Discussion
Seems I'm like a lot of people at large . Oliver just gets right up my nose, always has, always thought he has a "punch me" face, and even worse now he thinks its his right to lecture everyone. If you asked me why I have that view, I couldn't begin to explain why. Some people just seem to have that effect on others.
As for Tv chefs, for me. I actually like to watch James Martin, and Rick Stein, but I'll be surprised if anyone ever outshines Floyd.
As for Tv chefs, for me. I actually like to watch James Martin, and Rick Stein, but I'll be surprised if anyone ever outshines Floyd.
menousername said:
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.
I wondered what would happen to the product itselfDoes 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.
You're right though, it would be interesting to try the same ready meal with and without the unnecessary salt/sugar and see how it tastes.
Is this the same Jamie Oliver in the tip distribution dispute with waiting staff?
http://fortune.com/2015/10/01/jamie-oliver-tipping...
Regarding his crusades, well it's nice that he gives a damn about certain things but you need to have a certain lack of humility to appoint yourself as the chief crusader in these matters.
http://fortune.com/2015/10/01/jamie-oliver-tipping...
Regarding his crusades, well it's nice that he gives a damn about certain things but you need to have a certain lack of humility to appoint yourself as the chief crusader in these matters.
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 t
ts themselves, so think/hope everyone else is/should be.
Pretty much. 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.
JuniorD said:
Is this the same Jamie Oliver in the tip distribution dispute with waiting staff?
http://fortune.com/2015/10/01/jamie-oliver-tipping...
Regarding his crusades, well it's nice that he gives a damn about certain things but you need to have a certain lack of humility to appoint yourself as the chief crusader in these matters.
It's also the same bloke with these recipies:http://fortune.com/2015/10/01/jamie-oliver-tipping...
Regarding his crusades, well it's nice that he gives a damn about certain things but you need to have a certain lack of humility to appoint yourself as the chief crusader in these matters.
http://www.jamieoliver.com/recipes/fruit-recipes/g...
http://www.jamieoliver.com/recipes/fruit-recipes/s...
http://www.jamieoliver.com/recipes/fruit-recipes/j...
http://www.jamieoliver.com/recipes/fruit-recipes/t...
You could go on and on.
Simblade said:
Despite him being a multimillionaire who could just make chirpy cookery shows he elects to help others. Regardless of what you think of him he is raising awareness about the biggest danger to people in the next 50 years.
You win the "hyperbolic post of the day" award. As far as I can taste, the stuff you buy has far less sugar and salt in than it used to, for our own good of course. Bland as all hell.
He's a scruffy unsophisticated vulgarian and has conned the world into believing he's a prophet. It's Show Business for Pete's sake - it's all for publicity and to make even more money! Good luck to him, he's struck a chord with his target market and is (skimmed) milking it.
He's also wrong. Next thing is a preference for sugar will be classed as an addiction and dedicated clinics will be set up. Patches will emerge and E-sucrose gob stoppers proliferate. Any excitement, such as, say, ADHD and the like, will attract legions of pseudo professors with quack degrees writing books about their 'personal journeys'. All entirely predictable. The one and only thing wrong about sugar, a naturally occurring compound, is that it is over-refined.
It's also very funny - otherwise intelligent adults getting up on their hind legs in protest at a stunt, thereby lending credence.
He's also wrong. Next thing is a preference for sugar will be classed as an addiction and dedicated clinics will be set up. Patches will emerge and E-sucrose gob stoppers proliferate. Any excitement, such as, say, ADHD and the like, will attract legions of pseudo professors with quack degrees writing books about their 'personal journeys'. All entirely predictable. The one and only thing wrong about sugar, a naturally occurring compound, is that it is over-refined.
It's also very funny - otherwise intelligent adults getting up on their hind legs in protest at a stunt, thereby lending credence.
menousername said:
I wondered what would happen to the product itself
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.
As I understand it, the salt helps emulsify the fat on cheap cuts of meat. Sugar then has to be added to counter the strong flavour of salt so it tastes normalDoes 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.
dandarez said:
There's sugar and there's sugar.
There's white refined crap, or worse, sweeteners, and there's gorgeous Muscovado and Demerara.
Bit like milk, there's white paint in bottles with a red or green cap, then there's real milk, with a gold cap usually unhomogenised from Jersey cows and similar.
Guess which I like?
Jesus, first we had wine snobs, then coffee snobs and now you seem to be leading the charge for sugar and milk snobs. There's white refined crap, or worse, sweeteners, and there's gorgeous Muscovado and Demerara.
Bit like milk, there's white paint in bottles with a red or green cap, then there's real milk, with a gold cap usually unhomogenised from Jersey cows and similar.
Guess which I like?
Edited by youngsyr on Tuesday 9th February 13:03
Jasandjules said:
By all means educate the public about the dangers of such things. But I get f**ed off with the idea we must all be taxed for everything. We are free to choose what we want to do to ourselves FFS.
It's often the case that the most vocal advocates of such taxes (carbon, sugar etc) are those who are least affected by them.Why do such people favour the 'stick' approach over the 'carrot' - perhaps it's a power thing.
Simblade said:
Yep. Salt and sugar other than being highly addictive are also incredibly cheap and make great fillers to bulk out processed food.They are food manufacturers wet dreams. Well until now.
There's a great book called Salt, Sugar, Fat if your interested in further reading. Tells how food companies spend millions using research scientists and psychologists to make 20 different versions of their product with varying amounts of salt, fat and sugar and test with large groups of people to see which one gets people to eat the most of.
Scientifically making people unhealthy. It's disgusting.
The 'bliss' point.There's a great book called Salt, Sugar, Fat if your interested in further reading. Tells how food companies spend millions using research scientists and psychologists to make 20 different versions of their product with varying amounts of salt, fat and sugar and test with large groups of people to see which one gets people to eat the most of.
Scientifically making people unhealthy. It's disgusting.
Sugar was known about decades ago, the book Pure, White and Deadly.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/lifestyle/wellbeing/die...
But sugar industry is powerful, there is no fat industry as such, it's just a by-product.
Sugar wins!
I always assumed that all brands of consumer granulated sugar would taste the same, until I bought a bag of Whitworths Granulated Sugar. Somehow it's really horrible! All my life I used McKinney's Granulated Sugar, which pisses all over this horrible Whitworths crap.
Edited by JuniorD on Tuesday 9th February 14:10 in view of cleverdick Halb's comments below/above 
Edited by JuniorD on Tuesday 9th February 14:12
JuniorD said:
I always assumed that all sugar was the same, until I bought a bag of Whitworths Granulated Sugar. Somehow it's really horrible! All my life I used McKinney's Granulated Sugar, which pisses all over this horrible Whitworths crap.
Different sources?Onions have more sugar than beets.
Jamie is easy to dislike, a very wealthy, smug, chirpy mockney. In fact what is there to like? Then there are his mid market eating establishments which are utterly awful. Really bad. Designed to extract maximum money from idiots by using his celebrity status.
But don't shoot the messenger.
We are not designed or evolved to eat ANY refined sugar, it is a very recent phenomenon in our diet. The food industry turn our liking of sweet things into a weapon to use against us in making us buy their rubbish. Sugar is added to EVERY processed food. The only way to avoid it is to cook from ingredients. "Healthy" breakfast cereals are packed full of it and are extremely unhealthy. They even add it to fruit juice and to tinned vegetables.
This sugar has a huge price to society in the array of diseases it causes directly and all the diseases that obesity, which it causes, creates. One in five children leave primary school clinically obese. We have an epidemic in our society which many experts say is worse than smoking, it puts huge strain on our NHS and you are paying for it.
Adding sugar to any food should be made illegal, the average mong in our society is incapable of being educated, just look how many still smoke or how few get any exercise. If we can't ban it then we should tax it, for two good reasons. Firstly the tax would reduce consumption because of price elasticity of demand. Secondly it would give money to government to compensate them for the huge amount that sugar costs society.
But don't shoot the messenger.
We are not designed or evolved to eat ANY refined sugar, it is a very recent phenomenon in our diet. The food industry turn our liking of sweet things into a weapon to use against us in making us buy their rubbish. Sugar is added to EVERY processed food. The only way to avoid it is to cook from ingredients. "Healthy" breakfast cereals are packed full of it and are extremely unhealthy. They even add it to fruit juice and to tinned vegetables.
This sugar has a huge price to society in the array of diseases it causes directly and all the diseases that obesity, which it causes, creates. One in five children leave primary school clinically obese. We have an epidemic in our society which many experts say is worse than smoking, it puts huge strain on our NHS and you are paying for it.
Adding sugar to any food should be made illegal, the average mong in our society is incapable of being educated, just look how many still smoke or how few get any exercise. If we can't ban it then we should tax it, for two good reasons. Firstly the tax would reduce consumption because of price elasticity of demand. Secondly it would give money to government to compensate them for the huge amount that sugar costs society.
Edited by Adam Ansel on Tuesday 9th February 14:03
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff