Advanced search

Benefits chopped for fatties.

(116 Posts)
Iggly Thu 03-Jan-13 11:07:53

Benefits Chopped for fatties?! really?

I'm just astounded. Who shall we demonise next?

tilder Mon 14-Jan-13 07:54:05

I can't bring myself to flick on a link spouting bacon and eggs to be the healthiest breakfast.

Wonderful to see so many links on one thread to such a reputable, scientifically and medically respected publication that never posts bollocks, contradictions or inaccuracies.

tilder Mon 14-Jan-13 07:50:16

I can't quite belive this thread is for real.

For starters, the proposal is unworkable. So no worries there.

It isn't one or two ingredients that cause people to be fat, its eating too much of anything amd moving too little. Although the more calories, then yes the more likely it is to pile on the weight.

Yes some procedures may be weight limited. This is for several reasons, losing the weight may be curative, doing the procedure when obese may carry an unacceptable risk to the patients health, it can even be physically difficult to perform a procedure.

And no, I don't believe the Nazi's are coming.

Smudging Mon 14-Jan-13 07:35:40

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Smudging Mon 14-Jan-13 07:25:25

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

claig Mon 14-Jan-13 00:07:11

I agree with Xenia about bacon and eggs. Bacon contains lots of nutrients, particularly in the fat

Here is something saying that nitrites/nitrates are not as bad as we are often told.

Not sure about this, but lots of things we have been told about food by the "experts" has turned out to be wrong. They used to tell us that eggs were bad for us and they are very healthy, and they rarely mention the harm that high fructose corn syrup, aspartame and GM ingredients can do.

Smudging Sun 13-Jan-13 21:32:04

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Darkesteyes Sun 13-Jan-13 17:47:49

What edam said.

edam Sat 12-Jan-13 23:31:29

Maybe Westminster councillors should discuss this policy with Eric Pickles, the local government minister. And if they can do it without laughing - without the tiniest, tiniest hint of a grin - they get the chance to put it into practice.

Except no, because that would depend on GPs wanting to do the dirty work of Tory councillors - councillors who draw pretty generous 'allowances' from the taxpayer for pulling this kind of stunt.

PurpleStorm Tue 08-Jan-13 23:31:58

It's a lot easier for someone to overeat and get fat if they're eating processed food & soft drinks, compared with eating unprocessed foods. Processed foods & soft drinks tend to be calorie dense, and often don't fill you up for as long as unprocessed foods & drinks.

And there's a lot of processed food around these days. For example, if you're out and about, get hungry and want a snack, it's a lot easier to find junk food than it is to find a healthy alternative, unless you've planned ahead and brought a healthy snack with you. And in supermarkets, there's usually plenty of very visible special offers on processed foods.

We do all have responsibility for their own behaviour - but the environment we live in makes it very easy for us all to eat processed food.

Kendodd Tue 08-Jan-13 13:13:21

"Processed foods and soft drinks are 100% the culprit"

What do we have absolutely no responsibility for our own behaviour?

Xenia Mon 07-Jan-13 11:51:50

It's always a compromise. If you look at the low car bootcamp threads on mumsnet it is also one of the most common ways of eating too - it's not a diet for a short time. It is just a way to eat which means you stay happy and healthy and a good weight.

ouryve Mon 07-Jan-13 11:29:10

Well, if that's the type of diet you believe in (I tend to believe we've evolved a bit in the past 10,000 years), you'd better knock bacon out of it because that's pretty heavily processed.

Xenia Sun 06-Jan-13 13:38:58

Processed foods and soft drinks are 100% the culprit. Nothing to do with portion sizes.

"A. In the U.S., calcium intake is one of the highest in the world. Yet paradoxically, we also have one of the highest rates of bone de-mineralization (osteoporosis). Bone mineral content is dependent not just upon calcium intake but upon net calcium balance (calcium intake minus calcium excretion). Most nutritionists focus upon the calcium intake side of the calcium balance equation, however few realize that the calcium excretion side of the equation is just as important.

Bone health is substantially dependent on dietary acid/base balance. All foods upon digestion ultimately must report to the kidney as either acid or base. When the diet yields a net acid load (such as low-carb fad diets that restrict consumption of fruits and vegetables), the acid must be buffered by the alkaline stores of base in the body. Calcium salts in the bones represent the largest store of alkaline base in the body and are depleted and eliminated in the urine when the diet produces a net acid load. The highest acid-producing foods are hard cheeses, cereal grains, salted foods, meats, and legumes, whereas the only alkaline, base-producing foods are fruits and vegetables. Because the average American diet is overloaded with grains, cheeses, salted processed foods, and fatty meats at the expense of fruits and vegetables, it produces a net acid load and promotes bone de-mineralization. By replacing hard cheeses, cereal grains, and processed foods with plenty of green vegetables and fruits, the body comes back into acid/base balance which brings us also back into calcium balance.

The Paleo Diet recommends an appropriate balance of acidic and basic (alkaline) foods (i.e., lean meats, fish and seafood, fruits, and vegetables) and will not cause osteoporosis in otherwise healthy individuals. Indeed, the Paleo Diet promotes bone health.

For more information, see The Nutritional Characteristics of a Contemporary Diet Based on Paleolithic Food Groups and Paleo Diet Acid/Base Balance Table."

ouryve Sun 06-Jan-13 13:30:32

Children (and adults) need calcium, Xenia. And I think our diets already rely too heavily on meat.

Besides, processed food alone is not the culprit. It's portion sizes, plain and simple.

Xenia Sun 06-Jan-13 13:24:15

There is certainly the argument that the overweight die young (there are very very few fat old people ) which saves teh NHS a fortune but I believe the sums show that the cost of the diabetes and other health problem care is huge compared to what is saved from early deaths.

Frosties do not make you happy. Sugar causes a brief sugar high and then you crash which is why depression levels are currently so high. The route to happiness is in three healthy meals a day sans Frosties. Even bread and ketchup have sugar in them.

uptheamp Sun 06-Jan-13 12:58:01

why do we want to improve health though? we already are living way too long and can't cope with the amount of elderly we have

don't want to give up my frosties just to add ten years of misery to my life thanks. would rather not be old and useless

Xenia Sun 06-Jan-13 12:54:48

We could simply ban the entirety of processed food. That would improve health at a stroke. We are now the second fattest nation on the planet. It is not just a joke. It's a really serious issue.

People think children's cereals are healthy but even if it's pure porridge you are just feeding stodge ie carb and dairy. Give them eggs, meat, bacon, veg, water, not toast and jam and cereals and milk

cinnamonnut Sun 06-Jan-13 10:25:47

I really don't think the food should just be made illegal like that!

claig Sat 05-Jan-13 21:16:20

Labour are saying that they want to do something about what goes into our fodd. Good on them.

piprabbit Sat 05-Jan-13 19:38:41

Glad that's cleared up grin

cinnamonnut Sat 05-Jan-13 18:15:00

I actually wasn't 100% sure grin

mercibucket Sat 05-Jan-13 18:08:38

These thinktanks float all kind of 'outrageous' ideas, to soften us up, and soon enough they will be mainstream
Look how quickly one or two turn up on here to applaud the idea
This government is treading a very very dangerous path - encouraging the worst in each of us and pitting group against group. Why? Who would benefit while we all fight amongst ourselves? The government, of the rich.
It is dangerous because of where it can lead. People have a very dark side to them. We forget this because in our own lives we haven't seen it. But we see the consequences on tv and throughout history. Most people who commit atrocities under state direction would be perfectly normal, decent citizens in a different time and place.
I also see this as another step towards fascism. Many normal people have supported fascism. The consequences are horrific.

piprabbit Sat 05-Jan-13 17:58:28

cinnamonnut - just checking that you didn't think my idea was a serious suggestion for addressing the consumption of take away food. I'm starting to think I should have added a LOL or a hmm or a grin.

ChippingInLovesChristmasLights Sat 05-Jan-13 17:48:30

There are more holes in this proposal than in swiss cheese!

It is thoroughly unworkable.

It is also grossly unfair to target one 'group'. I agree with everything Claig (and others posting similarly) has said.

It is astounding, that people who should know better, are supporting this, people who I had assumed actually had a brain. Just goes to show how well people can hide their stupidity on an internet forum.

insancerre Sat 05-Jan-13 17:00:44

But what if they rigged all the exercise bikes up to the national grid? Then we wouldn't need the nuclear power stations they plan to build.
That's not a serious suggestion by the way, but neither is the plan in the article.

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: