Joshua Cheshire is a Senior Coordinator at Students for Liberty UK. He has written and spoken on issues of regulation, free speech, and dystopian fiction.
As is often the case, the government’s latest episode in their war of fun is just them making a meal of everything. The policy in question looks to frustrate as many people as possible, whilst simultaneously failing to achieve its stated objectives.
The announcement that ‘unhealthy’ foods such as deep fried products, cheese-based dishes, and sausage rolls are to be heavily regulated and in some rare cases banned outright in schools has prompted justified ridicule. Every British student will fondly remember the feeling. You enter the lunch hall, exhausted after a morning spent learning a set of equations in maths. But then you remember – it’s Friday, and fish and chips is on the menu.
Compared to other school meals, which are consistently rated lower than prison food for both enjoyment and nutrition, the occasional slice of pizza or battered fish is a welcome relief. The government’s target of reducing childhood obesity may well be a noble aim, yet the proof of this policy as effective is fishy at best.
The first issue to raise is one of portion sizes. As a veteran of our education system, I remember supplementing my barebones lunch with chocolate, crisps, soft drinks, and every other imaginable source of ill-health. School meals are served in small, often unsatisfying and underwhelming portions. Cutting calories on a school lunch is all well and good for children facing obesity, but one must also consider the sizeable high-sugar breakfasts, the rucksacks full of snacks, and the fast food dinners which make up a much larger portion of their diet outside of school.
Secondly there is the problem of children who are underweight or facing malnutrition. For many low income families, the school lunch is the main meal in their child’s day, and the relentless pursuit of cutting calories can leave children with slim pickings when trying to meet their calorific needs.
Whilst obesity is certainly a risk, malnutrition is also tied to cardiovascular problems, stunted growth and a whole host of health concerns. The 2024 discussion paper ‘Calories Out’ found that “for every child who moves from the obese category to the healthy weight category, at least two children become underweight” as a result of previous food reformulation schemes.
The third element is the removal of joy from lunchtime. The rare treat of ‘unhealthy’ food can put a smile on the face of any tired pupil at the end of the week. It is hard to forget the alleged chef Jamie Oliver’s bizarre attempt to convince a group of school children not to eat chicken nuggets.
On television, he made the fried dish using a recipe which is wholly inaccurate to any recipe for the product – including, interestingly enough, all major fast food chains – and succeeded in persuading the British public to buying his cookbooks. Unfortunately for the Turkey Twizzler Tyrant, all of the children involved said they would eat the chicken nuggets despite him making them deliberately ‘icky’ by using ‘waste’ products from the chicken. The truth is that sometimes we like food that is unhealthy, and that is okay.
In a recent documentary for Channel 4, public health guru Tim Spector told the public that ultraprocessed food is bad for our health, he then defined ultraprocessed food as “food which has been processed that is bad for your health.” It is this sort of circular reasoning by so-called academics that has deep fried the brains of policymakers and left them petrified of bogeymen and buzzwords.
Rather than regulate more, it is about time that the stack of public health rules be put on the scales, and, probably, Ozempic. Educate parents to make better choices for their children, whilst letting there be some edible meals served once a week at school. It’s possible to teach people to eat better without lying to them like Spector and Oliver, and without using the strong arm of the law. It is time that this government left its puritanism sleeping with the fishes
Joshua Cheshire is a Senior Coordinator at Students for Liberty UK. He has written and spoken on issues of regulation, free speech, and dystopian fiction.
As is often the case, the government’s latest episode in their war of fun is just them making a meal of everything. The policy in question looks to frustrate as many people as possible, whilst simultaneously failing to achieve its stated objectives.
The announcement that ‘unhealthy’ foods such as deep fried products, cheese-based dishes, and sausage rolls are to be heavily regulated and in some rare cases banned outright in schools has prompted justified ridicule. Every British student will fondly remember the feeling. You enter the lunch hall, exhausted after a morning spent learning a set of equations in maths. But then you remember – it’s Friday, and fish and chips is on the menu.
Compared to other school meals, which are consistently rated lower than prison food for both enjoyment and nutrition, the occasional slice of pizza or battered fish is a welcome relief. The government’s target of reducing childhood obesity may well be a noble aim, yet the proof of this policy as effective is fishy at best.
The first issue to raise is one of portion sizes. As a veteran of our education system, I remember supplementing my barebones lunch with chocolate, crisps, soft drinks, and every other imaginable source of ill-health. School meals are served in small, often unsatisfying and underwhelming portions. Cutting calories on a school lunch is all well and good for children facing obesity, but one must also consider the sizeable high-sugar breakfasts, the rucksacks full of snacks, and the fast food dinners which make up a much larger portion of their diet outside of school.
Secondly there is the problem of children who are underweight or facing malnutrition. For many low income families, the school lunch is the main meal in their child’s day, and the relentless pursuit of cutting calories can leave children with slim pickings when trying to meet their calorific needs.
Whilst obesity is certainly a risk, malnutrition is also tied to cardiovascular problems, stunted growth and a whole host of health concerns. The 2024 discussion paper ‘Calories Out’ found that “for every child who moves from the obese category to the healthy weight category, at least two children become underweight” as a result of previous food reformulation schemes.
The third element is the removal of joy from lunchtime. The rare treat of ‘unhealthy’ food can put a smile on the face of any tired pupil at the end of the week. It is hard to forget the alleged chef Jamie Oliver’s bizarre attempt to convince a group of school children not to eat chicken nuggets.
On television, he made the fried dish using a recipe which is wholly inaccurate to any recipe for the product – including, interestingly enough, all major fast food chains – and succeeded in persuading the British public to buying his cookbooks. Unfortunately for the Turkey Twizzler Tyrant, all of the children involved said they would eat the chicken nuggets despite him making them deliberately ‘icky’ by using ‘waste’ products from the chicken. The truth is that sometimes we like food that is unhealthy, and that is okay.
In a recent documentary for Channel 4, public health guru Tim Spector told the public that ultraprocessed food is bad for our health, he then defined ultraprocessed food as “food which has been processed that is bad for your health.” It is this sort of circular reasoning by so-called academics that has deep fried the brains of policymakers and left them petrified of bogeymen and buzzwords.
Rather than regulate more, it is about time that the stack of public health rules be put on the scales, and, probably, Ozempic. Educate parents to make better choices for their children, whilst letting there be some edible meals served once a week at school. It’s possible to teach people to eat better without lying to them like Spector and Oliver, and without using the strong arm of the law. It is time that this government left its puritanism sleeping with the fishes