Governments should stop giving healthy eating advice

So endives with home made full-fat cheese sauce for tonight's supper perfectly fits the Swedish dietary theory - good oh!

Yes, in answer to the OP it should stop all the advice. Because it doesn't work anyway and it costs you and me a lot of money that could be better spent on repairing pot holes in our roads.Sensible people know what to eat.

Here you are. It was forwarded to me by another sceptic of the 'low fat is good' dogma.

Think that was a very scientific experiment Nellie.What do you propose next?

I don't think the reporter of such news needs to have published studies herself if she reports accurately what she is told by other "authorities" on the subject. There are several links to her sources in the article. There's quite a difference between being a scientist and being a science reporter. So long as what she writes is accurate (this can be checked), her "qualifications" for the job are fine.

Did anyone else notice that Sweden became the first western country recently to renege on low animal fat dietary advice? I'll see if I can find the link.

Enjoyed your rant, Nellie. Pity about the dishcloths !

Dishcloths even!

Nellie

Re understanding of science! If you put a few dish clothes in a pan to boil clean, with water at 100C and come to look at Gransnet the water will eventually fully evaporate leaving the dishcloths stuck to the bottom of the saucepan.

I do not think that the Government have a choice but to offer such advice, the costs of bad diets is beginning to cripple the NHS.

The bigger problem is around the very poor public understanding of these issues and how to analyse the published information. Add to that the vested interests of food manufacturers "my product is 95% fat free" (and stuffed with too much sugar and salt etc.)

New theories about cause and effects are constantly being investigated and developed in all branches of science and medicine etc. The effects of DNA research and the understanding of genetics has changed massively in the last few decades.
It is not surprising that government information changes over time in the light of new evidence.
The world would still be thought to be flat without these new understandings.

If the government did not issue this advice then inevitably people would start to complain, "well nobody told me this fizzy drink was too full of sugar and would rot my teeth or cause me to develop type 2 diabetes" etc.etc.
It is "contact the injury lawyers" I want to blame someone else for this.

People are notoriously bad at changing eating and other lifestyle habits.

Just look at television adverts. " and now the science bit" shocked tones! All of which implies that this science is too scary and complicated for you to think about. " Just don't worry your pretty little head about it" use our shampoo, deodorant, disinfectant etc, and all will be well.

Rant over!
It is interesting to me that I not think science threads on GN ever seem to get a very big following.

An interesting read from the link given but not really all that surprising - they often get it horribly wrong.

I remember the adverts on tv campaigns to get people to eat volumes of fibre (remember Ian Botham and the 'can you eat three shredded wheat) and the All Bran adverts; Cancer Research asked the government for years to stop the advertising of fibre in such large quantities as it was fuelling a rise in bowel and other associated cancers - it took the government a few years to cancel the advice.

Re the eggs and cholesterol - if you reduce foods with cholesterol so your intake of cholesterol falls dramatically, your body will manufacture it anyway.

The best advice on nutrition was a chap I heard on Radio 4 - can't remember who he was. He said you should ask yourself the following questions about foodstuffs. Is it made in a factory? Is it heavily advertised? Does it come in a bright, shiny package. If yes, only eat it very occasionally.

As Iam64 says and the late Mr.G used to say (and he had heart disease) 'Everything in moderation'. I follow that rule, but I rarely eat red meat. I must admit the egg advice is very confusing. I tried to restrict him to 2 a week but now it appears you can eat them 'til the cows come home

Joanna Blythman. What qualifucations? Any research studies?

As different research keeps throwing up new (?) ideas and theories and the majority of the population take very little notice of government advice on what to eat or not to eat, I would say the answer is Yes. It is a waste of time and public money, apart from introducing healthy eating awareness in schools (not draconian rules). Those who want to provide a healthy diet for themselves and their families will do so, others will not bother despite government advice.

We should be concerned about government food advisers who are employed in the GM industry.

It'll take more than this last bit of research to convince me that animal fats do not clog the arteries. As it probably will Mr Pearson.

I think you should go with instinct. Seems obvious to me that oil from seeds would be healthier than the heavy, lumpy stuff you get from cows and sheep.

This really is a good thread to read at the start of the day. I am off now to butter my toast and pop some beef into the slow cooker. Yippee!

Maybe we should just adopt a more realistic approach to the advice chucked at us. Isn't it odd that as we get older, we become more like our grandparents. I am now my maternal grandfather, "all things in moderation, and a little bit of what you fancy does you good".