Nanny Hates Biscuits

Nanny's Chief Medical Officer, Dame Sally Davies, has claimed that women are eating 'two biscuits too much each day' and that we need to be 'honest' about weight.

Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Desert Island Discs she said: 

'I do think we have to be honest about it and not pretend people aren't overweight or obese.

What makes this happen is, on average, women eat one or two biscuits too much each day. 

So we need people to think about [eating] a little less every day so that they're stable and [eating] a little less than that every day to steadily drop [their weight]'.

This means that Nanny thinks that it's okay for men to eat as many biscuits as they wish.

It is clear that our eating, drinking and smoking habits won't kill us; we will die of misery instead!

Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.

Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.

Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Visit Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts

Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries

Nanny Bans Golden Brown

Oh dear, those of you who like golden brown crisps and biscuits are in for a disappointment.

Nanny will ban golden brown biscuits and crisps, as from next April.

For why?

Nanny's new rules force manufacturers to reduce acrylamide, a chemical found in burnt food which may lead to a higher risk of cancer.

The Telegraph quotes industry figures who said the products would now be baked at lower temperatures for longer, meaning they would lose their colour but not their crunch.

How absurd!

Fear not, it's not all bad, the salt and sugar (that Nanny also hates) in these products will remain!

Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.

Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.

Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Visit Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts

Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries

The Dangers of Biscuits

Oh dear, it seems that owing to Nanny's Home Orifice rules Norfolk police were forced to record an incident of a man being hit by a biscuit as a “violent crime”.

The victim was hit by the biscuit after a minor disagreement with a woman, and was left with “small red mark”.

Stephen Bett, the Police and Crime Commissioner, is quoted by the Telegraph:

“You could not make this up – it’s jaw-dropping.

I am sure people will find these examples of what the police are having to record as violent crime hard to believe to say the least.

I frankly couldn’t believe what I was reading. Is it any wonder we have seen a rise in recorded violent crime in Norfolk if these types of incidents have to be logged?”

In other cases a child who was brushed across the arm with a stinging nettle by another child was also recorded as ABH (actual bodily harm).

A Norfolk Police spokesman said:

"National crime recording standards give the police a duty to record these incidents as crimes in Norfolk. However, we have a measured approach to how we deal with them.

Just because we record these as crimes, it will not always be appropriate to arrest or seek to prosecute the alleged offenders.

It is very much dependant on the individual circumstances of each report."

The country has gone truly mad!

Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.

Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.

Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Visit Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts

Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries

CASHing In On Publicity

I see our old "chums" from Consensus Action on Salt and Health (Cash) are up in arms again about the "dangers" of salt.

I do wonder, given how many very real threats there are in the world that we should really be worried about, how it is a group of people have ganged up together to fret about salt; they must have very empty lives?

Anyhoo, it seems the latest "threat" from salt comes in the shape of biscuits such as "Butterkist". CASH are howling with anxiety that parents should not feed their kids too many biscuits, because they contain salt.

Amusingly some major brands seemingly contain more salt than chicken nuggets.

As per the Telegraph Asda’s fun size mini milk chocolate digestives were the worst offender, with 0.4g of salt per 25g bag. Sainsbury’s giant white chocolate and raspberry cookies packed 0.39g per 60g biscuit. McVitie’s mini gingerbread men had 0.3g of salt for every 25g pack while its dark chocolate hobnobs delivered 0.2g per 19g biscuit.

For comparison, a Birds Eye fish finger contains 0.2g of salt per 28g finger. A Sainsbury’s chicken nugget has 0.24g of salt per nugget. The adult recommended daily allowance is 6g, but for under-threes it is just 2g.

Graham MacGregor, professor of cardiovascular medicine at Queen Mary, University of London who by happenstance runs CASH said:

“With salt hidden in sweet foods as well, how can parents be expected to prevent their children from eating too much, putting them at risk of high blood pressure as adults?” 

FFS!

Parents, if they have any commonsense, won't be feeding their kids these things night and day. In the event they are, it won't be the salt that kills them it will be their obesity.

On that note, if CASH is so worried about the salt, why don't the manufacturers simply add some more sugar to counterbalance the salt?

At this point I ask myself if only human beings were able to excrete excess salt in some way, like animals do; eg via sweat or their kidneys?

Oh, hang on a minute.....

Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.

Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.

Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Visit Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts

Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries

Nanny Bans Knobs

Oh dear I see that Nanny continues to believe that we are not capable of controlling our appetites and, as such, she must do it for us by rationing our food intake.

This time Nanny's gimlet eye has fallen on portion sizes of biscuits, doughnuts, cakes and milky drinks. Nanny wants food manufacturers, cafes and supermarkets to  reduce the portion size of these items.

However, even Nanny has realised that these plans may in fact be bollocks.

Can you see the problem children?

Yes, that's right, people will simply buy more of the smaller portions. The Telegraph notes that even Nanny's Department of Health realises this.

The other obvious point (obvious to everyone except Nanny) is that customers will be ripped off by retailers et al, as the prices charged will not be reduced proportionately in line with the portion size reduction.

Nonetheless Nanny's Department of Health has created evidence (or has done "scientific" research - take your pick) that "shows" that biscuits alone contribute 6% of daily saturated fat intake of a child aged between four and 10.

Yawn.

Why doesn't Nanny simply issue us with some war time ration books, and be done with the pretence that she believes in individual choice and freedom?

Anyhoo, restrictions on the size of biscuits will meet fierce resistance from the knob throwers of Cattistock.

My advice to all and sundry is "hang on to your knobs, lest Nanny takes them away!"

Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.

Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.

Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Visit Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts

Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries

Nanny Bans Coffee Again!

In December 2010 I wrote the following:

"I see that the health and safety gestapo have identified another "threat" to children. This time the "threat" comes in the form of tea and coffee served at "coffee mornings" hosted in childrens' centres.

Mill Hill Children's Centre, Waterlooville Hampshire, is the latest childrens' centre to fall under the jackboot of the health and safety brigade. Despite having served tea and coffee to adults, who take their kids there for some 7 years (for an entry fee of £1), hot drinks are now banned (ironically the £1 charge remains!).

The fact that people drink tea and coffee at home seems to have escaped Nanny, as does the fact that the risk of a kid having a cup of coffee dropped on him/her is considerably less than the risk of the kid being injured in a car crash whilst being driven to a "coffee morning".

Knobheads!"

Well here we are in March 2012 and I see that the health and safety gestapo have again donned their jackboots and banned coffee yet again.

Nanny's chums from Warwickshire County Council recently sent "officers" to a mum's and children's playgroup called "Coffee and Play" at Stratford-upon-Avon and have ordered the group to change its name to "Baby Play" and banned the serving of coffee and biscuits.

The coffee has been banned because of "health and safety" rules, and the group has been told to serve breadsticks and fruit instead of biscuits (for "health" reasons).

The group has been running for five years, and not one child has yet been injured by coffee. However, the council gestapo are adamant; coffee is banned!

Vicky Kersey, children’s centre officer at the county council said:

“To minimise any risk of scalding a child we have introduced a hot drinks policy at all of the county's children's centres."

As I noted in 2010:

"The fact that people drink tea and coffee at home seems to have escaped Nanny, as does the fact that the risk of a kid having a cup of coffee dropped on him/her is considerably less than the risk of the kid being injured in a car crash whilst being driven to a "coffee morning".
Knobheads!"

Warwickshire County Council should be told to fuck off!

Councils are the enemies of the people!

Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.

Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.

Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Visit Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts

Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries

The Dangers of Biscuits

My thanks to Uncle John for alerting us to this cretinous piece of Nannyism as reported in the Telegraph the other day, involving that hallowed institution the School Dinner Lady.

Kathleen Lavery (Dinner Lady) was forced to leave her job at a primary school in Brookeborough near Enniskillen, after she offered one of the kids (a relative) a biscuit.

Can you guess what Nanny did to her?

She was disciplined over the incident.

For why?

Seemingly, the act of an adult (a school dinner lady I would note) offering a child a biscuit constitutes potential "grooming" of the child.

Needless to say, given the odious side of human nature, she was then subjected to such a barrage of gossip and rumours by others that she was forced to leave her job.

Remember folks a few hundred years ago rumours of people being witches etc would be enough to have them burned. Now that we don't believe in witches anymore, we need another way to vent our hatred and self loathing onto others.

Those who subjected this poor woman to this ordeal should hang their heads in shame and beg her forgiveness.

Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.

Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.

Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Celebrate the joy of living with booze. Click and drink!

Visit Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts

Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Toys, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries

Tuck Off!

Nanny's hatred of individual liberty and freedom knows no bounds, as Ryan Staples found to his cost the other week.

Ryan, who is only 10 years old, was in the habit of taking a packed lunch to his school (Lunsford primary in Larkfield). At least he was, until the school's Gestapo intercepted his lunch box.

Ryan's crime?

The lunch box broke Nanny's rules on what we are allowed to eat.

The result?

Ryan has been banned from eating with the rest of his mates in the school dining room, until he learns to bow his head to Nanny's superior wisdom, and until he brings only "allowed" food in his lunch box.

Whilst he weighs up the pros and cons of bending to Nanny's authoritarian rules, he has to eat alone in the headmaster's office. That really is cruel and nasty.

How pathetic is this?

Child abuse wouldn't you say?

By the way, in case you are wondering what was so evil about the food within his lunchbox (drugs maybe?), it contained two snacks, instead of one.

Specifically Ryan's lunch consisted of a sandwich, fruit, fromage frais, cake, mini cheese biscuits and a bottle of water. The cake and the biscuits broke the snack limit.

They were "discovered" when a teacher checked his lunch box.

Why the hell are teachers inspecting lunch boxes?

That is an invasion of privacy, all the more so because Ryan is not old enough to fight back.

Malcolm Goddard, the headmaster, said:

"We take healthy eating very seriously and everyone is aware of our new policies."

Breathtaking arrogance!

As a child I took a lunchbox to school, it contained all manner of weird and wonderful oddities; banana sandwiches, chocolate cup cakes, hot soup, home made crisps etc.

The teachers never ever tried to inspect the food, or interfere with what we ate (they were down the pub). I am now 44, and in good shape (oh yes:)).

Nanny quite clearly intends to break the will and spirit of every citizen in Britain, she starts with the children so as to make her task easier.

Tuck Off!

Nanny's obsession with svelte waistlines shows no sign of abating. She has issued yet another edict about how unbelievably fat we are becoming, and yet again is trying to interfere in our eating habits.

This time she is targeting school children. In a spectacularly naive move, Nanny is instructing schools to stop selling junk food and instead make children eat seeds.

Yes that will work!

As Samuel Johnson once said:

"A small boy in search of vitals is an abomination".

The thought of Nanny trying to satisfy young appetites with a handful of seeds is really beyond a joke. Unless the seeds were coconuts, I really don't think that this latest "initiative" will suck-seed (get it?..come on folks I'm really trying here!).

Anyhoo, Nanny's friends in the School Food Trust (SFT) have issued draft guidelines that say nuts, seeds and yoghurt drinks should replace crisps, chocolate and fizzy drinks in tuck shops.

Nanny is going to introduce laws to stop children eating sweets and chocolate, that will be among the toughest in the world.

Ironically this new "initiative" comes just days after the Audit Commission attacked Nanny for her indecision and lack of leadership, over the implementation of measures to curb child obesity.

Nanny will ban crisps (which, by the way, are a very good source of vitamin c), but for some strange reason will allow cakes and biscuits. Erm aren't cakes and biscuits fattening and bad for the teeth?

Nanny's chum Dame Suzi Leather, chairman of the SFT, said that the rules, to be introduced from September, were necessary because children were eating too much sugar, fat and salt with "little or no nutritional value".

Quote:

"They [the new rules] cannot succeed if pupils are surrounded with chocolate, crisps and drinks that fill them up with sugar and fat during the school day.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that when these products are removed, behaviour improves and this could also have implications for better learning."

There you are folks, Nanny makes up rules based on anecdotes, not scientific fact!

Dame Suzi is not just content with banning vending machines and altering tuck shop menus, she is also going to poke her nose into children's lunchboxs. Nanny will issue lunchbox guidelines, telling parents of what should be included in a healthy diet.

Not her business!

Now here is why all of these rules will fall down:

1 Children are given large sums of pocket money each week by their parents. The children use this to buy "banned food" off school premises. My local store, owned by my friend Karim, is awash with kids buying Jamaican patties, chocolate and crisps when there is a school break.

2 The majority of a child's calorie intake takes place outside of school.

3 The poor diet of children is largely down to the muck being fed to them by their parents. How does Nanny intend to deal with that?

4 It is not the state's job to regulate what people eat. If parents are too stupid or lazy to feed their children properly, the responsibility for their children's ill health rests with them, not with the state.

5 When I was a child I ate a full breakfast, school lunch, dinner and a supper; all of this was washed down with 3 pints of milk a day. I am now 43, in excellent health and indeed am slim and "athletic" (yes ladies it's true:)).

5 These people did not become great British icons by eating nuts and seeds:

Nanny Bans Celebrities

Nanny has decided to ban celebrities; what a bloody good idea!

Unfortunately her ban only extends to those celebs who endorse, what Nanny describes as, "junk food".

Nanny's chums in the Department of Health have issued an advisory document that says:

"Role models for children should not be used to endorse or personally to promote products (high in fat, salt or sugar) or promotional offers to children."

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it the role of parents to decide what children should eat?

The state should have no part to play in dictating, in a consumer society, who can buy what food product.

Nanny's dictat may end campaigns such as the Walkers crisps advertisements starring Gary Lineker, and David Beckham's £1M a year appearances for Pepsi (no loss there then).

The ban also extends to cartoon celebrities such as The Incredibles, who are used to promote Golden Nuggets cereal, and Spiderman who for reasons best known to himself eats Penguin biscuits rather than flies.

The proposals affect TV and cinema adverts, as well as internet campaigns and product packaging aimed at children under 12.

Needless to say Nanny does not think that her proposals go far enough. Health campaigners want a total ban on advertising "junk foods" to children. They believe voluntary codes will leave "wriggle room" for manufacturers, who will still be allowed to use celebrities to promote "healthy" foods and balanced diets.

Nanny classifies some brands of sliced white bread (which we all know to be the work of the devil!) and chicken tikka masala as "healthier choices".

Interestingly, because Nanny cannot issue a law that covers all potential loopholes, non celebrities that have been created especially for the promotion of "junk food" will not be banned.

In other words, Ronald McDonald and Tony the Tiger live to fight another day.

If only Nanny could kill off that irritating clown, then she might have maintained some credibility!

Tuck Off!

I am really beginning to think that Nanny must have had some very unpleasant experience with food, when she was a child; that at least would be one explanation for her seemingly never ending obsession with telling us what we should eat.

Nanny's dear old chum Ruth "Opus Dei" Kelly decided to have another go at our diets last week, by banning most of the products on sale in the school tuck shop (for my non Brit readers, a tuck shop is a sweet shop based within school grounds).

Opus Kelly said that crisps (did you know that crisps contain a very high amount of vitamin C), chocolate and fizzy drinks would be banned from sale in schools from September 2006.

If they are so dangerous, why is she not banning them now?

Does that not leave a whole year for the greedy and ignorant to sue Nanny for putting their little brats at risk, by exposing them to these "dangerous" products?

Anyhoo, in 2006 schools will be required by law to empty vending machines of the products, and remove them from tuck shops.

Opus's spokesman said that new legislation would cover "any way that food is served in schools, in tuck shops and vending machines".

That surely means that a child's packed lunch box is also subject to this law?

Taken to its logical conclusion it means that, in order to comply with the law, schools will have to search lunch boxes and confiscate "non conforming" sandwiches and biscuits etc.

It's not just crisps and fizz that are banned; burgers, sausages and other foods high in fat, salt and sugar content will also be outlawed as part of new nutritional standards for school canteens.

Ms Kelly told delegates at the Labour Party conference in Brighton last week:

"I am absolutely clear: the scandal of junk food served every day in school canteens must end.

And because children need healthy options throughout the day, from next September no school will be able to have vending machines selling crisps, chocolates and sugary fizzy drinks."

If these products are so bad, why has Nanny taken since 1997 (when she first grasped power) to act?

Aside from the obvious issues about freedom of choice and packed lunches, we do live in a free market economy etc, there is another small point. Vending machines are controlled by outside contractors, under the Government's Private Finance Initiative.

The contracts will have to be changed; that will cost a lot of money, if the companies are willing to change them.

I would like to make simple personal observation here.

When I was a child; I ate chips, burgers and sausages at school with no ill effects. I am now 43, and am not obese (in fact ladies, I am quite fit and trim;)).

The reason being, that whilst at school I may have indulged, at home my parents made sure that I ate properly; ie vegetables, fresh meat etc.

The health issue for some children is the fact that they eat shit all day; the fault lies not with Nanny, but with their lazy ignorant parents.

Now, we as a society are going to have to make a choice; do we let people live their lives as they wish (even if soem of us disapprove of their ignorance and stupidity), or do we dictate what they eat at home as well.

If Nanny is serious about her desire to improve the eating habits of the children, then this is the nettle that she will have to grasp.

To my view, Nanny is not serious at all; these headline catching "bans" are merely gimmicks pushed onto Nanny by other headline grabbers, such as Jamie "I work for Sainsburys" Oliver.

That is the real trouble with Nanny, she is not sincere; and that is why no one listens to her.

Nanny's Traffic Lights

Nanny has come up with some daft ideas in her time; but this one, I think, takes the biscuit.

Note: biscuit is one of Nanny’s proscribed substances, as it contains sugar. In order to comply with Nanny’s rules; I have to say at this point that I do not endorse the consumption, or use, of biscuits except in medically prescribed situations.

Nanny is now waging war against all forms of food, which she sees as posing a clear and present danger to our health. You will of course be aware that the human race has been in existence for around 150000 years; it has been able to handle its food affairs reasonably well, up until now.

However, “Nanny Knows Best”; she has decided to disregard the last 150000 years, and will be implementing a “traffic light system” for food labelling.

A what?

A traffic light system.

Nanny will divide food into three groups:

-The Good

-The Bad

-The Ugly

Each will be assigned a colour code; red for ugly (ie very bad), amber for bad and green for good. Needless to say only the most sinful of food will be assigned red such as; chocolate, confectionery, doughnuts, crisps and fizzy drinks.

Now, in theory, that is fine. A nice red label telling you that a bar of chocolate is high in fat and sugar, no doubt imparts information that you were not aware of; doubtless it will stop you from buying this product.

However, what about foods such as cheese, butter and milk?

Under Nanny’s rules these would be labelled red as well; after all, they are fat aren’t they?

On this basis are we to stop eating butter, cheese and milk products?

Or maybe, as we humans have discovered over the last 150000 years, we just need to exercise common sense; eg one bar of chocolate a day won’t kill us, 150 in a day might.



Nanny, get a life; and leave us to live ours!