This is Not Just Any State Intervention...

'It's not the fact that McDonald's are sponsoring the Olympics that's making everyone fat'

WHEN, in the supermarket, we read the back of food packaging and see that "E128, E102, hemlock, and cyanide" is written just above "may contain traces of bleach", we are divided in opinion. Some of us obviously think: "Hmmm... does this really need to be in a packet of crisps?" And some of us must think: "Ooooh! Buy one get one free!"

It's not only the fact that a radioactively luminous boiled sweet causes children to sing "I know a song that will get on your nerves" down your ear canal, scream "I hope you die!" loud enough for the neighbours to hear while the bathroom window's open, and write "Everybody hates me" on the wall in permanent marker; it seems the government are now suddenly concerned with the health risks posed by additives.

Ministers have agreed, this week, that if food manufacturers do not voluntarily phase out the additives, which the Food Standards Agency asked them to stop using earlier this year, they will pursue a ban through law.

Yet another item on the list of things to be banned.

Of course, the long-term effects of additives are unknown and while we don't want future generations to have two heads, fourteen ears and sound like Joe Pasquale, is it right to forge a slim, smoke-free, tofu-eating society by banning everything that is deemed to be bad?

The government have already banned junk food advertising between children's television shows and it was said last week that 80% of people think junk food advertising makes staying slim impossible. Although, this is more likely an excuse by fat people as to why they're still fat.

Blame it on the advertising.

This may make sense if people hadn't noticed that what you actually receive is never what is advertised.

The fast food you ordered, after looking at it on the poster, doesn't even slightly resemble what actually comes with your meal. Your fries are stale and cold, the chemicals in the fizzy drink are soaking a hole through the paper cup and your Super-Dooper-McBeef-Royale-Whopper burger looks like it's been trodden on by Queen Latifah.

But that's not all.

The debate into food companies sponsoring sporting events have also ignited a recent controversy. Cadbury's, McDonald's and Coca-Cola have already become official associates with the London 2012 Olympics. Carling put their name to the Football League Cup 5 years ago and surely, it should be that brands should be able to sponsor whomever they wish without state intervention.

If Carling wants to be associated with football, and Iceland want to be associated with old has-been "celebrities" sitting in urine in the jungle for the public's entertainment, they should, of course, be able too.

It's not the fact that McDonald's are sponsoring the Olympics that's making everyone fat.

That's just an idle excuse.

It's not even surprising the government gave up on criticising junk food companies who are sponsoring sports: "Welcome to the London 2012 Olympics - sponsored by celery," and "Welcome to the FA Cup Final - sponsored by Organic Whole Wheat Pasta," isn't going to work.

Unless the government come up with some decent, less intrusive and less totalitarian ways of changing people's lifestyles and eating habits, nothing's going to change.

There's even talk of free pedometers being issued to make sure everyone makes their 10,000 steps per day. But everyone already knows it's only 5 steps from the chair to the cupboard for a packet of crisps, 3 steps to the fridge for a chocolate bar, and then about 8 steps to the car.