Children in most deprived areas more likely to visit A&E and be obese
Children living in England's most deprived areas are more likely to visit A&E, be overweight or obese and suffer from tooth decay, a new report by aid agency Unicef UK has found.
The organisation has called on the Government to lift its two-child benefit cap after its findings showed that where children grow up until the age of five has 'a significant impact' on their early outcomes and future potential.
In the report published on Monday, every local authority in England was analysed against its level of deprivation and a range of early childhood health and educational outcomes.
It found that, when considering early years development, the most deprived authorities were more than twice as far away from achieving the Government's 'good level' target of 75% than the most affluent areas.
Only four of the 151 upper tier local authorities in England are currently meeting that target.
Nearly twice as many children suffer from late-stage, untreated tooth decay in the most deprived areas (29%) compared to the least deprived (15%), while five-year-old children living in the poorest communities are three times more likely to have had teeth removed due to decay, the report found.
Almost a quarter of reception-age children in the most deprived areas (24%) are overweight or obese, while general obesity levels in those areas are more than double those of children in the most affluent areas (12.9%, compared to 6%).
There is also an average of 1,020 A&E visits per 1,000 babies and young children in the most deprived areas, an increase of 55% on rates in the most affluent areas, the report found.
The five local authorities with the highest levels of deprivation – Blackpool, Knowsley, Liverpool, Kingston upon Hull, and Middlesbrough – were each in the lowest 20% for five of the six child wellbeing measures used in the analysis.
Some 1.2 million babies and children under the age of five – 35% of the age group's total population – now live in poverty across England, the report said.
It added that child poverty has increased more in the UK then in any of the 38 OECD and EU countries.
Among the report's recommendations are long-term, sustainable funding and expanding provision for Family Hubs, recruiting an additional 1,000 health visitors a year and making access to Government-funded childcare hours equal for all children aged two or older, regardless of their location or parental employment.
Unicef UK, joined by BBC presenter Dr Chris Van Tulleken, will present a petition calling for investments in early childhood, which has more than 105,000 signatures, to the Prime Minister at 10 Downing Street on Tuesday.
Chief executive Dr Philip Goodwin warned the consequences of growing up in poverty can be lifelong and said the report's findings were 'not acceptable'.
He said: 'There must be immediate, decisive, and ambitious action by the government. Any further delays will entrench inequality and condemn hundreds of thousands of children to poverty and its effects, as child poverty rates continue to rise.
'The Government must act urgently to lift the two-child limit and the benefit cap and commit to investing in the vital health and education services that support children during their crucial early years.'
Introduced in 2015 by then-Conservative chancellor George Osborne, the cap restricts child welfare payments to the first two children born to most families.
Sir Keir Starmer said he was 'absolutely determined' to 'drive down' child poverty when he was pressed on the two-child benefit cap in Parliament last week, ahead of the publication of the Government's strategy on the issue.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
5 hours ago
- Daily Mail
GPs to dish out 'King Kong' weight loss jab Mounjaro from TODAY, for free on the NHS - so could YOU qualify?
From today, obese patients in England will be able to access the 'revolutionary' weight-loss jab Mounjaro—free of charge—directly from their family doctor. The weekly injection, also known as tirzepatide, will be offered to around 220,000 people over the next three years under new NHS prescribing rules. Dubbed the 'King Kong' of slimming jabs, Mounjaro can help patients shed up to a fifth of their body weight in a year. More than a million people in the UK are already using it via private clinics, where it costs around £250 a month. Until now, only a limited number of patients could access it on the NHS via specialist weight-management services. But uptake has been limited, with just 4,000 people a month starting treatment due to a lack of clinic capacity. That changes today. GPs can now prescribe the drug to patients with a BMI over 40—classed as severely obese—and at least four obesity-related health conditions, such as type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure or sleep apnoea. The move follows a Government decision earlier this year to expand access to GLP-1 medications—a new class of obesity drugs including Mounjaro and its rival Wegovy. Health officials hope the rollout will ease pressure on overstretched NHS services by tackling obesity-related illness before it escalates. Over the next three years, NHS officials plan to relax the health requirements for getting the drugs so that more patients will be able to start treatment. And, within 12 years, around four million Britons are expected to be receiving NHS weight-loss jabs. However, the rollout has already been criticised by experts who believe it is moving too slowly to tackle a national obesity crisis. Nearly a third of British adults are obese, which costs the economy about £75 billion a year and contributes to more than 30,000 deaths. Meanwhile, GPs have raised concerns that they do not have the time to offer more patients GLP-1 injections. However, Health Secretary Wes Streeting said the rollout could help 'end the obesity epidemic'. He said: 'Obesity jabs are used by 1.5 million people in the UK, mainly through private prescriptions. 'The NHS was founded on a promise to 'universalise the best' and this Government is determined to bring revolutionary modern treatments to everyone who needs them, not just those who can afford to pay. 'This rollout is an important step in making these medicines more widely available and beginning to shift the focus of healthcare from sickness to prevention.' GLP-1 injections mimic the effect of a hunger hormone which is released by the stomach in response to eating and tells the brain when it is full. In 2021, Wegovy—which contains the drug semaglutide, also found in Ozempic—became the first GLP-1 injection to be approved for use in the UK. The drugs helps patients lose as much as 15 per cent of their body weight in less than a year. Mounjaro, which was approved for use in the UK in 2023, is even more effective, with obese patients, on average, losing up to a quarter of their weight in 12 months. Both Wegovy and Mounjaro are available privately to patients with a BMI over 30 – which classes them as obese—or over 27—they are deemed to be overweight, with at least one related illness. But experts say that, due to the fact it is more effective, around nine out ten NHS patients who are eligible for weight loss drugs will receive Mounjaro instead of Wegovy. If a Mounjaro prescription is approved, patients will initially need to have monthly face-to-face appointments with a 'suitably trained healthcare professional', such as a nurse. During this period, patients need to be monitored for potential side effects. While Wegovy and Mounjaro are considered safe for use, they can lead to uncomfortable symptoms such as nausea and indigestion. In rare cases the injections can trigger severe side effects such as pancreatitis—a painful and potentially life-threatening swelling of the pancreas. GPs will be required to provide nutrition and diet advice, along with physical activity guidance and psychological support, for a minimum of nine months after beginning treatment. Some experts have criticised the NHS GLP-1 rollout plan as too slow. At the present rate it will take 12 years to get the four million Britons who could benefit onto weight-loss jabs. In May, a report published by the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change (TBI), the former prime minister's think tank, described the NHS approach as 'painfully slow' and urged minister to offer as many as 15 million patients the injections. The TBI warned that, without immediate action, the UK's obesity crisis would cause the NHS to 'collapse under the weight of chronic preventable disease'. Obesity raises the risk of deadly issues like heart disease, cancer, and dementia. However, GPs groups have warned that family doctors do not have the time to offer weight-loss jabs to millions of patients. 'While we recognise the potential benefits of weight-loss drugs, we know many GPs are concerned about the implications of the rollout of weight-loss drugs into general practice,' said Professor Kamila Hawthorne, Chair of the Royal College of General Practitioners. 'GPs and our teams are already working under intense workload and workforce pressures, and this must be factored into this rollout in order to guarantee it can be delivered safely.' The news comes after new Government figures revealed that more than 100 deaths in Britain have been linked to GLP-1 injections. The vast majority of fatalities, which have all been reported since the jabs were licensed for use in the UK, are not proven to have been caused directly by the drugs. However, health chiefs tasked with policing the safety of medicines admit reports of side effects indicate 'a suspicion' they may have been to blame. A total of 111 deaths were logged with the regulator, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), up to and including May 29. In 2024, a British patient, Susan McGowan, 58, died after taking just two doses of Mounjaro. The Scottish nurse, experienced multiple organ failure, septic shock and pancreatitis. Hers is the only confirmed fatality linked to the jabs in the UK.
The Herald Scotland
11 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Westminster PIP cuts attacked by 'abandoned' Covid patients
Cousins, who works for Long Covid Support, said: 'The benefit system does not work. It underestimates the disabling effect of Long Covid and ME (myalgic encephalomyelitis, an accompanying symptom).' 'To be assessed for PIP, you have to score different points on a system. For example, you get a certain number of points if you can walk to the loo, etc. 'But the problem is that PIP assessments are unable to capture the fluctuations of living with Long Covid. The system just isn't designed for people with Long Covid.' Campaigners have met with Jo Platt MP (5th from right). (Image: Supplied) PIP is not an employment related benefit. Instead, it is intended to help manage the cost of living with a disability. This is something Cousins has direct experience with. PIP is paid by the Department for Work in Pensions but in Scotland has been replaced by Adult Disability Payment. However as the UK government provides a block grant to the Scottish Government for areas such as social security if spending on PIP decreases in England and Wales, the Scottish Government's block grant is reduced accordingly. 'I was on the British rowing team and got Covid at the beginning of the pandemic,' she explains. 'I got quite sick and spent around a year and a half recovering. I wasn't able to have a normal life. I was functional for probably four hours of the day. 'All I could do was rest. I seemed to turn a corner in Sepember 2021 and returned to training by the next year. But then I had a relapse and had to retire from competitive rowing.' Cousins noted: 'PIP is not about employment, it is about ability. A recent survey we conducted which spoke to 1200 people living with Long Covid found that just 0.4% would be more likely to work if PIP was taken away. 'By contrast, 36% said they would be less likely to be able to stay employed. It's going to have the opposite effect on what the government is claiming and is going to cost more. If you remove support from people, they will be more sick." Many people with Long Covid are healthcare professionals (Image: PA) Cousins added: 'People have been completely abandoned by the government. Several years ago, there were some positive steps when it came to treating Long Covid, like research funding and clinics. However, now the funding has dried up.' Most people in Scotland who collect disability benefits receive the Adult Disability Payment (ADP), instead of PIP, and it is expected that all will be under the devolved system by 2026. While the Scottish Government has said they will not cut ADP, funding reductions from Westminster are likely if the UK Government's bill is passed, which could lead to subsequent trimming, as in the case of the winter fuel payments last year. Read more: Labour says that their plans, announced in Parliament last Wednesday, are the result of 'a broken social security system' inherited from the previous government. If passed, the bill will tighten PIP criteria. 390,000 disabled people are expected to lose access to the payments as a result, according o a report by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR). Cousins said the cuts will directly impact the two million people sick with Long Covid across the UK, including an approximate 180,000 living in Scotland. She said: 'There is no light at the end of the tunnel. These cuts are particularly cruel because many people who caught Long Covid are healthcare providers who didn't have access to proper PPM, and now they are taking the one thing they do have away from them.' 'Long Covid is a disabling illness and has the lowest quality of life support of any illness. Cutting PIP isn't going to increase economic activity or save money for the public purse, but it will plunge people into poverty.' In a statement, a government spokesperson said: 'The vast majority of people who are currently getting PIP will continue to receive it. "We're creating a sustainable welfare system that genuinely supports sick or disabled people – including those with Long Covid - while always protecting those who need it most. 'At the heart of this is our review of the PIP assessment to ensure it is fit for the future. We will work with disabled people and a range of experts on this as we deliver our Plan for Change.'
The Herald Scotland
11 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Tunnock's is not to blame for society's problems
We know why the government feels this is necessary: we have eyes and the official figures provide the proof. In 2003, according to the Scottish Government, one-quarter of adults in Scotland were obese. Now it's one-third. And with obesity comes increased risk of cancer, diabetes and death and, as the UK Government points out, a cost of billions of pounds to the NHS. We are deep in a serious crisis that's getting worse. The question is how we get out of it and Tunnock's feels it is being unfairly targeted. Its sales director Fergus Loudon said in Scottish Grocer magazine that the food industry was being blamed for societal problems that were not of its making. 'Banning chocolate biscuit ads on TV before nine o'clock to prevent obesity,' he said, 'is rather like banning foreign holidays to prevent skin damage from too much sun.' A couple of things are going on here. First, it would be stupid to deny that food ads have an effect and that restricting ads can have some effect on what we buy and eat. The science writer Ellen Ruppel Shell points out in her very good book on obesity, Fat Wars, that Burger King spends more than half-a-billion dollars on promotional efforts every year and does it because it works. Conversely, no or little advertising would have the opposite effect to some extent and reduce consumption. 'Free-market capitalism is wonderful for many things,' says Shell, 'but public health is not among them.' However, accepting that advertising has an effect is not the same as solving the health crisis because it goes deeper than that. There's been virtually no advertising of vapes and vaping, for instance, and yet vaping has exploded as a habit. It's also worth pointing out that Tunnock's (est. 1890) was around when there wasn't an obesity crisis and is around when there absolutely is an obesity crisis. Of course, a ban on ads will have an effect around the edges, but the crisis will go on until we tackle the deeper trends advertising cannot change – what Mr Loudon of Tunnock's calls societal problems. I raise this subject whenever I talk to people in the food industry and it pretty much always comes back to the same few things. I had lunch with the French chef Jean-Christophe Novelli in Edinburgh and asked him what he thought was to blame for obesity. He said without a moment's hesitation: mobiles. We're getting fatter, he said, because of what we've done to our brains with technology – the constant messages, the instant gratification – and it means we're more absorbed in technology than in cooking and eating well. 'This is the thing that inflates your stomach,' he said, pointing to his phone. I agree with chef Novelli – we know phones are changing the way we behave, I can feel it myself. We also know it starts young. Children are much less likely now to be active and outdoors because they prefer their phones but Shell also writes in Fat Wars that no-one is born with a taste for hot, bitter or sour or, for that matter, single malt or cigars: tastes develop with exposure and social pressure – and that's fine as long as the influences are good. However, as Shell points out, in the US and the UK, children increasingly dictate family food choices, which leaves households 'immersed in a miasma of one-dimensional sweet taste that reinforces and entrains juvenile preferences'. Read more Are you 'upset'? The dangers of flags in Scottish schools These are the latest plans at the Glasgow School of Art. Really? No more Edinburgh Book Festival for me – where did it all go wrong? Anyone who grew up in the 1970s or earlier will know how true this is. I try to avoid using the phrase 'in my day' if I can, but in my day it was your parents who dictated the food choices based on what was good for you and how much it cost. Sweet foods like a Tunnock's Caramel Log, or the greatest British biscuit of all, the custard cream, were allowed as a treat but only a treat. By contrast, children now appear to be able to wield control and a veto on certain foods that would have been unthinkable in the 1970s. Adverts were around then and adverts are around now – it's the parenting that's changed. How we fix the problem isn't easy – we're now into the second generation of parents who don't know how to cook and have handed food choices to their kids. But another chef I've spoken to is Gary Maclean, senior chef lecturer at City of Glasgow College and a winner of MasterChef: The Professionals. He knows what's he talking about because he lived it. He grew up in the 1970s when most food was cooked from scratch and something like Wimpy was a treat. Now, kids are outdoors much less than they were, and McDonald's and KFC are a ubiquitous part of many children's diets. Result: fat kids. Maclean is well aware that an important factor in all of this is poverty. Unhealthy rubbish is relatively cheap. There was also an interesting Glasgow University study which showed that fast-food outlets are six times more prevalent in the poorest parts of the city. And it's all borne out by what happens to children and adults. By primary one, five-year-olds in Scotland are more than twice as likely to be at risk of obesity if they're from the most deprived catchments compared to the least. Roughly the same with adults: the obesity rate in the most affluent areas is 26% compared to 36% in the poorest neighbourhoods. An ad for Tunnock's (Image: Newsquest) You may think the answer to the problem is to tax unhealthy food, but Gary Maclean's concern is that it just makes life for poorer people even harder. Much better, he says, to try to get in early and encourage good habits at an early stage. If he had his way, he would make cooking and food education compulsory in schools – and it's hard to resist his logic. 'Learning to cook is just as important as learning to write,' he said. 'PE is compulsory and what you eat is just as important as what you do.' His conclusion is that Scotland has the best food in the world but the worst diet, and only something fundamental such as compulsory food lessons at school will change it. You could introduce all the rules on ads you like – you could ban ads for Tunnock's Teacakes entirely – but not only would that be unfair on a firm like Tunnock's that's trying to promote its product, it would only make a marginal difference on a population affected, and made unhealthier, by deeper trends. As it happens, Mr Loudon of Tunnock's also believes it's education that will address the problem and he's right: don't change the ads, change how we see them, and react to them. There's nothing wrong with a biscuit or two as part of a healthy balanced diet; all we need to do is to re-learn the fact.
