Fat Sweedish Kids

A study on obesity in Sweeden concluded the following:

Stockholm schools that banned sweets, buns and soft drinks saw the number of overweight children drop by six percentage points in four years, a Karolinska Institute study published on Monday showed.

A bit more in this brief regurgitated press release, I mean article, about the study:

The number of overweight or obese six-to-10-year-olds dropped from 22 to 16 percent in the 10 Stockholm schools that participated in the study by banning sweets and introducing healthier lunches, the Swedish research institute said in a statement.

A control group of schools that did not introduce specific food regulations saw the number of overweight or obese children rise from 18 to 21 percent.

The results of the project were to be presented on Monday in Budapest at an international conference on obesity.

So the number of fat kids decreased in the schools in the study. But you, the reader will think, aha, those kids must have slimmed down. But remember that the first paragraph told us that the number dropped after 4 years, considering a group of 6-10 year olds. Basically, this is an almost entirely different group of young people, but the impression is given that this is a matched pairs experiment. These kids don't necessarily have to be from the same families after four years.

One of the chief problems is that participation in the study was voluntary, so schools would consciously decide whether or not kids would be in the low-carb group or the control group. Those who would choose the restriced group would presumably want to be in this group to impress the parents, who would largely (ha! largely) want to be in this group. Likewise, those who want the freedom to drink sodas, etc, may not be as concerned with their health, or at least concerned enough that they would be effected. There would also be, presumably, parents moving into the districts of the other schools, based on their position, if they wanted better regulations.

The last sentence makes sense for parents who don't have the spines to be the ones deciding their kids' lunches instead of their own kids. For most people though, that sentence points out the futility of the regulation argument. Kids can certainly still get sweets, etc at home and elsewhere away from school, and at that age, it's entirely a function of parental controls.

As far as food that is provided by the school, it should absolutely be designed to be healthy, and good too. Kids who buy lunch at school should get something reasonably healthy, and there's not really a good argument for selling soft drinks in elementary schools. But if parents are going to decide what to give their kids, then why mess with that? I can see justification in saying no sodas for the young kids, but banning buns? One has to draw the line at some point.