Obesity: what kebabs and hotdogs can tell you about a nation

I have just returned home to Australia, following several weeks abroad. Being the food-oriented individual that I am, I take particular interest in all things culinary. I noticed that Australian food portions are very large.

My first port of call was Germany; land of the wurst. I would often have a light breakfast and then snack on a wurst for lunch. But then I would be hungry again by dinnertime. The German wursts that I bought from street vendors were not lost in a sea of bread, but instead enfolded lovlingly between a modest roll. Upon my return, I visited my favourite hot dog stand in the Queen Victoria market and got a bratwurst, which cost significantly more (seven dollars compared to two euro), and was lost amid bread and toppings. It was delicious, but I didn’t need to eat for the rest of the day.

In Turkey, I partook of the donor kebab. Let’s be honest, I partook of many donor kebabs. Again, they were relatively small, but delicious. The eve of my return, on the return drive from the airport I had a craving for a kebab, so I requested that we pull into a roadside donor kebab van. Again, I found that there was a significant price discrepancy (nine dollars against four Turkish lire), as well as a significant size difference. My Australian kebab, while delicious, would constitute a major meal. My Turkish kebabs were a large, but not overly so, snack,

These differences indicate to me, a symptom (and a perpetuating factor) of the obesity epidemic in which Australia is mired. The food portions are an enormous size. If I go to a restaurant, I have often taken to ordering an entrée sized meal, and being surprised when it is what I would consider to be the size of a main meal. A meal consisting of an entree, main meal, and dessert, should not have gargantuan portions for all three courses, yet I see more and more in restaurants that this is exactly the case.
The fact that hot dogs and donor kebabs are in effect a snack, or one meal out of three, is deeply concerning, considering their size. Eating three solid meals a day is all well and good, but eating three enormous meals a day unless one has a significant muscle mass, or leads a highly actively lifestyle, begs for pounds to be accumulated on the regular person.

London was the only city where I went into a restaurant, ordered a meal, and found that finishing it left me feeling over-stuffed. This large portion size makes sense in light of this excellent image that was a part of this economist article (which I highly recommend):

Both Australia and Britain are shown as having 60-70% of their populations as obese. This is a disconcertingly large figure, and one that to me, indicates a problem with the nations’ approach to food.

Perhaps we should start thinking about what Australians consider to be a normal meal size. Reducing the amount of food we as a nation ingest is a good start to stopping what is rapidly approaching, if not already is, an obesity crisis.

The Australian Government Lands Another Blow Against Higher Education

I am enrolled in an intensive subject set to commence in February, and I just received an email from the Student Administration politely informing me that Mathematics, Statistics, and Science had been downgraded from a ‘national priority’ to Band 2 funding, which would mean that the maximum student contribution had increased.

I had absolutely no idea what this meant, although I had a nasty suspicion that it meant something would be costing me more money, the prospect of which rarely thrills me. So I called over boyfriend, and asked him to take a look. He confirmed my suspicions.

After some researching, I actually found out what this means.  The Australian government website requires one to jump through numerous hoops to actually obtain this information, but this link provides the information:

http://studyassist.gov.au/sites/studyassist/helppayingmyfees/csps/pages/student-contribution-amounts

How the government determines the level of subsidy it gives certain courses and subjects is very difficult information to actually discover.

The QTAC website says the following:

“The Australian Government contributes towards course costs for Commonwealth supported students. Students also pay a ‘student contribution’. This student contribution may be borrowed from the Commonwealth government under the HECS-HELP Scheme.
Student contributions vary between providers and courses. These student contributions must be within a range set by the government (see table below for a guide to the cost of a standard full-time year of tertiary study in 2012). Course specific indicative costs will be available late in 2012 from each institution.”

A paper published by Engineers Australia suggests: “ Government investment in higher education has been justified in terms of delivering benefits to the economy, benefits to society and equity of access for students from all socioeconomic backgrounds.”

So the government subsidises subjects depending on how vital it deems those subjects to be. The table for funding in 2012 is as follows:

2012 Student contribution bands and ranges
Student contribution band	2012 Student contribution range (per EFTSL)
Band 3: Law, dentistry, medicine, veterinary science, accounting, administration, economics, commerce (see note 1)	$0 - $9,425
Band 2: Computing, built environment, other health, Allied health, engineering, surveying, agriculture	$0 - $8,050
Band 1: Humanities, behavioural science, social studies, education, clinical psychology, foreign languages, visual and performing arts, education, nursing (see notes 2 and 4)	$0 – $5,648
National priorities: Mathematics, statistics and science (see notes 3 and 4)	$0 – $4,520

The table for the funding in 2013 is as follows:

2013 Student contribution bands and ranges
Student contribution band	2013 Student contribution range (per EFTSL)
Band 3: Law, accounting, administration, economics, commerce, dentistry, medicine, veterinary science	$0 - $9,792
Band 2: Mathematics, statistics, computing, built environment, other health, allied health, science, engineering, surveying, agriculture	$0 - $8,363
Band 1: Humanities, behavioural science, social studies, education (see Notes), clinical psychology, foreign languages, visual and performing arts, nursing (see Notes)	$0 – $5,868

I am sure that there are many reasons and reports which explain the rationale behind which subjects and courses go into which band, but from my perspective, there are some very baffling decisions. The fact that no explanation was provided as to how mathematics, statistics and science dropped from national priorities to band 2 bewilders me. How is this a system that is accountable to the students within it?

I really feel for any students undergoing a science degree, as the cost of their degree has just doubled, without any explanation.

Sharon Bird is the parliamentary secretary for Higher Education – I seem unable to identify a specific minister for this important area, as I found out just now when I struggled through yet another awkward government website.

This is not an accountable system that informs students – those who will make up the future knowledge economy and workforce of Australia - why the fee changes are occurring, without notice or justification. I was informed of this price change only after I had enrolled in the subject and my place in it had been confirmed by the University. For Science students who began their course last year and the year before, at the time of selecting that course, they were informed that the subjects within that course were designated ‘national priority’ and therefore subject to the maximum level of Government financial support and educational priority. Now, without any warning, publicity or explanation, they are faced with the unpleasant discovery that midway through their course, it has been downgraded not one, but two bands. This implies the course is suddenly of lesser value and in financial terms, they are facing an extra $4000 a year in either debt or upfront fees. This further adds to the financial burden when, again, without warning, the Government abruptly slashed the discount for upfront fee payments from 20% to 10%, even to those who were midway through their courses.

This is not supporting university students or tertiary education in Australia.

I am aghast. You should be too.

Goodbye to Berlin

I am leaving Berlin, and moving onward to Paris. Since my last post, I have had the opportunity to explore the city in greater depth.

Before I continue on to my final impression of the city however, I must first place a correction. It would seem I misinterpreted my handy military-knowledge source. The Russians took Berlin (in the Battle of Berlin), and razed everything. It was the rebuilding efforts that showed the difference between the Allied and Soviet militaries. My apologies to all who were confused. Don’t worry, I was too when I first heard it, but I deferred to what I understood to be superior knowledge (let’s face it, it is superior knowledge, it was my interpretation skills that need work).

Berlin is a very interesting city. In Paris, where the inner city is almost entirely preserved, and as such, very little commerce-style business is conducted within the Rue Périphérique beyond that which caters to the tourist attractions of the city. By contrast, Berlin is a city where the lovingly reconstructed buildings stand alongside far more modern designs and constructions.  

In many aspects, this gives the city a charm- a sense of life that sleepy Paris doesn’t have, because to me, Paris is in many ways, a city of the past that has someone managed to be transported into the present. But my feeling is that Berlin is unfinished. The number of cranes which dominated the skyline is surprising. 

 A skyline of cranes 

The view from the Berliner Dom 

 

There is so much history in Berlin – it was the site of many of the greatest confrontations and moments that were considered to define the twentieth century, but that meant that it has been drained and shattered – by two world wars, and under a brutal communist regime the marks of which continue to be visible today. I think Berlin may be more finished in ten or so years, and then, boy, I want to see it. 

The Reichstag - in itself an old building that was ruined by the NAZI party, which has been given a modern interior

Until then, my heart will be lodged firmly in Paris.  

I am in Paris, and very excited about this fact.