A new study, published today, reveals that one in 12 (3.6 million or 8%) of the nation is so overweight that they could be considered for gastric-band, weight-loss surgery*.  

The study, carried out amongst over 2,000 adults, also reveals that almost a quarter (23%) of Brits have a body mass index (BMI) that now classifies them as being ‘obese’.  This compares to 11% in 1999.   The definition of obese is a BMI of 30 and above.

The findings, released by not for profit healthcare organisation Nuffield Health, shows that there is an ever growing misperception of what ‘overweight’ means in Britain.  Today’s study shows that more than half (57%) of Brits are now ‘overweight’ according to BMI measurements. 

In addition to the 3.6 million overweight enough to be considered for gastric bands, a further 2.4 million (5%) people are now just two index points away from being considered for weight loss surgery (i.e. they have a BMI between 33.0 and 34.9). A man measuring five feet, ten inches and weighing 16.5 stone has a BMI of 33.1.

Despite the number of obese adults having doubled since 1999, the ‘Nuffield Health Weight Loss Report’s’ major cause for concern is the potentially fatal lack of general concern about weight and how it affects peoples’ health. 

While Nuffield Health says it has seen a doubling of bariatric (weight-loss) operations in the past year, the research shows that one in eight (12%) obese Brits still say they are ‘not bothered’ about their weight. 

The study suggests that while more people are able to correctly identify themselves as being overweight (75% in 1999, versus 89% in 2009); they are extremely reluctant to do anything about it.

The report shows that almost one in five (17%) obese Brits are not contemplating any form of weight-loss action.  This is in spite of 42% having been asked by their partner to shift some weight in the past 12 months.

The increasing failure of individuals to do anything about their own weight problems goes some way to explain how the nation is ‘eating itself to death’.  A separate study from the ONS (in March this year) showed the number of obesity-related deaths has leapt by 35% since 2003.

The report also highlights how reluctant people are to seek professional help with weight loss in the way they might with other medical problems.  Less than one in five (18%) said they would seek out advice from a health professional.  Only 5% said that they would ever consider weight-loss surgery.

Professor Michael McMahon, a leading consultant in the field of bariatrics and keyhole surgery from Nuffield Health, says:

“The increased acceptance of obesity is alarming. It is disappointing that in the last five years the emergency services have had to respond to over 1,700 requests to help move obese patients stuck in their homes. However, there are probably numerous social and environmental factors behind it.

“The majority of people go to see a doctor within one week of noticing a cold, cough or ingrown toenail, but the same people ignore obesity problems for a number of years before seeking professional help. This delay could be fatal.

“If people continue to turn a blind eye to their weight problems, they will see their life expectancy considerably shortened.  If nothing changes then I believe we could see one in six people eligible for weight-loss surgery within a generation. 

“The new research suggests that if the rise in obesity continues at this rate, the majority of the British population could be obese before the turn of the century. Clearly this is a situation that cannot be allowed to happen.

“The increasing profile of larger celebrities, for example James Corden, Eamonn Holmes, Ruth Jones and Beth Ditto, means that being overweight is now perceived as being ‘normal’ in the eyes of the public. We talk about the dangers of skinny media images, but the problem actually swings both ways.”

Dr Andrew Jones, Group Medical Director at Nuffield Health, adds:

“There are many ways that people could control their weight if they wanted to. Their first step should always be to look at nutrition and exercise.

“Since we linked health assessments with fitness and wellbeing centres, people are now able to get professional advice from nutritionists and senior wellbeing advisors - highly trained exercise professionals. Only if this approach doesn’t work, should weight loss surgery be considered.”

The ‘Nuffield Health - Weight Report’ also exposes the parts of the nation with the highest number of people failing to recognise they are overweight.

The denial hotspots are:

1. Cardiff (with 17% of overweight people incorrectly thinking they are healthy weight)
2. London (15%)
3. Norwich (14%)
4. Manchester (13%)
5. Birmingham (9%)

The report also reveals that people in Leeds and Edinburgh are most likely to recognise that they are overweight; only 3% of people in Leeds, and 7% in Edinburgh who were overweight failed to recognise the fact.

Professor Michael McMahon concludes:

“For people with a substantial amount of weight to lose, gastric bands and bypasses often provide the only route to a healthy and active life which can then be maintained through healthy eating and exercise.  The more people that begin to consider the possibility of this type of surgery, the more we’ll be able to start normalising attitudes to this type of treatment.”

For information on the weight loss advice and surgeries available at Nuffield Health, please visit http://www.nuffieldhealth.com/weight-loss-surgery

ends

Notes to editors

2009 research was carried out by Nuffield Health amongst a representative sample of 2,023 adults during March 2009.

1999 research was carried out by the Office of National Statistics amongst a representative sample of 1,894 adults during March 1999.

* According to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence bariatric surgery is recommended as a treatment option for adults with obesity if they have a BMI of 40 or more, or 35+ and other significant disease (for example, type 2 diabetes or high blood pressure).

The BMI weight ranges, as set out by the World Health Organisation are outlined below:

<18.4   underweight
18.5-24.9  ideal weight
25-29.9  overweight
30-39.9  obese
40+  morbidly obese

Nuffield Health is a registered charity and the largest not-for-profit independent healthcare provider in the UK. Its aim is to make independent healthcare affordable and accessible to all, helping people to take control of their health. For further information on the weight loss surgeries available at Nuffield Health Hospitals, please visit nuffieldhealth.com.

Nuffield Health Hospitals offer a range of weight loss surgeries across their hospitals network, including gastric bands and gastric bypasses.

The programme’s main case study was Max Mosley, last year alleged by News of the World to have participated in sado-masochistic orgies with prostitutes. Mosley argued that, as the story was not in the public interest, the papers should pay damages against him. As well as that, he is calling for criminal offences to be enacted in such cases, asking for jail time, on top of fines, for editors who flout the rules.

Unsurprisingly, the print media represented on the programme took a slightly different view, with Ian Hislop of Private Eye arguing that using privacy laws to seek injunctions about people’s private lives is a dangerous threat to the freedom of the press.

It’s a battle that’s bubbling away in circles both media and legal. Hugh Tomlinson, a QC with the firm Matrix, has warned that privacy laws are having an increasing impact on the way the tabloids operate: “We are gradually moving from a position where anything could be published unless it was forbidden, to the opposite: nothing about an identifiable individual can be published unless it can be justified.”

A case concerning privacy that’s been through the courts rather more recently is that of NightJack, a police blogger who won this year’s Orwell Prize. His posts gave an insider’s view of front-line policing, and included his views on social and political issues, as well as disguised anecdotes about cases he was working on.

After having heard rumours that the Times had uncovered his identity, NightJack went to court to prevent the paper revealing his name. The injunction was refused, and NightJack was outed by the paper after the judge ruled that blogging is “essentially a public rather than a private activity”. NightJack was subsequently disciplined by Lancashire Constabulary, the force he worked for, and the award-winning blog has been removed from its corner of the blogosphere.

At first glance, this case appears to be in stark contrast to that of Max Mosley: in Mosley’s case, journalists argue that privacy laws are encroaching upon the rights of media. In the case of NightJack, a paper’s right to print a story seems to outweigh an individual’s right to remain anonymous. However, when both cases are looked at a little more closely, the crux is the same: freedom of speech. In the first, it’s the media’s right to print stories that they believe are in the national interest. In the second, it’s an individual’s right to free speech, albeit in a medium that the world at large is still learning to deal with.

The judge presiding in both cases, Mr Justice Eady, has been previously lambasted from some corners of the press for the “imposition” of a privacy law. Following the NightJack case, there’s been more criticism from those who are deeming him an enemy of free speech.

Equally important to the debate is the consideration of whether an issue is genuinely in the public interest. The private sexual behaviour of consenting adults, whilst to some might be distasteful, probably isn’t something that we have a right to read about over our cornflakes. On the other hand, anything behaviour related to Nazism from a figure who heads up a major sporting body probably is. The everyday workings of a public service, funded by the taxpayer, could also conceivably be said to be something the public has a right to know.

Freedom of the press is a long-standing tradition in Britain, and one of which we should be rightly proud. So is freedom of speech. And whilst the European Convention on Human Rights does say that there’s a legitimate right to privacy, the debate is yet to be fully explored. But when it is, it’s something that needs to be tested in Parliament, not by individuals in the courts.

@ruthbarnett spends her time scouring Twitter, along with the other social media sites such as Facebook and Flickr, for information that might lead her to stories. She’ll keep an eye on the trends, watching popular topics under discussion to see what’s going on – something that she mentioned in a video interview she gave today to a breakfast briefing.

The fact that Sky News has seen fit to assign someone to the full-time role of social media correspondent should show beyond doubt its importance in the mediasphere.

Of course, Ruth explained this morning, she’d never rely on a single Tweet as the sole basis of a story – but she’d say the same of a single email, or phone call. Just because the source is new, it doesn’t mean that the old journalistic rules don’t apply.

There are many people out there for whom Twitter is something of an anathema: “God, no, I don’t use it,” said one of my friends recently. “It just seems like it’s the worst possible mix between egotism and voyeurism. If I wanted that, I’d watch Big Brother.”

My seventeen-year old sister – something of a barometer for me on these matters – provided another unscientifically-sourced opinion.

“Why bother?” she said. “I don’t need to know what everyone else is up to every second of the day.” Even for an avid user of Facebook and MSN, it seems that Twitter is just one step too far.

So it might be that it’s only in the media bubble where some forms of social media are living up to the hype.

But social media in general, and Twitter in particular, is a great way for journalists and the public alike (if they’ll listen) to be aware of the moment’s breaking news. It gets information out to a wide audience with an ease and immediacy that few other media can achieve. It’s been a particularly useful source of information in a variety of situations recently that film crews and journalists haven’t been able to reach: hotel rooms in Mumbai, in the Hudson river, or – currently – at a rally in Tehran. The latter, incidentally, is why Ruth couldn’t be there in person this morning, instead having to make hourly broadcasts on the Tweets coming out of Iran.

I don’t know that we’ll be using the language that we are – TwitScoop and hashtags – in several years’ time, or even Twitter itself, Ruth said earlier. But the fact remains that social media has fundamentally changed the way we talk to each other.

This democratisation of information – and the democratisation of instant information – is something that even the most sceptical out there soon won’t be able to ignore. For the moment, Sky might be ahead of the pack. But it won’t - and shouldn’t – be long before the other outlets catch up – even if it is to the chagrin of the world’s teenagers.

So we were unsurprised to see that the Halifax has taken full advantage of this fact, releasing a timely story about the cost of weddings – to the guests.

Statistics released by the bank suggest that attendance at a wedding costs, on average, £624.10. Ouch.

It definitely created some debate in the Van office: a colleague sitting opposite me fervently agreed that it’s an expensive process, with the conversation leading quickly on to whether the concept of a wedding list is an acceptable one, and taking up a good proportion of the morning.

With over half the office being involved in a wedding in some form this year, whether attending, boycotting or taking the plunge, the item was a great example of how a simple story can have real talkability: so long as it taps into a near-universal experience, and engages its audience. And if it’s a subject that can channel a little outrage, then so much the better.

I might reconsider that outfit, after all – for something a bit cheaper.

Sensitive to the media agenda, agencies have been holding back stories that aren’t time-sensitive, in the hope that they don’t get swallowed by the monopoly Claimsgate has on the media.

This could be a very wise move: in PR, as in everything, timing is crucial. It is possible to do everything right: a story can be newsworthy, and the press release perfect, but get the timing wrong and weeks of hard work can vanish into the ether.

For PRs, the news agenda has felt a little like a conspiracy for much of this year, with big-issue stories claiming column inches for weeks at a time. First (and still) the recession makes the headlines, bringing with it banks’ nationalisations and bankers’ golden goodbyes; and anyone in the healthcare sector of the industry will tell you that whilst swine flu might not have become the global catastrophe predicted, the media coverage was pandemic.

But here at Van, we’re not afraid of a challenge. We also know that by the end of a week, people are definitely amendable to something a little more light-hearted than a flipping MP and the rock-bottom price of their house. This was borne out today when a piece of research we released revealing secrets in the way you hold your drink became the BBC News site’s most emailed story.

It goes without saying that success is dependent on a variety of factors, and when placing a story, swimming against the media current can be dangerous thing to do. But examination of the signals that are out there can be the key to success, whether that’s in the office – or the pub.

A new study released today has revealed that the way you hold your drink says more about you than you might think.

The ‘Walkabout Drinks Report’ concludes that the way you hold your drink reveals key personality traits and gives away secrets you might not want people to find out.

After observing over 500 people drinking in bars across the country, Dr. Glenn Wilson, a consultant psychologist, has discovered eight types of drinker.

Analysing people’s body language and using the “Interpersonal Behaviour Circle” theory*, he has also pinpointed celebrities who seem to personify the types identified. They include the “Jack the Lad” Jason Statham; “Ice Queen” Victoria Beckham; “Fun-loving” Sarah Harding and “Playboy” Russell Brand.

The research was commissioned by Walkabout bars to help them get a better understanding of their customers. It suggests that people fall into only one of eight categories when they raise a drink to their lips.

The types of drinker are:

1. The Flirt: Usually a woman, who holds her glass with dainty, splayed fingers and uses it in a provocative way. She may position it over her cleavage so as to draw attention to her attributes or peer over the rim to make eye contact when taking a sip. She may “tease” the rim of the glass with her finger, perhaps dipping it into the drink and sucking it dry.

Assuming her agenda is appealing, the best way to approach is with reciprocal flirtatious gestures. Celebrities: Paris Hilton, Kate Walsh (The Apprentice).

2. The Gossip: This (mainly female) drinker tends to cluster in all-female groups talking about other people, and can be critical. She holds a wine glass by the bowl and uses it to gesticulate and make points in conversation. She is inclined to lean over her drink, in towards others so as to speak confidentially.

This person already has a close-knit social group with little inclination to extend it, therefore advances from outsiders are not usually welcome. Celebrities: Kate Moss, Sadie Frost.

3. The Fun-lover: This type of drinker may be a man or a woman, who drinks to be sociable and values togetherness. A convivial individual, he / she enjoys being with their friends, and likes a laugh. Swigs taken from bottled drinks are short, so they don’t miss out on chipping in with the conversation. The bottle is held loosely at its shoulder for ease.

This type of person is always happy to extend their social circle. The best way to approach them therefore is to leap directly into light, good-humoured conversation and make them laugh. Celebrities: Sarah Harding, Helen Chamberlain (Soccer AM).

4. The Wallflower: This is a shy, submissive individual who holds the glass protectively, not letting go, as though afraid somebody will take it away. Palms are kept hidden and the glass is used as a social crutch – the drink is never quite finished, with a mouthful left in case of emergency. The drink is small (maybe half a pint of lager for a man). It may be drunk through a straw, which is fidgeted with, and used to stir the drink between sips. The style and pace of drinking is an echo of those around them (very little is initiated). 

This individual needs to be approached in a gentle, sensitive way, with perhaps a few understated compliments to build self-confidence, but may eventually warm to overtures. Celebrities: Scarlett Johannson, Natalie Portman

5. The Ice-queen: This is a mainly female type whose natural style is cold and defensive. She drinks from a wine glass, or a short glass, which is held firmly in a barrier position across the body so as to deter intimate approaches.

It is usually a waste of time approaching this woman; she may be ready with a castrating put-down. Celebrities: Victoria Beckham, Debra Barr (The Apprentice)

6. The Playboy: This man is the active, self-confident, Don Juan-type seducer. He uses his (usually long) glass or bottle as a phallic prop, playing with it suggestively.

He is inclined to be possessive, and can be tactile with his female companions. Celebrity: Russell Brand, David Walliams

7. The Jack the Lad: This “peacock” is conscious of his image and will drink a bottled beer, or cider. Inclined to be confident and arrogant, he can be territorial in his gestures, spreading himself over as much space as possible, for example, pushing the glass well away from himself and leaning back in his chair.

If he’s drinking with his mates, he would be unlikely to welcome approaches from outside the group, unless sycophantic and ego-enhancing. Celebrities: Jason Statham. The “ladette” (e.g. Lily Allen) is a female approximation to this male archetype.

8.  The Browbeater: This rather pugnacious type is again mostly male. He prefers large glasses, or bottles, which he uses as symbolic weapons, firmly grasped, and gesticulating in a threatening, “in the face” kind of way.

Something of a know-it-all, he comes across as slightly hostile, even if only through verbal argument, or jokes targeted at others. He should be approached with great care, or not at all. Celebrities: John Prescott, Russell Crowe (with Naomi Campbell as a female equivalent).

Dr. Wilson explains: “The simple act of holding a drink displays a lot more about us than we realise – or might want to divulge. When Hillary Clinton was on the campaign trail, commentators picked up on the fact that she used her left hand to raise a pint, even though she’s right-handed – she might just have been posing for a shot, but some people suggested that it was an insincere gesture.

“The next time you’re in a bar, it might be worth thinking about what you’re saying to the people around you, just by the way you’re holding your glass.”

-ends-

Notes to editors:

Drinkers were observed in bars during April 2009.

* The Interpersonal Circle is a model for conceptualizing, organizing, and assessing interpersonal behavior, traits, and motives (Wiggins, 2003).

The interpersonal circumplex is defined by two orthogonal axes: a vertical axis (of status, dominance, power, or control) and a horizontal axis (of solidarity, friendliness, warmth, or love). In recent years, it has become conventional to identify the vertical and horizontal axes with the broad constructs of agency and communion (Horowitz, 2004). Thus, each point in the interpersonal circumplex space can be specified as a weighted combination of agency and communion.

Digital technology has already enhanced many aspects of the armchair football fan’s TV experience but now, for the first time in the 128-year history of The FA Cup, an interactive version of The Official FA Cup Final programme will be made available online in advance of Saturday’s match between Chelsea and Everton.

FA Cup Sponsor E.ON has exploited recently developed web technology so fans not lucky enough to be at Wembley this weekend won’t be denied an essential part of the match day experience – poring over a ‘magazine’ full of pictures, statistics and interviews from both managers and key players in advance of the 3 o’clock kick off.

And to help provide the complete Wembley experience – the online programme (or i-mag) comes complete with the words to the FA Cup hymn ‘Abide with Me’ – sung at every Final since 1927.

The interactive Cup Final preview also offers some significant features that the traditional paper-based memento can’t.

The i-mag is full of moving images and video footage of key FA Cup moments and the goals scored on this year’s road to Wembley.

This modern twist to football programmes does however provide something of a conundrum to the tens of thousands of fanatics in Britain who invest their money and leisure time into programme collecting.

Robert Stein (56, from London) has been collecting programmes since attending his first Chelsea match in 1965.

Formerly in the banking industry and now a private investor in the sports and entertainment business, he is also the owner of the most valuable FA Cup Final Programme of all time - the 1915 Chelsea v Sheffield United ‘khaki cup’, played at Old Trafford and so called because the majority of the spectators were wearing their army uniforms.

Robert bought his programme from another private collector in 1999. Only five programmes are thought to still exist from this match and a soiled, folded copy fetched £15,000 at auction in 2001.

Despite collecting the originals from days gone by, Robert believes digital programmes are a good thing.

He says: “Programme collecting is a wonderful way of understanding the history of the game. You can’t halt the tide of inevitability and online programmes will help promote the hobby of football memorabilia collecting to a worldwide audience.”

Phil Boas, Head of Sponsorship & Events at E.ON, adds: “The FA Cup has a rich history of creating memorable moments and, by embracing technology, we’ve found a new way to give fans another unique way to enjoy the excitement of Cup Final day for families watching the game at home.”

The digital FA Cup programme, which forms part of E.ON’s season-long Family Football initiative, aims to encourage families to come together to watch The Final on 30 May. 

All season E.ON, has brought families and football together by offering a host of FA Cup benefits.

Thousands of fans have got their hands on the trophy as it has travelled the country on The FA Cup Trophy Tour, witnessed the amazing skills of football freestylers at E.ON Family Football Lounge events and scooped a number of exclusive FA Cup family ticket packages.

To download this year’s digital FA Cup programme for yourself, please visit the website www.familyfootball.co.uk from Monday 25th May 2009.

The email in question was sent by an accounts manager at Pulse Communications in Sydney, inviting leading Australian foodies to write a blog post about how great Fancy Feast cat food is, and why it deserves its own stand at Australia’s Good Food and Wine Show. Oops.

A particularly withering reply was sent from an editor at The Weekend Australian, detailing his delight at his “big opportunity to get out of journalism”, and asking for details on the money he’d receive for “trashing his entire career”.

Pulse has been forced to backtrack, claiming (some say unsuccessfully) that they weren’t offering cash for comment, and that the email was meant for freelancers, asking for copy for the Pulse blog and the cat food’s website.

Whilst the PR industry does, of course, need to be embracing social media, it also needs to learn how to do so. The case provides a sterling example of how not to.

It doesn’t take very long to find posts in which people grumble about marketing and PR types sending emails that ask for their product to be featured. And it’s understandable. An email I received referring to a personal blog a week or so ago ran:

Hi there,Hope you don’t mind me getting in touch. I work for Suchandsuch Media, and we’re making sure that Scottish sites know about the latest viral from Irn Bru. It’s high school musical, but with a Scottish twist.

Conceivably, it’d be an interesting piece of footage (I don’t know, I didn’t watch it). But (ignoring for a moment that fact that a ‘viral’ is not something thought up by creative types – a piece of footage becomes viral when it’s so popular it’s sent from person to person. A bit like a virus. Funny, that) I’m not Scottish, neither is my blog, and I’m pretty certain I’ve never mentioned Irn Bru. I’ve also never posted anything in the form of video content, and my blog features no advertising. The relevance of the sender’s email escapes me, as it does regarding the one she sent a couple of days later, following up on my “interest”.

Ditto those sent asking whether I would like to do “an unbiased review (in English language [just as well, as my Swahili’s a bit rusty these days]) of our Asian furniture site on your blog” or linking to a site that sells sex toys. As it happens, I’d like to do neither.

As put by one blogger: asking me to promote something that has absolutely no relevance to any of the things I blog about is like asking an untrained monkey to sing a Lady GaGa song: utterly pointless, unlikely to happen and does no favours for anyone involved.

The key is fairly straightforward: approach selling-in to social media the same way as to print. There’s no point calling the Daily Star with a nuanced and subtle story about the changes proposed to a Bill going through Parliament, just as you probably wouldn’t call The Daily Telegraph with a picture story if the photo’s of a girl in a barely-there bikini on the back of a motorbike.

It’s a simple theory, but once that works: whether it’s new media or old, know your audience. And think twice before you hit ‘send’.

(There’s also some debate as to whether swine flu has been with us at Van for a something approaching a week since a member of the team got back from his holiday. We’re erring on the side of a nasty cold.)

The BBC site has done an admirable job in giving us all the information we could ever possibly need on the topic, with an ‘in-depth’ section devoted to advice, Q&As, maps, history, timelines and pictures, as well as fetching diagrams of the virus in various forms.

Of course, for the hard-working journalists out there, it’s tricky to keep people’s interest in one story for such a long time – even for something as potentially apocalyptic as swine flu. It won’t do merely to chronicle events; a new angle is needed. Either that, or there are some alarmingly covetous journalists, begrudging their health writer colleagues’ days in the sun, for a quick glance round Google shows that the story has been covered in myriad categories.

The education writers tell of how parents at a Devon school, closed to stop the spread of the infection, were “frustrated” to learn of the news via a statement from Gordon Brown.

In the States, the technology correspondents are tutting at “Twitter’s role in facilitating an unnecessary global panic”.

Clearly not one to knowingly underestimate the severity of a situation, the writer goes on to say that “it’s only a matter of time before that the next generation of cyber-terrorists — those who are smart about social media, are familiar with modern information flows, and are knowledgeable about human networks — take advantage of the escalating fears over the next epidemic and pollute the networked public sphere with scares that would essentially paralyze the global economy.” Cheery stuff.

Thankfully, the tech people on our side of the pond have taken a slightly subtler line, warning against opportunistic spammers using the subject of swine flu in spam mails to infect people’s computers.

Even the foodies are getting in on the act – Alex Renton at The Times makes the case for organic food, highlighting the theory that swine flu evolved on intensive pig farms.

And, of course, no self-respecting news outlet would let such a story pass by without finding the sleb angle: in the midst of mutating viruses and a potential pandemic, The Daily Star brings us the crucial news that two ex-Big Brother contestants are undergoing tests after holidaying in Mexico under the headline “BB Babes Pig Flu Terror”.

Looks like our poorly colleague is in illustrious company indeed…