So we're at last going to see an end to junk food advertising aimed at children. And with the announcement came the expected outcry from companies that make their money selling bad food to kids, as well as health professionals who say the new rules will not go far enough.
'A load of junk' screamed the Sunlast weekend, telling its readers that 'TV bosses were furious?at a nanny-state advertising ban on junk food which will cost them£39m'.
As broadcast watchdog Ofcom unveiled its plans, the Sunquoted Channel Five chief executive Jane Lighting: 'This is a tough decision, and we are disappointed that it is even more draconian than the stringent measures Ofcom originally proposed.'
The Daily Mirrorcited campaigners who 'hit out at &Quot;inadequate&Quot; new rules' as measures fell short of the blanket ban before the 9pm watershed widely demanded. The British Medical Association's Dr Vivienne Nathanson was quoted saying: 'Isn't children's health more important than advertising revenues?'
Proposals also emerged this week to give obese teenagers stomach surgery on the NHS after a ruling by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. The Daily Mailclaimed that the decision had caused an 'outcry' while The Observer's headline told its readers that the 'NHS must pay for fat children to get surgery'.
It is well known that the government is struggling to meet its obesity target and that the nation's ever-increasing waistline is impacting on children most. Perhaps it is time for ministers
to ring-fence NHS funding to fight the flab.