THE Oxford dictionary defines nanny state as “a government regarded as overprotective or as interfering unduly with personal choice”. However, we should ask: what do they want to protect people from and why would they interfere?
A fine example of such nanny-state interventions are the actions taken to minimise the use of tobacco (ie taxes, a ban on TV advertising, a ban of smoking in public places, health warnings on packaging). As a result of these interventions the percent of people who smoke went down from around 60 per cent in 1950s to below 20 per cent today. Interventions translated into millions of lives saved.
Today the majority of the Scottish population have excess weight, which is followed by the burden of obesity-related diseases like cancer, type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, shorter lives, worse quality of life, and a growing cost to the wider economy.
Anyone who thinks that the government interferes unduly with personal choice should have an honest think about what and who else is currently interfering with our choice. What is making 65 per cent of the Scottish population choose a diet that makes them overweight and obese?
Why would Scotland have such different obesity and health records than, say, Sweden or Japan? Our physiologies or will power are not different, but our food environment is different. The environment around us shapes our choices everyday.
What we eat depends on what’s on shop shelves and what’s on special offer in the shops; what we recognise from home, friends, TV, media; how easy it is to get to certain shops or restaurants; and how much time we have. If we take a step back, it should be clear that our food environment and food system strongly influence our diet.
We need to see and understand the whole picture. Telling a child to drink water will never work if the child never sees anyone else doing it, if there are no water fountains at school and public places, and water is more expensive than sugary drinks.
If we are serious about improving our diet and our health, we need to take a good look at our food environment and food system. The Good Food Nation Bill gives us the opportunity to do this: with clever and brave actions we can achieve much more than improved diet and health in Scotland.
Dr Anna Gryka
Policy Officer, Obesity Action Scotland
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel