WHO report: 74% of men & 64% women in UK overweight by 2030

[Psamathe]

So how do we get GP surgeries to encourage cycling with groups like CTC and friends, rather than merely tolerate us by providing small average-at-best cycle parks?

I suspect that as in all walks of life, there is a massive range within GPs as well. Until a couple of years ago, my GP practice was useless and made no effort to encourage activity and when I e.g. was diagnosed with arthritis in my feet and had to give up countryside walks my then GP just shrugged (no suggestion like try cycling, try swimming, etc.). Then they had some new GPs in and I was assigned to one and he is really keen to make sure his patients stay active. So when my rotator cuff (ignored by other GPs for 2+ years) was causing me to give-up kayaking, he was giving me stronger NSAIDs, and offering steroid injections as he felt it really important I stay as active as possible.

My local council run fitness/health centres (gym, badminton, squash, swimming, etc.) has a referral scheme where your GP/nurse/health professional can refer you to the centres where you have a meeting with staff to decide what you want to do, they teach you how it works (e.g. gym equipment) and I believe you get 12 free sessions. I don't know how many people are referred under the scheme (though I guess the Council should know).

I wonder if there are schemes but maybe there are barriers (GPs more concerned with getting patients through in 10 mins, too high a poverty requirement for a referral, too many patients referred who didn't take it up/complete it so they no longer bother, etc.). I never used to bother which GP I saw (they really don't know like in those nostalgic days) though now I've been assigned to a better one I tend to try and stick with him. So I've seen quite a lot of different GPs over the last 6 years and (except my current one) in my experience they seem a pretty uninspired group. It must be a difficult job and the increasing workload, politicians talking garbage (e.g. see your GP at weekends, see your GP within 48 hrs, etc.) and they are already overworked fully booked-up for over two weeks - it must be disheartening.

Ian

[Edwards]

Keith. I don't think any of your points are worthy of a response. Please stay on topic with the OP. That is after all the way forums work.
You're not advancing the subject one bit.

Play the ball, not the man.

The only reason that you are saying this is because you know that you can not give any meaningful response to the original point I made.
The one that states that according to you this report is flawed. Unless of course you are now stating that BMI is a useful tool.

That is on subject and you still have not answered that.
As for playing the ball you could do with taking your own advise again.

[RogerThat]

Please keep on topic. Referring to previous threads from the past advances this argument no further.

That's how forums are supposed to work. I'm not reiterating previous arguments for your benefit.

I really don't think any of your points are worthy of addressing. You're simply trying to rehash a previous topic. Which is poor form . If you had read the entire WHO report you'd see that they are also critical of the inefficacy of BMI. If you can't advance the argument why bother contributing at all?

Stay on topic!!

[Edwards]

Please keep on topic. Referring to previous threads from the past advances this argument no further.

That's how forums are supposed to work. I'm not reiterating previous arguments for your benefit.

I really don't think any of your points are worthy of addressing. You're simply trying to rehash a previous topic. Which is poor form . If you had read the entire WHO report you'd see that they are also critical of the inefficacy of BMI. If you can't advance the argument why bother contributing at all?

Stay on topic!!

I am on topic and the question is simple is the article you linked to flawed.

Clue to the answer Yes/No .

For any meaning full discussion it should be established if the document is flawed.

[RogerThat]

If you were citing the original WHO paper rather than a hack precis of it in the Guardian I would take your point seriously.

As it is it's just frivolous to discuss anything, given the reference document you cite.

I'm not really interested in frivolous, unreferenced 'opinion'. Which serves no one, least wise advancing the topic.

[mjr]

There are several 'Healthy Living' cycling and walking schemes in my area. Unfortunately they are piecemeal and usually poorly funded, attracting less than a dozen or so participants. It is heartening however to see many of my ex patients joining schemes like these.

The thing is, we've already got rides organised by CTC and others. Having new ride programmes start up, struggle and collapse where there are existing rides doesn't help existing groups and doesn't help the new riders (because they won't usually be told about existing rides, especially if the new programme operator's funding is linked to numbers participating). Wouldn't it make more sense to harness these first and only start new rides where there are gaps?

As well as our own publications, our local rides are promoted on Facebook (very easy), British Cycling (easy), BBC (fiddly and needed a disclaimer/explanation that we don't insure people to ride)... but with Norfolk County Council and Active Norfolk, we can list our group, but we can't list our rides because they don't run or manage them. Unsurprisingly, we have very few referrals from NCC or AN. We get more from putting posters up in Borough Council buildings.

Clearly a lot more money has to be pumped into preventing illness in the first place, a mass participation scheme would be advantageous, with perhaps the carrot and stick of free clothing or equipment provided (helmets, locks ect)

I would be worried that giving out special clothing would reinforce the misconception that cycling requires them. Practical things like locks and lights could be good carrots (actually, we used to get locks subsidised by the police but I need to check whether that scheme is still running after the latest cuts). I'm not sure what you meant by sticks? (The clothing? )

I'd personally like to see it incentivised by an NI contributions reduction for those participating in such initiatives.

I'd like that, but then I would, wouldn't I?

[Tangled Metal]

Sorry but your link was to the guardian article not the WHO report. If you wanted to discuss only the WHO report and not the article then link to that report. Discussing the article you linked to (which TBH I didn't read neither) is the way forums work, although threads often drift and go off topic. That is also how they work. I only say this because IMHO there is a discussion on your original post and the contents of the included link.

[toomsie]

Absolutely agree, preventative programmes like this are very much underfunded and often trivialised by NHS service providers. The stark reality is that we're looking down the barrel of a diabetes disaster in less than 10 years time. The burden in the NHS will be truly collosal.

Its time to put some money away then. Spend less time on the road and more in the office, blood.

[mercalia]

A load of nonsense. Any one with eyes sees that the younger generation of people of working age seem to have taken on board the message and are slim and lithe?

[Lucyhan]

Whatever method you use anyone can see that this nation is getting fatter. Back in the 1980s a day's cycling would include a stop at in a field or park bench and consume home made sandwiches and tea from a flask. Now we stop at coffee shops, drink lattes full of milk and sugar and eat slices of cake as big as doorsteps and goodness knows what is in them.

It is the food industry which has got us used to eating larger portions of high calorie foods, it is and groups that encourage exercise are fabulous but it has to go hand in hand with healthy eating, pointing out the pitfalls of the 'tea stop'.

[toomsie]

If we had a free market healthcare, I would choose one that give me discounts for healthy lifestyle. Fortunately we have the NHS. A service so great ..... that we are forced to pay for it.

[Edwards]

In large scale samples of the population BMI is the only cost effective tool to use anything else is just not practical. So even with the cyclist who are going to be classed as obese the numbers are going to be so few that it does not matter.

In my opinion cycling on its own will not now or ever make any difference to the rise in Obesity. People will need to make life style changes in their diet first. It is of no use cycling a few miles then eating all the sugar rich stuff that is available now.

There was some interesting stuff on the BBC comparing the rise in sugar intake (population as a whole) and the rise in the average weight of the population.

I take responsibility for my own weight and do not expect the NHS to do so for me but it seems that others do not, then it is not their fault when they get fat.

[Gearoidmuar]

Well now, there is a problem Huston and it's a big one.
The British, Irish and most European Nations are getting fatter.

One of the major causes is the NHS and other National Health Services' glaringly unscientific dietary advice, which is based on the old Pyramid dietary advice in which most food intake was recommended as carbs. This was based on nothing scientific and was invented by an unqualified vegan clerk in the American Department of Agriculture. This is what caused the worldwide obesity epidemic, in association with processed food. What's wrong with processed food? It all has added sugar. Sugar is the number one baddie, followed by refined carbs. These raise insulin levels and create a vicious circle of hunger and more fat.
Cure?
Cut the sugar, reduce carbs a lot and eat fat.

Result?

I lost 40lb starting on it and have had the weight off, without hunger, for a year.
Exercise is pretty useless at getting weight off, though it can help to keep it off. Scientific trials say so, not just me.

[mjr]

This was based on nothing scientific and was invented by an unqualified vegan clerk in the American Department of Agriculture.

I'll pick this one, David Mitchell - is it true or not?

Cure?
Cut the sugar, reduce carbs a lot and eat fat.

The problem is that if you "reduce carbs a lot and eat fat", many people become unhealthy: underweight with high blood cholesterol and glucose readings. While most people do seem to need to reduce intakes of refined sugars and carbs, you're far better replacing them with a mix of protein, unrefined grains and olive/rapeseed/sunflower fats, not simply any old fat.

[Gearoidmuar]

This was based on nothing scientific and was invented by an unqualified vegan clerk in the American Department of Agriculture.

I'll pick this one, David Mitchell - is it true or not?

Cure?
Cut the sugar, reduce carbs a lot and eat fat.

The problem is that if you "reduce carbs a lot and eat fat", many people become unhealthy: underweight with high blood cholesterol and glucose readings. While most people do seem to need to reduce intakes of refined sugars and carbs, you're far better replacing them with a mix of protein, unrefined grains and olive/rapeseed/sunflower fats, not simply any old fat.

The word is TOSH!. They don't. They get down to a natural weight, their bloods become good, their blood sugards fall etc. Rapeseed and sunflower oils are NOT good for you. They have too much Omega 6 fats. Olive Oil is good.

The top lipid experts in America are now using LCHF diets for their patients.