Discussion
Simblade said:
Jamie's School dinners was inspired by the book 'They are what you feed them' by the chief neurologist at Oxford
You're slightly overselling Dr Alex Richardson there. The names of the departments she's involved with e.g. 'Department of Social Policy and Intervention' show it's really about starting with a preconceived notion of what you want people to do, then creating evidence of whatever flavour to nudge them in the direction you want them to go.This is the same old 'X is bad for you' argument as has been used many times before around foods and pretty much always turns out to be wrong with further research. They got rid of the things that really are bad for you i.e. smoking so have latched onto something else.
Newsflash: most people are perfectly capable of knowing what things are good for them or not and moderating their intake. When it comes to nutrition you'll usually automatically self regulate regardless of specific knowledge of the ingredients.
For the obese it should be obvious that they're eating too much of whatever.
For those who know they should cut back and don't care halving portion sizes or increasing costs won't have any significant effect; they'll just eat twice as many portions or spend the extra.
In the meantime Jamie's stupid idea has impacted on everyone else and cost them money.
Plus the guy is a massive hypocrite about pretty much everything so regardless of what he's selling I'll take it with extra salt. He's also not that clever about most things (regardless of some decent merchandising & sponsorship income) so that's another mark against him.
scenario8 said:
Troubleatmill said:
When he was discovered... Jamie Oliver found a niche.. ad made a career of it.
Problem is, he is a spent force.
How can you get growth... when there is nothing via osmosis...
He should do what was expected of him...
Make a few years of successful TV shows.
Licence his name to all of the s
te kitchen stuff under the sun...
Retire.
( And... he is seriously overweight these days... so.. it is like Janet Jackson on her.. I use 20 bottles of hairspray a day.... but CFC's are bad )
If you need a spokesperson..... get one that eats their own dog food.
Sorry, what?Problem is, he is a spent force.
How can you get growth... when there is nothing via osmosis...
He should do what was expected of him...
Make a few years of successful TV shows.
Licence his name to all of the s
te kitchen stuff under the sun...Retire.
( And... he is seriously overweight these days... so.. it is like Janet Jackson on her.. I use 20 bottles of hairspray a day.... but CFC's are bad )
If you need a spokesperson..... get one that eats their own dog food.
Edited by Troubleatmill on Monday 8th February 23:28
But... maybe you have missed the famous Janet Jackson hairspray moment...
..or maybe my command of the English language is a bit ropey.
What is it that you do not understand?
Happy to help.
Simblade said:
Jonesy23 said:
You're slightly overselling Dr Alex Richardson there. The names of the departments she's involved with e.g. 'Department of Social Policy and Intervention' show it's really about starting with a preconceived notion of what you want people to do, then creating evidence of whatever flavour to nudge them in the direction you want them to go.
This is the same old 'X is bad for you' argument as has been used many times before around foods and pretty much always turns out to be wrong with further research. They got rid of the things that really are bad for you i.e. smoking so have latched onto something else.
Newsflash: most people are perfectly capable of knowing what things are good for them or not and moderating their intake. When it comes to nutrition you'll usually automatically self regulate regardless of specific knowledge of the ingredients.
For the obese it should be obvious that they're eating too much of whatever.
For those who know they should cut back and don't care halving portion sizes or increasing costs won't have any significant effect; they'll just eat twice as many portions or spend the extra.
In the meantime Jamie's stupid idea has impacted on everyone else and cost them money.
Plus the guy is a massive hypocrite about pretty much everything so regardless of what he's selling I'll take it with extra salt. He's also not that clever about most things (regardless of some decent merchandising & sponsorship income) so that's another mark against him.
You make it seem as if she's just written a book to push some government agenda. She's a scientist (the most well regarded one in her field) who studied the effects of nutrition on brain health in a lab then wrote a book about it because in 30 years time if you extrapolate the numbers of children who are getting autism/adhd its going to be the biggest problem in the country.This is the same old 'X is bad for you' argument as has been used many times before around foods and pretty much always turns out to be wrong with further research. They got rid of the things that really are bad for you i.e. smoking so have latched onto something else.
Newsflash: most people are perfectly capable of knowing what things are good for them or not and moderating their intake. When it comes to nutrition you'll usually automatically self regulate regardless of specific knowledge of the ingredients.
For the obese it should be obvious that they're eating too much of whatever.
For those who know they should cut back and don't care halving portion sizes or increasing costs won't have any significant effect; they'll just eat twice as many portions or spend the extra.
In the meantime Jamie's stupid idea has impacted on everyone else and cost them money.
Plus the guy is a massive hypocrite about pretty much everything so regardless of what he's selling I'll take it with extra salt. He's also not that clever about most things (regardless of some decent merchandising & sponsorship income) so that's another mark against him.
Also the way you talk about 'eating too much' and 'self regulation' shows you know little about nutrition and health. I'd suggest you may like to do some reading on how refined sugar acts on the same dopamine pathways in the brain as cocaine. Or how when rats who have been addicted to cocaine over time yet given the option of a line or sugar they will choose sugar. Everytime. There is little choice in the matter when children are being fed something more powerful than cocaine on a daily basis then hypnotised by adverts all day as they lie in their pre diabetic coma.
This is not Jamie Oliver doing this on his own. He's just the face of a group of scientists and Dr's who know this, have for years and have not had a voice to get the information out.
So today it's sugar, yesterday it was salt. It used to be alcohol, fags, artificial sweeteners. It's been MSG, non saturated fats, red meat, eggs and chicken. You name it.
FFS it's like the weekly music charts, whatever's in fashion is the greatest threat.
If you don't like it don't eat it. Just don't spend taxpayers money educating the irredeemably stupid, who will kill themselves one way or another.
And more importantly than anything else, DON'T TAX IT. If sugar is harmful then simply ban it's use in manufactured food stuffs. Why is there a need to tax it, as if I didn't know........?
Strongly advise reading for perspective on sugar.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2015/05/the-bbc-swall...
If you want to address obesity, exercise, plus the consumption of saturated fats (I.e ban McDonalds and see how that goes down with the Hoi Poloi) might be a f
king more sensible place to start. Idiotic politics and health policy.Simblade said:
You make it seem as if she's just written a book to push some government agenda. She's a scientist (the most well regarded one in her field) who studied the effects of nutrition on brain health in a lab then wrote a book about it because in 30 years time if you extrapolate the numbers of children who are getting autism/adhd its going to be the biggest problem in the country.
Also the way you talk about 'eating too much' and 'self regulation' shows you know little about nutrition and health. I'd suggest you may like to do some reading on how refined sugar acts on the same dopamine pathways in the brain as cocaine. Or how when rats who have been addicted to cocaine over time yet given the option of a line or sugar they will choose sugar. Everytime. There is little choice in the matter when children are being fed something more powerful than cocaine on a daily basis then hypnotised by adverts all day as they lie in their pre diabetic coma.
This is not Jamie Oliver doing this on his own. He's just the face of a group of scientists and Dr's who know this, have for years and have not had a voice to get the information out.
You need to relax,you're getting too worked up.Put your feet up,have a nice sugary coffee and a fag followed by a nice chocolate donut.Also the way you talk about 'eating too much' and 'self regulation' shows you know little about nutrition and health. I'd suggest you may like to do some reading on how refined sugar acts on the same dopamine pathways in the brain as cocaine. Or how when rats who have been addicted to cocaine over time yet given the option of a line or sugar they will choose sugar. Everytime. There is little choice in the matter when children are being fed something more powerful than cocaine on a daily basis then hypnotised by adverts all day as they lie in their pre diabetic coma.
This is not Jamie Oliver doing this on his own. He's just the face of a group of scientists and Dr's who know this, have for years and have not had a voice to get the information out.
It'll do you the world of good.
Edited by Funkycoldribena on Tuesday 9th February 02:18
Edited by Funkycoldribena on Tuesday 9th February 02:19
Edited by Funkycoldribena on Tuesday 9th February 02:20
I like Jamie Oliver. He's made a tremendous success of himself. He started without pretension as a young bloke doing his 'naked chef' books and found them to be a big hit and he has went from strength to strength. His branded products and mediocre Italian restaurants are a bit dubious but I'd probably sign the same deals as he has, I could live with my name being on some average pizza and pasta dishes for a paycheque and little effort. His health activism may grate on some but he does act out of genuine concern and desire for change. There are more profitable ways to spend your time than battling for good school meals, a fact I'm sure he is aware of.
As a presenter, chef and an authority on food, is he as good as Rick Stein? No, but then who is?
As a presenter, chef and an authority on food, is he as good as Rick Stein? No, but then who is?
Simblade said:
Most of those things you listed will harm you btw.
And it's laughable how people think they have a choice in the matter. What's a stressed single mom who works full time suppose to do when the supposedly low fat ready meal she's bought thinking it's healthy is pumped full of something that gets you higher than Keith Moon at Xmas.
You think one of the biggest industries in the world is going to let the government ban their biggest profit producer? The fact is something changes now or we'll all be paying in 30 years when the NHS is full of people brought up addicted to food that kills them.
A lot of people do not give a fk about their health. I for one do not want to be paying for them to be lifelong recipients of antidepressants and insulin so food companies can keep making massive profits.
Mom? Eh?And it's laughable how people think they have a choice in the matter. What's a stressed single mom who works full time suppose to do when the supposedly low fat ready meal she's bought thinking it's healthy is pumped full of something that gets you higher than Keith Moon at Xmas.
You think one of the biggest industries in the world is going to let the government ban their biggest profit producer? The fact is something changes now or we'll all be paying in 30 years when the NHS is full of people brought up addicted to food that kills them.
A lot of people do not give a f
k about their health. I for one do not want to be paying for them to be lifelong recipients of antidepressants and insulin so food companies can keep making massive profits. Anyway, can't imagine how sanctimonious you must have come across, trying to influence family members' parenting by sending them a book. Beyond odd.
Leroy902 said:
I agree.
He's a millionaire many times over, and you can tell he means what he says, genuinely wants to make a change for the better, but ignorant fools on these forums will just complain, even if his intentions are genuine, and everything he says makes complete sense.
It's normally a reflection of themselves, they can't get their head around the fact someone actually wants to make a change, without any sort of motives...
They tend to be sneaky tts themselves, so think/hope everyone else is/should be.
Oh come on, you really think he's doing any of this for the greater good and without any sort of benefit to himself? You're deluded if you think that's the case. It's all to do with selling the Jamie Oliver brand pure and simple and while the topic is real his crusade is simply a front to sell more books and make more profit, he seems to have found a niche that isn't touched by many of the other big names and as such is using it to his advantage.He's a millionaire many times over, and you can tell he means what he says, genuinely wants to make a change for the better, but ignorant fools on these forums will just complain, even if his intentions are genuine, and everything he says makes complete sense.
It's normally a reflection of themselves, they can't get their head around the fact someone actually wants to make a change, without any sort of motives...
They tend to be sneaky t
ts themselves, so think/hope everyone else is/should be.Agree with the comments on him being a self important prat though, can't say I liked him much when he was a cheeky chunky cockney either mind so at least I'm constant in my views.
Leroy902 said:
I agree.
He's a millionaire many times over, and you can tell he means what he says, genuinely wants to make a change for the better, but ignorant fools on these forums will just complain, even if his intentions are genuine, and everything he says makes complete sense.
It's normally a reflection of themselves, they can't get their head around the fact someone actually wants to make a change, without any sort of motives...
They tend to be sneaky tts themselves, so think/hope everyone else is/should be.
Oh come on, you really think he's doing any of this for the greater good and without any sort of benefit to himself? You're deluded if you think that's the case. It's all to do with selling the Jamie Oliver brand pure and simple and while the topic is real his crusade is simply a front to sell more books and make more profit, he seems to have found a niche that isn't touched by many of the other big names and as such is using it to his advantage.He's a millionaire many times over, and you can tell he means what he says, genuinely wants to make a change for the better, but ignorant fools on these forums will just complain, even if his intentions are genuine, and everything he says makes complete sense.
It's normally a reflection of themselves, they can't get their head around the fact someone actually wants to make a change, without any sort of motives...
They tend to be sneaky t
ts themselves, so think/hope everyone else is/should be.Agree with the comments on him being a self important prat though, can't say I liked him much when he was a cheeky chunky cockney either mind so at least I'm constant in my views.
Dr Jekyll said:
Jamie is promising to 'go Ninja' if the government doesn't clamp down on sugar. So if we keep being allowed to continue eating sugar, an annoying self important prat will become a silent and invisible self important prat. That's win win.
I think he has it muddled up, there is little point in tackling "sugar" if our offspring are sitting on their butts playing their Nintendo, it would be just as bad as any other fad diet!As mentioned, JO has a string of restaurants bearing his name and a few (peculiar) olive/salad dressing outlets dotted around the country.
If he is the last word on healthy diets, he could lower the price his outlets charge for a small tub of olive salad, thereby increasing access to healthy foods, and stop his restaurants serving pizzas, burgers and chips.
For those who know nutrition, why do ready meals and fizzy drinks NEED salt and sugar? If the producers did not add it at all what woukd happen to the product?
If he is the last word on healthy diets, he could lower the price his outlets charge for a small tub of olive salad, thereby increasing access to healthy foods, and stop his restaurants serving pizzas, burgers and chips.
For those who know nutrition, why do ready meals and fizzy drinks NEED salt and sugar? If the producers did not add it at all what woukd happen to the product?
menousername said:
For those who know nutrition, why do ready meals and fizzy drinks NEED salt and sugar? If the producers did not add it at all what woukd happen to the product?
Our bodies crave fat, salt and sugar. In evolutionary terms we've just hopped off the Savannah and we still have these deep seated cravings because we don't know when our next meal is. Except we do and for things like sugar we don't have a switch that says we've had enough.People either like JO or they don't. His campaigns only reinforce those ideas and the people that hate him will never be able to see he's trying to do something good.
I quite like the bloke and his heart is in the right place but when I saw him about going all ninja and kicking this lot( I presume he means the current democratically elected government) out if they don't do something about it I lost respect for him and saw a chef version of Russell Brand in the making. Shame as until that moment I thought he was politically neutral and was doing a good job about changing school diets for the better. Another champagne socialist is not what the country needs unless of course they give all their wealth away to needy causes.
Ridley said:
Our bodies crave fat, salt and sugar. In evolutionary terms we've just hopped off the Savannah and we still have these deep seated cravings because we don't know when our next meal is. Except we do and for things like sugar we don't have a switch that says we've had enough.
People either like JO or they don't. His campaigns only reinforce those ideas and the people that hate him will never be able to see he's trying to do something good.
I wondered what would happen to the product itselfPeople either like JO or they don't. His campaigns only reinforce those ideas and the people that hate him will never be able to see he's trying to do something good.
Does salt and / or sugar add anything to the product in terms of longevity, quality etc. Why do ready meals have a tonne of salt if it is so easy to just not add salt. In the current climate of fast food restaurants bowing to public pressure and offering salads, labelling the nutritional values, etc. the ready meal industry would have a very quick PR win by ditching it.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff