Skip to comments.Eating Candy in Childhood Linked to Adult Crime
Posted on 10/03/2009 3:09:15 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
What parent hasn't used candy to pacify a cranky child or head off a brewing tantrum? When reasoning, threats and time-outs fail, a sugary treat often does the trick. But while that chocolate-covered balm may be highly effective in the short term, say British scientists, it may be setting youngsters up for problem behavior later. According to a new study, kids who eat too many treats at a young age risk becoming violent in adulthood.
The research was led by Simon Moore, a senior lecturer in Violence and Society Research at Cardiff University in the U.K., who specializes in the study of vulnerable youngsters. Moore had been investigating the factors that lead children to commit serious crimes, when, during the course of his work, he discovered that "kids with the worst problems tend to be impulsive risk takers, and that these kids had terrible diets - breakfast was a Coke and a bag of chips," he says. (See nine kid foods to avoid.)
Intrigued by this association, Moore turned to the British Cohort Study, a long-term survey of 17,000 people born during a one-week period in April 1970. That study included periodic evaluations of many different aspects of the growing children's lives, such as what they ate, certain health measures and socioeconomic status. Moore plumbed the data for information on kids' diet and their later behavior: at age 10, the children were asked how much candy they consumed, and at age 34, they were questioned about whether they had been convicted of a crime. Moore's analysis suggests a correlation: 69% of people who had been convicted of a violent act by age 34 reported eating candy almost every day as youngsters; 42% of people who had not been arrested for violent behavior reported the same.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
There is a reason i turned out so good...
The UK should just lock all its citizens in rubber rooms and give them milk pablum and rubber spoons. Except the muzzies, of course, who get to own the place.
Tooth decay, maybye. But this is British and they don’t much care for that stuff.
Another University junk science study.
How many steps is this away from “This is what the government allows your children to eat.”?
The number of people diagnosed as mental defectives in the United Kingdom in the early twentieth century correlates strongly with the number of letters in the last name of the Vice-President of the United States. Coincidence?
"C'mon, kids! Breakfast is ready! Hurry up or you'll miss the bus! And I want to make sure you are evil and violent later in life!"
If I publish a paper saying that drinking Coke for breakfast leads to a life of crime, can I have a large research grant?
Maybe funded by Pepsi?
Some folks just don’t have the tools to be intellectually challenged by children.
I ate candy like I was starving and I turned out great.
This is great! Now I can do anything illegal and just blame the candy my mom let me eat in childhood. The Pez made me do it!
You aint hard core till you snorted pixie sticks FRiend.
Betcha all those kids had potatos while growing up to be violent. (Or maybe potatoes.)
Their mothers didn’t love them enough to feed them healthy food and thus starved them emotionally. One of the results of Feminism.
My guess is that the sugar coated cereals on every store shelves are as bad as candy...and is criminal!
Is this the twinkie defense run amok?!
Thank goodness, poptarts, cocoa puffs, and honeybuns aren’t candy.
So what’s next? Ban Halloween trick-or-treating and Easter baskets?
Seriously, this is so junk science. Maybe the parents that couldn’t feed their kids nutritious food also batted them about the head every day, didn’t talk with them, and didn’t set any moral standards. Did this “study” control for any of those factors?
I’m a stone cold dark chocolate killer.......
Okay, I was a regular little Private Pyle as a kid, and I’ve so far managed to avoid committing any serious crimes.
Maybe it wasn’t the candy that caused it but the parents who bribed kids for good behavior with candy so much that they grew up to be selfish, entitled criminals.
Sometimes I can see logic in these studies, not this one. I suppose a parent that never says no and always caves to tiny tyrants will have a bratty “give it to me or else” kinda kid.
Shoot I should be in Prison right now.. I mean I do poke people with needles all day.. Maybe that is my bad streak...
This is why children should be rewarded with Slim Jims.
Right...it’s candy that is responsible for committing crimes in adulthood. It’s not no father in the home, poor parenting, peer pressure, greed, etc...it’s M&Ms and Hershey bars.
When I used to live in Scotland with the Hubbie, I used to go to the Woolworth on the High Street and buy £1.40p worth of candy and a bag of Quavers every week. But I swear I never robbed anyone.
Who pays for all these dumb studies...the same thing could be said about peanutbutter and jelly sandwichs, because I am sure every criminal ate those sandwiches as a child...
I bet they drank water every day too!
Time/CNN it must be true, right?
Then my friends and I should be on Death Row.
Alternative theory, based on same evidence: Junk food doesn’t contribute to children turning out badly, incompetent parenting does. To give a misbehaving child candy is to reward bad behavior. Teaching your children that bad behavior pays is a good start to turning them into criminals.
And as for the whole Coke-and-chips-for-breakfast - any parent who would permit that either a) isn’t attentive enough, or b) lacks judgment. I’m no health nut, but even I wouldn’t eat a breakfast like that, or permit any child under my supervision to.
Maybe all this did was single out the spoiled kids.
I’ve often wondered why popular cereals have to be that sugary sweet. To me it’s almost nauseating. I’ve gone to things like corn flakes (that still may have some sugar but it isn’t “in your face” sweet).
Apparently not. Is it just marginally possible that parents who cared enough to insist that their kids eat nutritious food where better parents who taught self discipline and right from wrong? Naw, it's the junk food pass some more taxes and ban candy.
These researchers should demand their money back from whatever schools gave them degrees.
It is called poor parenting and candy/treats only reinforce the bad behavior. The treats themselves have nothing to do with it.
What about wearing diapers? Did you know that 100% of all killers and rapists once wore them?? 100% correlation!!!!
Corn Flakes are just mashed up bits of gypsum like corn stuck together with a liquid sugar cement. Even if it isn’t in your face sweet its still mostly that liquified sugar. I used to eat lots of different types and most cereal flakes are created that way. These days I have switched to an old boy scout favourite up here in Canada called Red River cereal (not sure if it is available in the US or not) and it is very healthy with no sugar but I do add some maple syrup for flavour.
I suppose prosecutors all ate sauerkraut as children
Sugar-coated utrajunk science.
Would you believe there was a recipe bouncing around in the 70’s for “sauerkraut chocolate cake.” You just mixed the kraut in with the cake mix and some eggs and baked, and it was touted as the most wonderful thing. My mother tried it, and I am convinced the recipe was a prank. Cherries fill out a chocolate cake nicely — but the other stuff? Phew and yuck!
And the first thing you learn in either Psychology or Statistics is that Correlational Studies CANNOT be used to establish cause-effect relationships.
True. Even if the correlation is valid, i.e., repeatable, representative of a true correlation, it doesn’t mean cause and effect. The first thing that occured to me was that parents who are lazy and indulgent get poor results.
It’s what’s known in statistics as colinearity. Many traits may be associated.
Yes... like it completely fails to examine the “spoiled-child” hypothesis.