In The Media Again
I just watched a couple of TV programmes I’d recorded earlier. Both of them almost “got it” but turned away at the last moment.
One was Dispatches which looked at the sugar and salt content of breakfast cereals, but shied away from pointing out the dangers in the cereal content. One sad thing was looking at some of the kids and thinking “wheat face!”
The second was Who Made Me Fat?
Now Channel 4 is fairly competent, but BBC3 is aimed at the sort of audience who needs an instruction manual for an on/off switch but knows the imtimate details of the “lifestyle” of every celebrity. Despite that it took a half decent swipe at the food industry, and pissed off one or two politicians (and several security guards). The Olympics, sponsored by McDonalds, Coca-Cola and Cadburys???
Both programmes rightly slammed sugar, but also fats – and didn’t address other carbs at all, so Conventional Wisdom is still alive and well. George McGovern was right to make Ancel Keys the world’s most successful grain salesman.
One things that emerged from the latter was the truly horrendous Sugar Bureau. Apparently the RDA for sugar is 60g, plus 30g of unrefined sugar already concealed in foods like fruit. Say what??? that’s 45g of fructose alone, I’m pushing it to eat 90g total carbs! The presenter added up her sugar consumption on her low fat diet and found it was over 160g – that’s right, 80g of fructose on top of 80g glucose. Now add her healthy breakfast cereal and brown rice and you start to see why there’s an epidemic of obesity which is worsening as people avoid fats. Something my mother bought the other day had an RDA of 70g for sugar and 230g for total carbs, I’ve seen higher but seldom lower on other packets
Not a few of her interviewees correctly pointed out that extra sugar is added to foods because it’s a cheap bulking agent and replaces more expensive ingredients. Sadly they didn’t take the next logical step of realising this also applies to wheat.
You may think the ongoing saga of the sacking of Drugs Adviser Professor David Nutt, followed by the resignation of Les King, has nothing to do with diet, or diabetes, but I think it is directly relevant: he was sacked because he went up against dogma with facts and information, much as what happens to doctors and researchers who do the same in the dietary field. When cannabis was declassified I said at the time that it was a temporary move designed to induce tokers to be less careful so the Police could build information and make a lot of arrests later when it was reclassified again. Was I wrong? Don’t assume when this lot of eejits are voted out and the other lot of eejits are voted in that any of this will change – except that the Food Industry will probably be given even more carte blanche to increase their profits at the expense of our health. Which makes me ponder whose profit margin is greater, a heroin dealer or a wheat pusher.
And finally . . . some good news.
If they’d used an even better diet they’d almost certainly have gotten even better results. Here’s how to find what that diet is
The original paper is here
Oops, no it’s not, that’s a different paper.
Subscription only, but you can read the summary.