It's called proper grownup joined up thinking which politicians seem to find difficult.
Scottish political mess. Is Devolution working?
Acute anxiety after death of my husband
Have any of you got all electric cars? Pros and cons please.
Sign up to Gransnet Daily
Our free daily newsletter full of hot threads, competitions and discounts
SubscribeIt's called proper grownup joined up thinking which politicians seem to find difficult.
How would they phrase that FlicketyB?
Quite, FlicketyB.
Please don't tell the government or that Terry whatsizname that DGD2 (age 2) and I made cakes together yesterday. With icing on.
I suppose we should have made a healthy tomato sauce and wholewheat pasta - she likes that as well.
Possibly it is because the government is always PREACHING to us about healthy food, that so many people ignore them
Food has been medicalised and nutritionalised and turned in to 'bad' and 'good' food until most people are paranoid about every mouthful they eat and then get fed up and eat what they like.
Why doesn't someone just sing the pleasures of fresh food, how nice a diet rich in fruit and vegetables is. The pleasure of the variety in breads and meats and all those wonderful foods we have access to. The infinite variety of different tastes and textures.
We all know children respond better to praise than criticism. Why doesn't this and every government learn some lessons from child rearing?
I love food, and I eat well but every time we get 'experts' pontificating like this I want to go out and stuff my face with sweet foods, which I actually do not like, just annoy them.
Oh, Aka, that would spur me on!
I was always taught not to drink with meals as was DH. I now break that rule with sometimes, which has so many empty calories.
However, DD1 and SIL always have a jug of water on the lunch and dinner table, and DD1 would be appalled at the thought of children drinking low calorie drinks with aspartame as a sweetener.
It probably is something that is learned in the home by example, but many parents today don't cook with fresh ingredients so it has to be left to the school to teach at least the basics of cookery.
We did occasionally have "processed" food but in the 50's there were nowhere near as many products as you can buy today. I remember when the Vesta meals came out (chop suey, curry, etc.) which were like glorified Pot Noodle - water added to dried ingredients and simmered - we thought it very exotic and the height of sophistication!
And losing the fight sue
Sadly we've been preaching healthy eating for 30 years now and it's made no difference, in fact things have got worse.
I think the only thing that might work would be a 'fat tax' - 1p on basic rate of income tax for every kilo you are overweight.
Sigh!! when will someone in government realise that rising obesity is a multi faceted problem that cannot be cured by one solution. It must also take into account town planning which allows multiple fast food restaurants in every town so bad food is never far away and is also relatively cheap.
I agree though the speaker did look as though he was fighting his own Battle of the Bulge
I can't help thinking though that the teaching of cooking should start in the home. I am sure the reason our son and daughter enjoy cooking for their families is because we have always done that and they grew up with it, rather than anything they did or didn't learn at school. As far as I know, no cooking is taught in French schools, but people seem to cook much more here.
Surely this is something learnt by example and habit. If you cook food from scratch then it isn't full of processed rubbish and empty calories. I can't believe all the processed stuff in UK supermarkets that is available now.
I would willingly eat a whole packet of low fat digestive biscuits now.
Flippin' diet.
I like Waitrose low fat cheddar.
MiniMouse A large proportion of the processed foods that people eat contain ingredients that are bad for them but often high-powered but misleading marketing campaigns are used to sell them. Many foods that have been marketed as being "healthy" have been found to be anything but. It is difficult for people to scrutinise all the ingredients and to work out just how much a particular ingredient contributes to the total daily recommended allowance.
If we expect families to avoid the regular consumption of processed foods, then we must educate young people properly about the danger they pose to current and future health, and teach them how to cook simple meals using reasonably priced fresh ingredients (not, as I recall my son having to do for "cookery", assembling a pizza from a shop bought dough base, olive oil, tomato paste and mozzarella cheese).
. . . . . but why SO much?! I agree about low-fat, especially cheese!
Manufacturers load their products with sugar, fat and salt as most people like the taste so they sell more. Low-fat digestive biscuits certainly don't taste as good!
Why does today's mantra always seem to be, "If in doubt, tax them or fine them"? - ie the general public.
Why does processed food and drink contain so much sugar and salt? Surely the manufacturers can produce them with much lower amounts. Is it cheaper to bulk the products out with sugar and that's why they do it?
Also, with apologies for being on my high horse here, isn't there an argument for saying that people should use some discipline/self-discipline and just cut down on fizzy drinks etc without legislation and taxes being used as a stick - yet again!
I heard them discussing this on the Today programme. It made me cross that they did n't mention the eateries chains who dole out endless free sugary drinks (as per the thread yesterday)
I do think the advice to put water on the dinner table rather than juices or squashes is good. We have always had water. [halo]
Not more taxes on the less well off though, and, let's face it, they are probably the ones it would hit.
Holly It does seem a bit silly for the Food and Drinks Federation to put up for interview someone who is recommending calorie counting as opposed to calorie removal at source when, from your description, he is unable to follow his own recommendation.
Apparently, the most dangerous shape to have so far as heart attacks and stroke are concerned is one where weight is unevenly distributed and concentrated in the middle of the body - and, from what you say, this chap fits the bill.
If the French example is anything to go by, it would appear that the effect of higher taxation on certain foods does not change eating behaviour in the long term. Of course, the government is reluctant to alienate the food industry but it seems to me that the best way of stopping people eating unhealthy food is to introduce legislation to prevent manufacturers from producing it.
Ah, yes, but the fat round the middle is the most dangerous to health!
Perhaps he's got really teeny weeny skinny legs, so that taken overall he's not over weight?
This morning, on the BBC News, it was reported that a sugar tax was still being considered in the fight against rising obesity levels in the UK and that other measures, such as advising parents to place a jug of water on the dinner table rather than sugary drinks, would form part of the education process. It would, however appear that taxation is the way Government prefer to go.
A gentleman by the name of Terry Jones, from the Food & Drinks Federation, was on the programme to give advice on calorie reduction. He stated that they (FDF) are working with manufacturers to reduce the overall calories in food during the production process as he believes 'this is the way to help people control their calorie intake'.
He stated that 'France has had a rate of tax on sugary drinks since 2012 and consumption fell by 2% that year; the following year it went up by 1/2% and by the start of 2014 it went up by 6%'.
Two questions: do you think that Mr Jones' belief is the better way to go (the removal of calories during the production process) rather than tax (which is probably just a revenue earner anyway - governments know people won't give things up totally);
and
the thing that surprised me that Mr Jones had been elected to appear to give his views on controlling calorie intake - he had no discernible jawline (his chin seemed to run straight into his collar) and a stomach that a Buddah statue would have been proud of. If people are going to give advice about calorie control, shouldn't those messages come from someone who isn't also having a problem limiting their calorie intake? Doesn't that smack of hypocrisy?
i1.ytimg.com/vi/qEQvQWqhiAc/0.jpg
(image of Mr Jones)
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join the discussion, watch threads and lots more.
Register now »Already registered? Log in with:
Gransnet »Get our top conversations, latest advice, fantastic competitions, and more, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter here.