Register

Yet another foodscare :-(

For all refugees from the old Beeb Food Boards :-)
Chill out and chat with the foodie community or swap top tips.
NOTE: CHATTERBOX IS IN THIS FORUM

Moderators: karadekoolaid, THE MOD TEAM, Stokey Sue, Gillthepainter

Posts: 712
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 11:08 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby miss mouse » Thu Apr 18, 2019 9:30 am

strictlysalsaclare wrote:Whenever I read these reports I always wonder who has sponsored the study.


Quite.

User avatar
Posts: 8629
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:02 pm
Location: Stoke Newington, London

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Stokey Sue » Thu Apr 18, 2019 10:53 am

The trouble is over focus on one element of the diet, and single issue studies seldom have enough subjects in them

I have more faith in the huge long term studies such as Framingham and American Nurses, but although they include enough people, and follow them for life there are problems with any study that lasts that long. My diet I’m sure has changed over the last 40 years, due to fashion, finances, changing taste etc - how often do you sample? Which sample is relevant?

User avatar
Posts: 3719
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2012 11:53 am
Location: near some lakes

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Gillthepainter » Thu Apr 18, 2019 12:01 pm

Mine changes too.
The only scare story I recently heard that I've paid attention to was Emilia Clarke (Game of Thrones) on the radio. I cannot quickly find it on Google but will have another go later.
Suffered a heart attack that she put down to her Coca Cola consumption. But she was drinking 10 or more cans a day!
But I've decided not to drink it any more (I only drank it once a flood anyway, so I shan't miss it).

And then, there's that hidden agenda:

https://www.facebook.com/AtheistRepubli ... 716013847/

User avatar
Posts: 8629
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:02 pm
Location: Stoke Newington, London

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Stokey Sue » Thu Apr 18, 2019 3:14 pm

I think one can safely ignore the level of wilful stupidity in that video

Though there’s a bit of Twitter storm, some people saying the Lancet EAT study was subverted by Seventh Day Adventists trying to promote their Eden diet, because obviously a diet largely based on plants, including whole grains, is terribly bad for you and could only have been recommended if there was a conspiracy afoot :roll: :roll: :roll:

Talking of conspiracy I note that most of the people starting these rumours have high protein / keto diet books and videos to sell :lol:

User avatar
Posts: 1547
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 6:16 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby dennispc » Thu Apr 18, 2019 5:48 pm

I wish I had time to go through that report, though the Guardian does well with its story. For now, I'll leave you with this thought.

A slice of bacon has just over one gram of saturated fat. Gregg's vegan sausage roll contains 9g.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=gregg ... e&ie=UTF-8

Site Admin
User avatar
Posts: 3253
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:56 pm
Location: Bushey

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Sakkarin » Wed May 15, 2019 11:07 am

Haaaa! Now it's the cooking process not the ingredients that are getting the flack!!! I just had to laugh, I saw the photograph...

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... -pollution

User avatar
Posts: 3146
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 6:28 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby jeral » Wed May 15, 2019 2:42 pm

There is some truth (I think) in the article. For instance, wood burners are known to be one of the worst contributors to air polution in this country and it was mooted in parliament whether they should be banned (indoors and out); some cleaning products that really "get on your chest" and many, like weedkillers, are overly strong unnecessarily; grease particles do linger and get everywhere though whether harmful or not I don't know.

On the other hand, there have been studies that showed that getting out to get fresh air was more psychological as there was no difference between in and out air, although this current study clearly begs to differ - testing only four houses(?). I suppose it also very much depends on whether living in the leafy countryside or next to a diesel-fume-clogged road.

In principle, I'd have thought it depended on whether one "transgressed" frequently or constantly, or did what is always in effect recommended being a little of everything and everything in moderation.

The poll on how much time kids spend outside is interesting, being a downward spiral IMO. If playing fields and after-school activities have disappeared (as they have), undoubtedly X-box etc takes over, giving rise to the claim that there's no need for outdoor spaces (nor for them to be maintained at huge cost and often with fees attached) now as few would use them being happy with free internet pastimes.

What do others take away from the report?

User avatar
Posts: 1879
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:30 pm
Location: Provence

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Joanbunting » Wed May 15, 2019 4:16 pm

There are wood burners and wood burners. We have a totally enclosed one whith two flues one which deals with the paticles and one which releases the heat through ducts into three rooms. We even got a large tax rebate for having it fitted. The other thing is we only ever burn really dry wood - at least 2 years after it has been cut.

I can see the problems with installing what are really vanity stoves in houses with pretentious owners in city centres but right out in the open country there is no better way,to heat, especially as we are not permitted to have solar panels because we are situated in a regional park.

At least the village kids are always outside unless it's too hot then they are let out from about 5.00pm and they really do know how to play. Not a single one with any spare kgs on them. They do not snack either except for the famous gouter when they come home from school.
Cooking for those you care about is the most profound expression of love - Anne-Sophie Pic

User avatar
Posts: 3146
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 6:28 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby jeral » Wed May 15, 2019 5:44 pm

Joanbunting: You say,
"especially as we are not permitted to have solar panels because we are situated in a regional park".

May I ask why not?

Apols for just taking that one aspect from your post.

User avatar
Posts: 8629
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:02 pm
Location: Stoke Newington, London

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Stokey Sue » Wed May 15, 2019 7:22 pm

The article is too brief, imo to go into the subject in depth - talks about cooking a Sunday roast on a gas job, which if you click the link isn’t quite what he means (would be a good trick though)

But I have noticed that any form of frying, including stir frying, even with the extractor hood on full throttle tends to set off my smoke detector, when there’s no sign of burning. Smoke detectors are of course really particle detectors. So I think there’s probably a real issue with the particle load. Question is, what’s the real risk to humans exposed to them?

User avatar
Posts: 1879
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:30 pm
Location: Provence

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Joanbunting » Thu May 16, 2019 3:00 pm

Jeral we are not alowwed solar panels for the reason I gave and even more so that our home is situated in "Un de la plus beaux en France" - an official and much prized award given to a limited number of villages. The reason is apparently that such activities as pargliding and hot-air balloons must have a perfect view when drifting overhead - lots of tourist pennies!!

You can have them if you have big enough grounds but never on rooftops, Just as we are retricted as to the size of statellite dishes and the colour of our shutters. They are however plans afoot to have an array of panels installed in a nearby quary which it about to be abandonned and also over our entirely natural sewage system which works on a series of reed beds.

Probably too much information but we knew what to expect when we bought our house and we respect both the park and the village status., considering ourselves to be very lucky people. Just as we know we can't use movable charcoal bbq's because of the risk of fire - so we have a gas one.
Cooking for those you care about is the most profound expression of love - Anne-Sophie Pic

Site Admin
User avatar
Posts: 3253
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:56 pm
Location: Bushey

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Sakkarin » Sat Jun 08, 2019 4:53 pm

This is worrying, now they're suggesting hospitals shouldn't be offering processed meat (specifically bacon) on their menus at all. Unfortunately the article is not open to comments, so the headline plants the idea in people's heads that somehow the hospitals are doing something wrong by offering ham and bacon, without comeback.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... use-cancer

Posts: 2416
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2017 6:19 pm
Location: Barcelona

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Alexandria » Sun Jun 09, 2019 1:20 am

Good article Sakkarin.

This is truly a disgraceful catastrophe ..

I have never seen bacon, ham or even pork
served in a hospital in Spain, as a visitor
to see a few of my clientel service reps
or daughter in laws when they were
giving birth or when I had my
twin sons.

In Spain, they ask
about your dietary preferences
and they are noted when you
are admitted to the hospital
room for your care. It is the
first thing the nurses do.
They also read your medical
récords where this may be
noted and also, allergies
are discussed.

Most take
vegetarian meals as they are not
up to eating too much.
Barcelona, soulful & spirited, filled with fine art, amazing architecture, profoundly steeped in culture & history, and it engages all your senses, and food fancies.

User avatar
Posts: 2581
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 1:40 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby karadekoolaid » Sun Jun 09, 2019 2:13 am

This is worrying, now they're suggesting hospitals shouldn't be offering processed meat


Well yes, it is worrying. One assumes that hospital food should be prepared fresh, and from scratch - which would automatically eliminate bacon, ham ,sausages, other processed meats, processed fish, frozen vegetables, tinned food; everything that is not 100% fresh.

From my (very brief) experience of hospital food, however, I would at least hope they might use seasoning of some sort. :crying1

User avatar
Posts: 8629
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:02 pm
Location: Stoke Newington, London

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Stokey Sue » Sun Jun 09, 2019 11:13 am

I only skim read the article I don’t have the time or the blood pressure to spare

Hospital food is a minefield

I follow the lovely Leicnut on Twitter, he’s a qualified doctor who is the consultant clinical nutritionist at Leicester Royal Infirmary. He gets very fed up people assuming that their own version of a generic healthy diet is what all patients need - if that were the case he wouldn’t have a job, working out as he does what is best for individuals or small groups of patients.

On the specific case, yes nitrites do (probably) cause cancer. But the relative risk is very low and and you most likely need repeated doses over a long period, not an occasional bacon butty. Sometimes getting the calories and protein into a patient might be considered more immediately important I suspect

Karadekoolaid I hope you are being sarcastic, it’s hard to tell. You have shown a dislike of frozen food before, despite the facts, which are that frozen veg and fish have been shown consistently by proper scientific investigation to have more nutrients than “fresh” produce that has been through the supply chain and got tired. There’s no way kitchens working on the scale of an NHS hospital could cope without them, and no reason other than prejudice that they should.

User avatar
Posts: 505
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:06 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby strictlysalsaclare » Sun Jun 09, 2019 12:42 pm

Having now read the Guardian article, I am kind of in agreement with Stokey Sue on several points. I am sure that most of us a aware that nitrite free bacon, sausages and ham are a bit more expensive than the other kind. Therefore there is probably not the budget for them at some NHS trusts. Also with regards to frozen veg, peas are definitely more nutritious as they are usually frozen within 3 hours of picking. It must be the same for all other frozen veg that is available. The registered dietician on Eat Well for Less has said the same thing on more than one occasion.

User avatar
Posts: 2993
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2012 12:33 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Pampy » Sun Jun 09, 2019 2:04 pm

Definitely with Sue on this.

User avatar
Posts: 1547
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 6:16 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby dennispc » Sun Jun 09, 2019 4:50 pm

People who don't eat nitrates may still get cancer. Vegan Maurice Gibb, once of the BeeGees, died from colorectal cancer.

Posts: 1735
Joined: Thu May 03, 2012 10:35 am

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Lusciouslush » Sun Jun 09, 2019 5:18 pm

What is that old saying? Oh yes, everything in moderation.....!

User avatar
Posts: 2581
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 1:40 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby karadekoolaid » Sun Jun 09, 2019 6:03 pm

Karadekoolaid I hope you are being sarcastic, it’s hard to tell


Sorry, Sue - the "frozen veg" bit should not have been there. I freeze lots of veg myself.

the "seasoning" bit definitely stays!

PreviousNext

Return to Food Chat & Chatterbox

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 24 guests