This reminds me of a talk Earnest Adams gave last year, where he was talking about the potential of games to teach or something, and illustrated it with a shmup involving a sperm or something. Maybe it was a game about safe sex involving condoms, whatever. The point is, using a shmup mechanic as an example of what games can do misses the point, and so does this game, though maybe by not so wide a mark.

The junk food mechanic would be much more effective if there was a balance between junk food and healthy food, reflected in the level design's distribution of the different items and their mathetmatical relationship. Having a single encounter with junk food make you fat, effectively unable to continue until you stop and do push-ups, takes away from what could have been a more subtle statement about a balanced diet. Overt didacticism is best left for children's literature and Church group theatre productions, where they can be conveyed much more efficiently.

What's ironic about it is that it's precisely the medium of videogames that have the potential to represent the complexity of these relationships, even if simplified for a younger audience.

At the studio, we've been working on a game about the politics of nutrition for a while now. We got delayed, but expect more on it early next year.

This game sounds extremely familiar:
">http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php/Kid_Speedy">
...and from Patrick's comment it sounds like the Bros. Chaps did a better job than the UK latecomer.

Plus: retro Atari graphics, Ian!