评论
打印
The almost 700 obesity policies fell under the banner of 14 separate obesity strategies.
近700项肥胖症政策属于14个独立的肥胖症战略的范畴。
It is poignant to read the titles of these largely failed and forgotten strategies, which share an air of wishful purpose.
阅读这些折戟沉沙和被人们遗忘的肥胖策略的标题让人感慨万千，它们出于一种一厢情愿。
Under John Major in 1992, there was Health of the Nation.
1992年，在约翰-梅杰的领导下，出现了 "国家健康"的概念。
Next, under Tony Blair in 1999, came Saving Lives.
接下来，在1999年托尼-布莱尔的领导下，出现了"拯救生命"的概念。
Also under Labour came Choosing Health (2004), Choosing a Better Diet (2005) and Choosing Activity (2004, 2005 and 2005) and Healthy Weight, Healthy Lives (2008).
在工党的领导下，还有"选择健康"（2004年）、"选择更好的饮食"（2005年）和"选择活动"（2004、2005和2005年）以及"健康体重，健康生活"（2008年）。
The Coalition government produced Healthy Lives, Healthy People and A call to action on obesity in England (2011).
联合政府制定了《健康生活，健康人》和《英格兰肥胖症行动呼吁》（2011）。
Most recently, under the Conservatives there have been three instalments of Childhood Obesity: A Plan for Action and then, in 2020, Tackling Obesity.
最近，在保守党的领导下，已经发布了三期《儿童肥胖症行动计划》，然后是2020年的《应对肥胖》。
Notice how the words choosing and action keep reappearing in these strategies.
请注意选择和行动这两个词在这些战略中曾反复出现。
Given that poorer UK households would have to spend nearly 40% of their income to buy food for a healthy diet, according to recent data from the Food Foundation, to frame healthy eating as simply a matter of choosing is dishonest.
根据食品基金会最近的数据，英国较贫困的家庭必须花费近40%的收入来购买健康饮食的食物，因此，将健康饮食仅仅归结为民众的选择是不够公正的。
It's not choice if you can't afford it.
如果你买不起，那就不是选择。
Decades of research show that obesity is determined to a large extent by environmental factors such as socioeconomic inequality, the rise of ultra-processed food and the way that cities are built to facilitate car use.
几十年的研究表明，肥胖在很大程度上是由环境因素决定的，如社会收入差距过大，超加工食品兴起，以及城市建设推动了汽车的普及。
But policymakers of England have stayed wedded to the idea that weight is all about personal responsibility: just eat less and move more.
但英格兰的政策制定者一直秉持体重是个人责任的观念：只要少吃喝，多运动就能减肥。
The failures of obesity policy in England and the UK are part of a larger problem with food policy in general.
英格兰和英国肥胖症政策的失败是整个食品政策更大问题的一部分。
As well as being a source of joy and nourishment, food is Britains biggest employer, accounting for 4.1m jobs (most of them low-paid).
食品不仅是快乐和营养的来源，而且是英国最大的雇主，提供了410万个工作岗位（其中大部分是低薪工作）。
At the same time, poor diet is the countrys biggest cause of preventable disease and the food supply is also one of its biggest drivers of climate breakdown (10% of our greenhouse gas emissions come from agriculture).
同时，不良饮食习惯是造成英国可预防疾病肆虐的最大原因，食品供应也是气候崩坏的最大推动因素之一（我们10%的温室气体排放来自农业）。
And yet for decades, a food policy to address any of this has seemed to be missing in action.
然而，几十年来，解决这些问题的食品政策似乎一直缺位。
Fewer than a quarter of the policies analysed by Theis and White (24%) included any plan for monitoring their progress.
在Theis和White分析的政策中，只有不到四分之一的政策（24%）包括任何监督其进展的计划。
Nearly a third (29%) of the policies did not include any timeframe, any evidence or any position on who or what is responsible for driving the rise in obesity.
近三分之一（29%）的政策不包括任何时间框架、任何证据或任何阐明关于谁或者什么因素导致肥胖症上升的立场。
It isn't just that food policies in England have long been ill-suited to improving our diets.
这不仅仅是因为英格兰的食品政策长期以来不适合改善饮食。
It is that very few people, inside or outside government, seems to have the slightest idea what these policies actually are.
而是在政府内外，似乎很少有人知道这些政策到底意义何在。
