. Now I'm seriously worried about the other 30% - they may quite possibly be dead.
Almost two fifths (39%) of parents surveyed also said they think junk food adverts on TV make it difficult to help their children eat a healthy diet.
I suggest then, that it's quite clear that those 39% surveyed should not be parents in the first place. I find 'no' to be one of the easiest words to pronounce, and I have a vocabulary of - ooh - at least 500 of them.
The BHF believes that this survey highlights the urgent need to close legal loopholes in the UK’s regulatory system which mean companies are free to promote unhealthy food and drink products to children both online and on TV during popular family TV shows. 
It does nothing of the sort. It just says that approximately 12 million parents seem to be incapable of controlling their kids.
The BHF is calling for the Government to introduce tighter restrictions online and ban junk food adverts being shown before the 9pm watershed to protect children from making unhealthy choices.
Because that's why people ran round a field for 2 hours in their spare time ... so that their donations could be spent on political lobbying.
[Mike Hobday, our Director of Policy, said:] “We cannot allow companies to continue exploiting holes in the system at the expense of our children’s health."
"Our children", Mike? If I'd had any with you I think I might have remembered. You, Mike, can look after your kids, and the rest of us can look after ours, OK?

Well, it seems that 61% of us can, anyway. Good grief.


Geoff Cliff said...

Yes, 'our' children; conceived thanks to the kind government that does not (yet) sterilise potential parents before puberty, delivered in 'our' hospitals, educated in 'our' schools, and all thanks to the beneficence of 'our' system - funded, of course, by the beneficence of 'our' taxpayers. Included here, of course, are the companies that (mostly) pay taxes out of the profits that they make by providing products that people want to buy - the filthy capitalists who use 'loopholes' in the mass of 'our' regulations in order to force consumers to undermine the control freaks' views of how a 'free' society should be under 'our' complete control! These people are truly not of our world, they are not of our society. They are our parasites, and we must rid ourselves of them before they bleed us all dry!

nisakiman said...

Err, isn't pestering just what kids do, whether it be food, toys,
sweets, playing in the park or keeping a snail as a pet? What is wrong
with the other 30%? Doped up on Ritalin or something?

Having had four of the little buggers, I can say with some certainty that you are 100% correct in your assumption that what kids do is pester their parents for what has caught their eye at a given moment in time. I would imagine that this has been the case at least since cro-magnon man was clipping his sprogs round the ear and saying (negative) "grunt!".

As you say, DP, it is a bit of a worry that 30% have lost the ability to pester. One wonders what lies ahead for them in adulthood if they lack the ability to articulate and attempt to achieve what they want out of life in childhood.

Antipholus Papps said...

We cannot allow fake charities to continue exploiting our children at the expense of our political system.

There, fixed it!

Séan Billings said...

The 30% in question don't have to pester because they are in Mickey D's every other day anyway. Kids pester in an attempt to get stuff they wouldn't have otherwise. The parents being pestered are the ones saying "no".

"39% of parents surveyed also said they think junk food adverts on TV
make it difficult to help their children eat a healthy diet"

The assumption here is that the those parents are giving in, but that's not what it says.

Imagine in a survey about junk food a parent is asked whether junk food advertising makes it harder to get the kids to eat healthy food; what does saying "yes" mean? Does it mean they just give in and drive out for a happy meal or does it mean they have to say "eat your carrots" more often than they think they should need to?

truckerlyn said...

A little of what you fancy does you good - or so the old saying went!

The only time eating so called 'junk' food is a problem is when that is what the kids (or adults) eat EVERY DAY! To eat it a couple of times a month, or even once a week, is not going to harm them! In order to eat this food every day the parents would need to be pretty well off, though!

Away from the junk food, some very young children can take a few years to develop a taste for what is termed 'healthy' food, but the still need to eat, so it is obvious parents will give them what they will eat! (If they didn't they would be in court for child neglect)! Normal parents would try to introduce 'proper' food into their child's diet alongside the foods they will actually eat. Each child is different and their tastes will differ. To try and force the child to eat something it doesn't like is self defeatist as it will put the child off for life!

It would be a miracle, I know, but I would sincerely like to see people in government and those running these so called charities having to pass a Common Sense exam before they can even apply!

theprog said...

Why do people give them the answers they're looking for? Could it be that over half of parents have no idea that the results of a BHF funded poll are ALWAYS going to fuel demands for gov to nag and persecute them? It's more or less the same across the entire PH board.

Yankee Doodle said...

Hey Wal-Mart, quit putting the candy by the cash register.

RooBeeDoo said...

If Mike has children, he must be in the 39% bracket of being unable to cope with the demands of bringing up children. Perhaps Social Services could help him out.
Then again, if he doesn't have children, why is he trying to groom us into thinking 'our' children are his children ... sounds a bit paedo to me ;)
Damn, we can all play that game ...

Sam Duncan said...

“Exploiting holes in the system”? How is, say, Cadbury's going to ITV and saying, “How much for a week's run of 30-second slots at half-past four? Right, we'll take 'em.” exploiting holes in the system? The man's insane.

Sam Duncan said...

Really? All of you?

Or do you actually mean, “Sincerely, me and a few people I've spoken to”?

Jax said...

Oh, but DP, don't you know? These days being a parent just isn't de rigeur!! No, sirreee. These days mums and dads are supposed to be their kiddies' Bestest Friends, and the most important thing in the world is that their children like them. Always