The Health Star Rating is a front-of-pack labeling system that rates the overall nutritional profile of packaged food and assigns it a rating from ½ a star to 5 stars. It provides a quick, easy, standard way to compare similar packaged foods. The more stars, the healthier the choice.

Health Star Rating

Now all we need is an energy density indicator and some of the most dangerous food manufacturers in the world will go broke overnight.

:-)

Rule 303 said:

The Health Star Rating is a front-of-pack labeling system that rates the overall nutritional profile of packaged food and assigns it a rating from ½ a star to 5 stars. It provides a quick, easy, standard way to compare similar packaged foods. The more stars, the healthier the choice.

Health Star Rating

Now all we need is an energy density indicator and some of the most dangerous food manufacturers in the world will go broke overnight.

:-)

I agree.

Michael V said:

Rule 303 said:

The Health Star Rating is a front-of-pack labeling system that rates the overall nutritional profile of packaged food and assigns it a rating from ½ a star to 5 stars. It provides a quick, easy, standard way to compare similar packaged foods. The more stars, the healthier the choice.

Health Star Rating

Now all we need is an energy density indicator and some of the most dangerous food manufacturers in the world will go broke overnight.

:-)

I agree.

+ another.

Rule 303 said:

The Health Star Rating is a front-of-pack labeling system that rates the overall nutritional profile of packaged food and assigns it a rating from ½ a star to 5 stars. It provides a quick, easy, standard way to compare similar packaged foods. The more stars, the healthier the choice.

Health Star Rating

Now all we need is an energy density indicator and some of the most dangerous food manufacturers in the world will go broke overnight.

:-)

Do you really think people are going to stop buying and eating junk just because the manufacturer has told them just how bad it is for them? It’ll probably boost sales beyond their wildest dreams.

Is this a new thing?

I have only recently noticed it on packaging, but this was after I already got it home. I have not paid attention to it in buying stuff.

Rule 303 said:

The Health Star Rating is a front-of-pack labeling system that rates the overall nutritional profile of packaged food and assigns it a rating from ½ a star to 5 stars. It provides a quick, easy, standard way to compare similar packaged foods. The more stars, the healthier the choice.

Health Star Rating

Now all we need is an energy density indicator and some of the most dangerous food manufacturers in the world will go broke overnight.

:-)

(shrugs) Probably you are kidding, but no.

btm said:

Rule 303 said:

The Health Star Rating is a front-of-pack labeling system that rates the overall nutritional profile of packaged food and assigns it a rating from ½ a star to 5 stars. It provides a quick, easy, standard way to compare similar packaged foods. The more stars, the healthier the choice.

Health Star Rating

Now all we need is an energy density indicator and some of the most dangerous food manufacturers in the world will go broke overnight.

:-)

Do you really think people are going to stop buying and eating junk just because the manufacturer has told them just how bad it is for them? It’ll probably boost sales beyond their wildest dreams.

Do you remember the short release of the cigarette brand named Death? Sold like hotcakes.

btm said:

Rule 303 said:

The Health Star Rating is a front-of-pack labeling system that rates the overall nutritional profile of packaged food and assigns it a rating from ½ a star to 5 stars. It provides a quick, easy, standard way to compare similar packaged foods. The more stars, the healthier the choice.

Health Star Rating

Now all we need is an energy density indicator and some of the most dangerous food manufacturers in the world will go broke overnight.

:-)

Do you really think people are going to stop buying and eating junk just because the manufacturer has told them just how bad it is for them? It’ll probably boost sales beyond their wildest dreams.

Yeah, I think it would dramatically change their sales. Kids these days are a LOT more health-conscious than any generation before them. They don’t smoke, don’t drink, and they know more about the foods they’re eating.

If there was a simple system that indicated energy density (‘traffic lights’ would be perfect) I promise you they would make smart choices.

Rule 303 said:

btm said:

Rule 303 said:

The Health Star Rating is a front-of-pack labeling system that rates the overall nutritional profile of packaged food and assigns it a rating from ½ a star to 5 stars. It provides a quick, easy, standard way to compare similar packaged foods. The more stars, the healthier the choice.

Health Star Rating

Now all we need is an energy density indicator and some of the most dangerous food manufacturers in the world will go broke overnight.

:-)

Do you really think people are going to stop buying and eating junk just because the manufacturer has told them just how bad it is for them? It’ll probably boost sales beyond their wildest dreams.

Yeah, I think it would dramatically change their sales. Kids these days are a LOT more health-conscious than any generation before them. They don’t smoke, don’t drink, and they know more about the foods they’re eating.

If there was a simple system that indicated energy density (‘traffic lights’ would be perfect) I promise you they would make smart choices.

Aren’t kids these days also a lot fatter than any generation before them?

dv said:

Rule 303 said:

The Health Star Rating is a front-of-pack labeling system that rates the overall nutritional profile of packaged food and assigns it a rating from ½ a star to 5 stars. It provides a quick, easy, standard way to compare similar packaged foods. The more stars, the healthier the choice.

Health Star Rating

Now all we need is an energy density indicator and some of the most dangerous food manufacturers in the world will go broke overnight.

:-)

(shrugs) Probably you are kidding, but no.

McDonalds is closing down hundreds of restaurants around the world, other big players are struggling for market share and heavily modifying their menus. The health effects on the couple of generations who have been exposed to the mass-marketing of fast foods are becoming undeniable.

Bubblecar said:

Rule 303 said:

btm said:

Do you really think people are going to stop buying and eating junk just because the manufacturer has told them just how bad it is for them? It’ll probably boost sales beyond their wildest dreams.

Yeah, I think it would dramatically change their sales. Kids these days are a LOT more health-conscious than any generation before them. They don’t smoke, don’t drink, and they know more about the foods they’re eating.

If there was a simple system that indicated energy density (‘traffic lights’ would be perfect) I promise you they would make smart choices.

Aren’t kids these days also a lot fatter than any generation before them?

Severe obesity has also increased from 19 per cent to 28 per cent over the past 20 years and people are becoming overweight or obese at younger ages.

The AIHW shows 15 per cent of people born in the mid-1990s were obese at age 18 to 21.

“This is almost double the proportion of obese 18 to 21-year-olds who were born two decades earlier,” said AIHW spokeswoman Lynelle Moon.

A similar pattern was observed for very young children born in the early 2010s.

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/australian-youth-more-at-risk-of-obesity-than-their-parents-report

People know that eating a lot of fatty, carby foods will tend to make you fat. They teach it in school, it’s well publicised by well meaning government agencies. No one is going to stopped from eating a box of tim tams because there was a label. “Really? These chocolate biscuits are high kJ? Cor blimey! Stap me vitals! Whodathunkit?”

Bubblecar said:

Rule 303 said:

btm said:

Do you really think people are going to stop buying and eating junk just because the manufacturer has told them just how bad it is for them? It’ll probably boost sales beyond their wildest dreams.

Yeah, I think it would dramatically change their sales. Kids these days are a LOT more health-conscious than any generation before them. They don’t smoke, don’t drink, and they know more about the foods they’re eating.

If there was a simple system that indicated energy density (‘traffic lights’ would be perfect) I promise you they would make smart choices.

Aren’t kids these days also a lot fatter than any generation before them?

Yes, because they’re sitting on their arses and there is almost no control over the foods they’re eating.

And let’s be clear about this, some of the stuff on the market is very highly engineered, by world-leading food experts, to be highly rewarding for the target market. Every single aspect of the purchasing and consumption of their food-shaped-objects is studied in the tiniest detail do deliver maximum possible profit. It is going to take a powerful regulatory influence to drive them away from that.

Rule 303 said:

Bubblecar said:

Rule 303 said:

Yeah, I think it would dramatically change their sales. Kids these days are a LOT more health-conscious than any generation before them. They don’t smoke, don’t drink, and they know more about the foods they’re eating.

If there was a simple system that indicated energy density (‘traffic lights’ would be perfect) I promise you they would make smart choices.

Aren’t kids these days also a lot fatter than any generation before them?

Yes, because they’re sitting on their arses and there is almost no control over the foods they’re eating.

And let’s be clear about this, some of the stuff on the market is very highly engineered, by world-leading food experts, to be highly rewarding for the target market. Every single aspect of the purchasing and consumption of their food-shaped-objects is studied in the tiniest detail do deliver maximum possible profit. It is going to take a powerful regulatory influence to drive them away from that.

Coca Cola Amatil, didn’t want to do the 10 cents on the return of the can thing.

dv said:

People know that eating a lot of fatty, carby foods will tend to make you fat. They teach it in school, it’s well publicised by well meaning government agencies. No one is going to stopped from eating a box of tim tams because there was a label. “Really? These chocolate biscuits are high kJ? Cor blimey! Stap me vitals! Whodathunkit?”

On the other side, nuts, dried fruit etc are marketed as health foods.

I worked with a woman who was seriously obese and trying to lose weight. She picked at a bag of nuts and sultanas all day, thinking that was healthy (for her).

Rule 303 said:

Bubblecar said:

Rule 303 said:

Yeah, I think it would dramatically change their sales. Kids these days are a LOT more health-conscious than any generation before them. They don’t smoke, don’t drink, and they know more about the foods they’re eating.

If there was a simple system that indicated energy density (‘traffic lights’ would be perfect) I promise you they would make smart choices.

Aren’t kids these days also a lot fatter than any generation before them?

Yes, because they’re sitting on their arses and there is almost no control over the foods they’re eating.

And let’s be clear about this, some of the stuff on the market is very highly engineered, by world-leading food experts, to be highly rewarding for the target market. Every single aspect of the purchasing and consumption of their food-shaped-objects is studied in the tiniest detail do deliver maximum possible profit. It is going to take a powerful regulatory influence to drive them away from that.

I agree it’s a good idea, but as dv points out, most people are already aware of what’s fattening and what’s not.

OTOH, there could be a few surprises.

Michael V said:

dv said:

People know that eating a lot of fatty, carby foods will tend to make you fat. They teach it in school, it’s well publicised by well meaning government agencies. No one is going to stopped from eating a box of tim tams because there was a label. “Really? These chocolate biscuits are high kJ? Cor blimey! Stap me vitals! Whodathunkit?”

On the other side, nuts, dried fruit etc are marketed as health foods.

I worked with a woman who was seriously obese and trying to lose weight. She picked at a bag of nuts and sultanas all day, thinking that was healthy (for her).

I think dietary advice tends to promote nuts too much. Although good for you, they’re also fattening and many people (including me) find it hard to ration nuts sensibly. Once you’ve started scoffing them it’s hard to stop :)

Bubblecar said:

Michael V said:

dv said:

People know that eating a lot of fatty, carby foods will tend to make you fat. They teach it in school, it’s well publicised by well meaning government agencies. No one is going to stopped from eating a box of tim tams because there was a label. “Really? These chocolate biscuits are high kJ? Cor blimey! Stap me vitals! Whodathunkit?”

On the other side, nuts, dried fruit etc are marketed as health foods.

I worked with a woman who was seriously obese and trying to lose weight. She picked at a bag of nuts and sultanas all day, thinking that was healthy (for her).

I think dietary advice tends to promote nuts too much. Although good for you, they’re also fattening and many people (including me) find it hard to ration nuts sensibly. Once you’ve started scoffing them it’s hard to stop :)

I know exactly what you mean. I’ve just finished a tiny bowl of smoked almonds. I’ve refilled it with roasted peanuts…

Bubblecar said:

Michael V said:

dv said:

People know that eating a lot of fatty, carby foods will tend to make you fat. They teach it in school, it’s well publicised by well meaning government agencies. No one is going to stopped from eating a box of tim tams because there was a label. “Really? These chocolate biscuits are high kJ? Cor blimey! Stap me vitals! Whodathunkit?”

On the other side, nuts, dried fruit etc are marketed as health foods.

I worked with a woman who was seriously obese and trying to lose weight. She picked at a bag of nuts and sultanas all day, thinking that was healthy (for her).

I think dietary advice tends to promote nuts too much. Although good for you, they’re also fattening and many people (including me) find it hard to ration nuts sensibly. Once you’ve started scoffing them it’s hard to stop :)

Yeppers. I now actively avoid buying nuts. I find a small bowl with a few beers turns into a large bowl and more beers.

Michael V said:

Bubblecar said:

Michael V said:

On the other side, nuts, dried fruit etc are marketed as health foods.

I worked with a woman who was seriously obese and trying to lose weight. She picked at a bag of nuts and sultanas all day, thinking that was healthy (for her).

I think dietary advice tends to promote nuts too much. Although good for you, they’re also fattening and many people (including me) find it hard to ration nuts sensibly. Once you’ve started scoffing them it’s hard to stop :)

I know exactly what you mean. I’ve just finished a tiny bowl of smoked almonds. I’ve refilled it with roasted peanuts…

Yet a dozen walnuts a day will lower your cholesterol levels.

sibeen said:

Bubblecar said:

Michael V said:

On the other side, nuts, dried fruit etc are marketed as health foods.

I worked with a woman who was seriously obese and trying to lose weight. She picked at a bag of nuts and sultanas all day, thinking that was healthy (for her).

I think dietary advice tends to promote nuts too much. Although good for you, they’re also fattening and many people (including me) find it hard to ration nuts sensibly. Once you’ve started scoffing them it’s hard to stop :)

Yeppers. I now actively avoid buying nuts. I find a small bowl with a few beers turns into a large bowl and more beers.

a fucking excuse for drinking mmore beers. Try the unsalted ones. ;)

sibeen said:

Bubblecar said:

Michael V said:

On the other side, nuts, dried fruit etc are marketed as health foods.

I worked with a woman who was seriously obese and trying to lose weight. She picked at a bag of nuts and sultanas all day, thinking that was healthy (for her).

I think dietary advice tends to promote nuts too much. Although good for you, they’re also fattening and many people (including me) find it hard to ration nuts sensibly. Once you’ve started scoffing them it’s hard to stop :)

Yeppers. I now actively avoid buying nuts. I find a small bowl with a few beers turns into a large bowl and more beers.

nods

Bubblecar said:

Michael V said:

dv said:

People know that eating a lot of fatty, carby foods will tend to make you fat. They teach it in school, it’s well publicised by well meaning government agencies. No one is going to stopped from eating a box of tim tams because there was a label. “Really? These chocolate biscuits are high kJ? Cor blimey! Stap me vitals! Whodathunkit?”

On the other side, nuts, dried fruit etc are marketed as health foods.

I worked with a woman who was seriously obese and trying to lose weight. She picked at a bag of nuts and sultanas all day, thinking that was healthy (for her).

I think dietary advice tends to promote nuts too much. Although good for you, they’re also fattening and many people (including me) find it hard to ration nuts sensibly. Once you’ve started scoffing them it’s hard to stop :)

Oh, is that so. Well, that’s my learning for today. I don’t buy them anyway.

Anyway it was an hour past that I was told that I should abed.

So be it.

I’ve imbibed enough health food to rattle an early morning RBT.

Michael V said:

dv said:

People know that eating a lot of fatty, carby foods will tend to make you fat. They teach it in school, it’s well publicised by well meaning government agencies. No one is going to stopped from eating a box of tim tams because there was a label. “Really? These chocolate biscuits are high kJ? Cor blimey! Stap me vitals! Whodathunkit?”

On the other side, nuts, dried fruit etc are marketed as health foods.

I worked with a woman who was seriously obese and trying to lose weight. She picked at a bag of nuts and sultanas all day, thinking that was healthy (for her).

Oh, we had someone in here, you might remember her … self-reported BMI was north of 40.

She was chowing down on sesame seeds all day to lose weight.

We had to tell her that
a) if something is a major source of the world’s cooking oil, it’s probably high in energy
b) seeds have to be high energy because they power all the operations of the plant until the point the photosynthesis can take place.

dv said:

People know that eating a lot of fatty, carby foods will tend to make you fat. They teach it in school, it’s well publicised by well meaning government agencies. No one is going to stopped from eating a box of tim tams because there was a label. “Really? These chocolate biscuits are high kJ? Cor blimey! Stap me vitals! Whodathunkit?”

You seem to be taking a fairly pessimistic approach to this, DV, but for what it’s worth, yes. If you ever find yourself staring at a shelf full of biscuits, and the energy density rating makes it clear that the Scotch Fingers are for consumption in moderation, the Tim Tams are only to be eaten if trying to gain weight, but the Walter’s Wafers may be eaten in their hundreds without fear of the many complications and inconveniences of obesity, I believe you will be much more likely to purchase the Walter’s.

party_pants said:

Bubblecar said:

Michael V said:

On the other side, nuts, dried fruit etc are marketed as health foods.

I worked with a woman who was seriously obese and trying to lose weight. She picked at a bag of nuts and sultanas all day, thinking that was healthy (for her).

I think dietary advice tends to promote nuts too much. Although good for you, they’re also fattening and many people (including me) find it hard to ration nuts sensibly. Once you’ve started scoffing them it’s hard to stop :)

Oh, is that so. Well, that’s my learning for today. I don’t buy them anyway.

I grow my own.

dv said:

Michael V said:

dv said:

People know that eating a lot of fatty, carby foods will tend to make you fat. They teach it in school, it’s well publicised by well meaning government agencies. No one is going to stopped from eating a box of tim tams because there was a label. “Really? These chocolate biscuits are high kJ? Cor blimey! Stap me vitals! Whodathunkit?”

On the other side, nuts, dried fruit etc are marketed as health foods.

I worked with a woman who was seriously obese and trying to lose weight. She picked at a bag of nuts and sultanas all day, thinking that was healthy (for her).

Oh, we had someone in here, you might remember her … self-reported BMI was north of 40.

She was chowing down on sesame seeds all day to lose weight.

We had to tell her that
a) if something is a major source of the world’s cooking oil, it’s probably high in energy
b) seeds have to be high energy because they power all the operations of the plant until the point the photosynthesis can take place.

Which is why they should be respected and rationed yes. Might I mention that we leaneth on the staff of life too mucheth?

Bubblecar said:

Rule 303 said:

Bubblecar said:

Aren’t kids these days also a lot fatter than any generation before them?

Yes, because they’re sitting on their arses and there is almost no control over the foods they’re eating.

And let’s be clear about this, some of the stuff on the market is very highly engineered, by world-leading food experts, to be highly rewarding for the target market. Every single aspect of the purchasing and consumption of their food-shaped-objects is studied in the tiniest detail do deliver maximum possible profit. It is going to take a powerful regulatory influence to drive them away from that.

I agree it’s a good idea, but as dv points out, most people are already aware of what’s fattening and what’s not.

OTOH, there could be a few surprises.

Sure, sure. Certainly I have no objection to prominent, simple labelling of calorific content and other nutritional information.

When you think about it it should be pretty easy for someone to track their kJ intake these days, what with our handheld computerisers and whatnot.

dv said:

Michael V said:

dv said:

People know that eating a lot of fatty, carby foods will tend to make you fat. They teach it in school, it’s well publicised by well meaning government agencies. No one is going to stopped from eating a box of tim tams because there was a label. “Really? These chocolate biscuits are high kJ? Cor blimey! Stap me vitals! Whodathunkit?”

On the other side, nuts, dried fruit etc are marketed as health foods.

I worked with a woman who was seriously obese and trying to lose weight. She picked at a bag of nuts and sultanas all day, thinking that was healthy (for her).

Oh, we had someone in here, you might remember her … self-reported BMI was north of 40.

She was chowing down on sesame seeds all day to lose weight.

We had to tell her that
a) if something is a major source of the world’s cooking oil, it’s probably high in energy
b) seeds have to be high energy because they power all the operations of the plant until the point the photosynthesis can take place.

I think the problem is the generalised nomenclature – “Junk Foods”.

You see, humans have evolved tastes to like – no, really crave – oil, sugar, salt. None of these are junk to hunter gatherers. people who all day eat leaves and grasses and the occasional tiny lizard that they knock off.

dv said:

Bubblecar said:

Rule 303 said:

Yes, because they’re sitting on their arses and there is almost no control over the foods they’re eating.

And let’s be clear about this, some of the stuff on the market is very highly engineered, by world-leading food experts, to be highly rewarding for the target market. Every single aspect of the purchasing and consumption of their food-shaped-objects is studied in the tiniest detail do deliver maximum possible profit. It is going to take a powerful regulatory influence to drive them away from that.

I agree it’s a good idea, but as dv points out, most people are already aware of what’s fattening and what’s not.

OTOH, there could be a few surprises.

Sure, sure. Certainly I have no objection to prominent, simple labelling of calorific content and other nutritional information.

When you think about it it should be pretty easy for someone to track their kJ intake these days, what with our handheld computerisers and whatnot.

Point is that once the weight is on….

The real issue is to try and promote why lettuce is so chewfabulous?

Rule 303 said:

You seem to be taking a fairly pessimistic approach to this, DV

That’s a fair assessment. I’ll be very happy to be proven wrong.

Michael V said:

dv said:

Michael V said:

On the other side, nuts, dried fruit etc are marketed as health foods.

I worked with a woman who was seriously obese and trying to lose weight. She picked at a bag of nuts and sultanas all day, thinking that was healthy (for her).

Oh, we had someone in here, you might remember her … self-reported BMI was north of 40.

She was chowing down on sesame seeds all day to lose weight.

We had to tell her that
a) if something is a major source of the world’s cooking oil, it’s probably high in energy
b) seeds have to be high energy because they power all the operations of the plant until the point the photosynthesis can take place.

I think the problem is the generalised nomenclature – “Junk Foods”.

You see, humans have evolved tastes to like – no, really crave – oil, sugar, salt. None of these are junk to hunter gatherers. people who all day eat leaves and grasses and the occasional tiny lizard that they knock off.

Yeah and we are no longer attempting to live through an ice age. Despite some comments I’ve seen.

dv said:

Bubblecar said:

Rule 303 said:

Yes, because they’re sitting on their arses and there is almost no control over the foods they’re eating.

And let’s be clear about this, some of the stuff on the market is very highly engineered, by world-leading food experts, to be highly rewarding for the target market. Every single aspect of the purchasing and consumption of their food-shaped-objects is studied in the tiniest detail do deliver maximum possible profit. It is going to take a powerful regulatory influence to drive them away from that.

I agree it’s a good idea, but as dv points out, most people are already aware of what’s fattening and what’s not.

OTOH, there could be a few surprises.

Sure, sure. Certainly I have no objection to prominent, simple labelling of calorific content and other nutritional information.

When you think about it it should be pretty easy for someone to track their kJ intake these days, what with our handheld computerisers and whatnot.

They already know what they are eating. No real need for an app.

dv said:

Bubblecar said:

Rule 303 said:

Yes, because they’re sitting on their arses and there is almost no control over the foods they’re eating.

And let’s be clear about this, some of the stuff on the market is very highly engineered, by world-leading food experts, to be highly rewarding for the target market. Every single aspect of the purchasing and consumption of their food-shaped-objects is studied in the tiniest detail do deliver maximum possible profit. It is going to take a powerful regulatory influence to drive them away from that.

I agree it’s a good idea, but as dv points out, most people are already aware of what’s fattening and what’s not.

OTOH, there could be a few surprises.

Sure, sure. Certainly I have no objection to prominent, simple labelling of calorific content and other nutritional information.

When you think about it it should be pretty easy for someone to track their kJ intake these days, what with our handheld computerisers and whatnot.

I do, (but not on a hand-held device) and I have developed a spreadsheet that helps me calculate this stuff. But I might not be normal…

Michael V said:

dv said:

Michael V said:

On the other side, nuts, dried fruit etc are marketed as health foods.

I worked with a woman who was seriously obese and trying to lose weight. She picked at a bag of nuts and sultanas all day, thinking that was healthy (for her).

Oh, we had someone in here, you might remember her … self-reported BMI was north of 40.

She was chowing down on sesame seeds all day to lose weight.

We had to tell her that
a) if something is a major source of the world’s cooking oil, it’s probably high in energy
b) seeds have to be high energy because they power all the operations of the plant until the point the photosynthesis can take place.

I think the problem is the generalised nomenclature – “Junk Foods”.

You see, humans have evolved tastes to like – no, really crave – oil, sugar, salt. None of these are junk to hunter gatherers. people who all day eat leaves and grasses and the occasional tiny lizard that they knock off.

What I think is that there’s no point in trying to say “this food is bad for you, that food is good for you”. It’s all about amounts. I’ve heard numbnuts say it’s okay for them to eat a lot of avocado because “it’s good fat” lol. You need an appropriate amount of kJ in a week, you need at least a certain amount of protein, you do in fact need a certain amount of fat/oil apparently, you need some roughage, you need a spread of micronutrients. You need to enjoy yourself.

roughbarked said:

dv said:

Bubblecar said:

I agree it’s a good idea, but as dv points out, most people are already aware of what’s fattening and what’s not.

OTOH, there could be a few surprises.

Sure, sure. Certainly I have no objection to prominent, simple labelling of calorific content and other nutritional information.

When you think about it it should be pretty easy for someone to track their kJ intake these days, what with our handheld computerisers and whatnot.

Point is that once the weight is on….

The real issue is to try and promote why lettuce is so chewfabulous?

I really don’t like lettuce much. It’s so bitter.

Michael V said:

roughbarked said:

dv said:

Sure, sure. Certainly I have no objection to prominent, simple labelling of calorific content and other nutritional information.

When you think about it it should be pretty easy for someone to track their kJ intake these days, what with our handheld computerisers and whatnot.

Point is that once the weight is on….

The real issue is to try and promote why lettuce is so chewfabulous?

I really don’t like lettuce much. It’s so bitter.

Have you grown your own?

dv said:

Sure, sure. Certainly I have no objection to prominent, simple labelling of calorific content and other nutritional information.

When you think about it it should be pretty easy for someone to track their kJ intake these days, what with our handheld computerisers and whatnot.

They’re already doing that and it’s not working very well, which is why I like the idea of a very simple visual representation of the energy density, not quantity. Red means stop, orange means sometimes, green means go.

dv said:

Michael V said:

dv said:

Oh, we had someone in here, you might remember her … self-reported BMI was north of 40.

She was chowing down on sesame seeds all day to lose weight.

We had to tell her that
a) if something is a major source of the world’s cooking oil, it’s probably high in energy
b) seeds have to be high energy because they power all the operations of the plant until the point the photosynthesis can take place.

I think the problem is the generalised nomenclature – “Junk Foods”.

You see, humans have evolved tastes to like – no, really crave – oil, sugar, salt. None of these are junk to hunter gatherers. people who all day eat leaves and grasses and the occasional tiny lizard that they knock off.

What I think is that there’s no point in trying to say “this food is bad for you, that food is good for you”. It’s all about amounts. I’ve heard numbnuts say it’s okay for them to eat a lot of avocado because “it’s good fat” lol. You need an appropriate amount of kJ in a week, you need at least a certain amount of protein, you do in fact need a certain amount of fat/oil apparently, you need some roughage, you need a spread of micronutrients. You need to enjoy yourself.

Well said and you didn’t even mention nuts.

roughbarked said:

Michael V said:

roughbarked said:

Point is that once the weight is on….

The real issue is to try and promote why lettuce is so chewfabulous?

I really don’t like lettuce much. It’s so bitter.

Have you grown your own?

Never had any luck.

Rule 303 said:

dv said:

Sure, sure. Certainly I have no objection to prominent, simple labelling of calorific content and other nutritional information.

When you think about it it should be pretty easy for someone to track their kJ intake these days, what with our handheld computerisers and whatnot.

They’re already doing that and it’s not working very well, which is why I like the idea of a very simple visual representation of the energy density, not quantity. Red means stop, orange means sometimes, green means go.

I like the way you put that.

Rule 303 said:

dv said:

Sure, sure. Certainly I have no objection to prominent, simple labelling of calorific content and other nutritional information.

When you think about it it should be pretty easy for someone to track their kJ intake these days, what with our handheld computerisers and whatnot.

They’re already doing that and it’s not working very well, which is why I like the idea of a very simple visual representation of the energy density, not quantity. Red means stop, orange means sometimes, green means go.

Fine, I’m down with whatever.

Michael V said:

roughbarked said:

Michael V said:

I really don’t like lettuce much. It’s so bitter.

Have you grown your own?

Never had any luck.

That’s one reason why it tastes bitter.

roughbarked said:

dv said:

Michael V said:

I think the problem is the generalised nomenclature – “Junk Foods”.

You see, humans have evolved tastes to like – no, really crave – oil, sugar, salt. None of these are junk to hunter gatherers. people who all day eat leaves and grasses and the occasional tiny lizard that they knock off.

What I think is that there’s no point in trying to say “this food is bad for you, that food is good for you”. It’s all about amounts. I’ve heard numbnuts say it’s okay for them to eat a lot of avocado because “it’s good fat” lol. You need an appropriate amount of kJ in a week, you need at least a certain amount of protein, you do in fact need a certain amount of fat/oil apparently, you need some roughage, you need a spread of micronutrients. You need to enjoy yourself.

Well said and you didn’t even mention nuts.

Well I did mention the nut of the numb tree.

dv said:

Michael V said:

dv said:

Oh, we had someone in here, you might remember her … self-reported BMI was north of 40.

She was chowing down on sesame seeds all day to lose weight.

We had to tell her that
a) if something is a major source of the world’s cooking oil, it’s probably high in energy
b) seeds have to be high energy because they power all the operations of the plant until the point the photosynthesis can take place.

I think the problem is the generalised nomenclature – “Junk Foods”.

You see, humans have evolved tastes to like – no, really crave – oil, sugar, salt. None of these are junk to hunter gatherers. people who all day eat leaves and grasses and the occasional tiny lizard that they knock off.

What I think is that there’s no point in trying to say “this food is bad for you, that food is good for you”. It’s all about amounts. I’ve heard numbnuts say it’s okay for them to eat a lot of avocado because “it’s good fat” lol. You need an appropriate amount of kJ in a week, you need at least a certain amount of protein, you do in fact need a certain amount of fat/oil apparently, you need some roughage, you need a spread of micronutrients. You need to enjoy yourself.

Yes, just a matter of enjoying good food in appropriate quantities.

As Micheal Pollan says, “Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.”

Michael V said:

dv said:

Michael V said:

On the other side, nuts, dried fruit etc are marketed as health foods.

I worked with a woman who was seriously obese and trying to lose weight. She picked at a bag of nuts and sultanas all day, thinking that was healthy (for her).

Oh, we had someone in here, you might remember her … self-reported BMI was north of 40.

She was chowing down on sesame seeds all day to lose weight.

We had to tell her that
a) if something is a major source of the world’s cooking oil, it’s probably high in energy
b) seeds have to be high energy because they power all the operations of the plant until the point the photosynthesis can take place.

I think the problem is the generalised nomenclature – “Junk Foods”.

You see, humans have evolved tastes to like – no, really crave – oil, sugar, salt. None of these are junk to hunter gatherers. people who all day eat leaves and grasses and the occasional tiny lizard that they knock off.

They’re precisely engineered by world-leading experts to fuck with your brain chemistry as much as they legally can, MV. Your local fruit & veg shop hasn’t got a hope in hell.

dv said:

roughbarked said:

dv said:

What I think is that there’s no point in trying to say “this food is bad for you, that food is good for you”. It’s all about amounts. I’ve heard numbnuts say it’s okay for them to eat a lot of avocado because “it’s good fat” lol. You need an appropriate amount of kJ in a week, you need at least a certain amount of protein, you do in fact need a certain amount of fat/oil apparently, you need some roughage, you need a spread of micronutrients. You need to enjoy yourself.

Well said and you didn’t even mention nuts.

Well I did mention the nut of the numb tree.

:)

Rule 303 said:

Your local fruit & veg shop hasn’t got a hope in hell.

Well NOW who’s being pessimistic

Bubblecar said:

dv said:

Michael V said:

I think the problem is the generalised nomenclature – “Junk Foods”.

You see, humans have evolved tastes to like – no, really crave – oil, sugar, salt. None of these are junk to hunter gatherers. people who all day eat leaves and grasses and the occasional tiny lizard that they knock off.

What I think is that there’s no point in trying to say “this food is bad for you, that food is good for you”. It’s all about amounts. I’ve heard numbnuts say it’s okay for them to eat a lot of avocado because “it’s good fat” lol. You need an appropriate amount of kJ in a week, you need at least a certain amount of protein, you do in fact need a certain amount of fat/oil apparently, you need some roughage, you need a spread of micronutrients. You need to enjoy yourself.

Yes, just a matter of enjoying good food in appropriate quantities.

As Micheal Pollan says, “Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.”

The family across the road, don’t eat anything that is green.

Michael V said:

dv said:

Sure, sure. Certainly I have no objection to prominent, simple labelling of calorific content and other nutritional information.

When you think about it it should be pretty easy for someone to track their kJ intake these days, what with our handheld computerisers and whatnot.

I do, (but not on a hand-held device) and I have developed a spreadsheet that helps me calculate this stuff. But I might not be normal…

Yep. I’m sorry to say that will only work for a very small proportion of the population.

Rule 303 said:

Michael V said:

dv said:

Oh, we had someone in here, you might remember her … self-reported BMI was north of 40.

She was chowing down on sesame seeds all day to lose weight.

We had to tell her that
a) if something is a major source of the world’s cooking oil, it’s probably high in energy
b) seeds have to be high energy because they power all the operations of the plant until the point the photosynthesis can take place.

I think the problem is the generalised nomenclature – “Junk Foods”.

You see, humans have evolved tastes to like – no, really crave – oil, sugar, salt. None of these are junk to hunter gatherers. people who all day eat leaves and grasses and the occasional tiny lizard that they knock off.

They’re precisely engineered by world-leading experts to fuck with your brain chemistry as much as they legally can, MV. Your local fruit & veg shop hasn’t got a hope in hell.

The fruit and veg are strictly brain fucking as well. If you buy them from the shop that is.

dv said:

Rule 303 said:

Your local fruit & veg shop hasn’t got a hope in hell.

Well NOW who’s being pessimistic

There is little scope left for optimism.

Rule 303 said:

Michael V said:

dv said:

Sure, sure. Certainly I have no objection to prominent, simple labelling of calorific content and other nutritional information.

When you think about it it should be pretty easy for someone to track their kJ intake these days, what with our handheld computerisers and whatnot.

I do, (but not on a hand-held device) and I have developed a spreadsheet that helps me calculate this stuff. But I might not be normal…

Yep. I’m sorry to say that will only work for a very small proportion of the population.

I’m not going to buy one anyway.

roughbarked said:

Point is that once the weight is on….

The real issue is to try and promote why lettuce is so chewfabulous?

This speaks to a serious question – Why the hell do I have to be a food expert to avoid getting hugely fat and dying in my forties? Who has time for that? I’ll just eat whatever is convenient and affordable and hope for the best…

Rule 303 said:

roughbarked said:

Point is that once the weight is on….

The real issue is to try and promote why lettuce is so chewfabulous?

This speaks to a serious question – Why the hell do I have to be a food expert to avoid getting hugely fat and dying in my forties? Who has time for that? I’ll just eat whatever is convenient and affordable and hope for the best…

‘xacly.

dv said:

Rule 303 said:

dv said:

Sure, sure. Certainly I have no objection to prominent, simple labelling of calorific content and other nutritional information.

When you think about it it should be pretty easy for someone to track their kJ intake these days, what with our handheld computerisers and whatnot.

They’re already doing that and it’s not working very well, which is why I like the idea of a very simple visual representation of the energy density, not quantity. Red means stop, orange means sometimes, green means go.

Fine, I’m down with whatever.

See? There it is. Marketers call this ‘buy-in’.

All you need now are a couple of mates who have lost 40kg and reversed their TII DM on the ‘Green Diet’ and you will never eat Tim Tams again.

Rule 303 said:

dv said:

Rule 303 said:

They’re already doing that and it’s not working very well, which is why I like the idea of a very simple visual representation of the energy density, not quantity. Red means stop, orange means sometimes, green means go.

Fine, I’m down with whatever.

See? There it is. Marketers call this ‘buy-in’.

All you need now are a couple of mates who have lost 40kg and reversed their TII DM on the ‘Green Diet’ and you will never eat Tim Tams again.

From a vegan to Kevin Bloody Wilson, “Do you know how that animal died?”
Kevin back, “Yeah, you starved it to death”.

Rule 303 said:

dv said:

Rule 303 said:

They’re already doing that and it’s not working very well, which is why I like the idea of a very simple visual representation of the energy density, not quantity. Red means stop, orange means sometimes, green means go.

Fine, I’m down with whatever.

See? There it is. Marketers call this ‘buy-in’.

All you need now are a couple of mates who have lost 40kg and reversed their TII DM on the ‘Green Diet’ and you will never eat Tim Tams again.

I already don’t eat tim tams.

But if you like I can be part of your campaign and say that your damned labels is what enabled me to lose 25 kg.

Rather than my spreadsheet …

dv said:

Michael V said:

dv said:

People know that eating a lot of fatty, carby foods will tend to make you fat. They teach it in school, it’s well publicised by well meaning government agencies. No one is going to stopped from eating a box of tim tams because there was a label. “Really? These chocolate biscuits are high kJ? Cor blimey! Stap me vitals! Whodathunkit?”

On the other side, nuts, dried fruit etc are marketed as health foods.

I worked with a woman who was seriously obese and trying to lose weight. She picked at a bag of nuts and sultanas all day, thinking that was healthy (for her).

Oh, we had someone in here, you might remember her … self-reported BMI was north of 40.

She was chowing down on sesame seeds all day to lose weight.

We had to tell her that
a) if something is a major source of the world’s cooking oil, it’s probably high in energy
b) seeds have to be high energy because they power all the operations of the plant until the point the photosynthesis can take place.

Out of curiosity I just looked up the stats for sesame seeds.
24 kJ per gram.

For comparison, pure sugar is 16 kJ per gram.

dv said:

Out of curiosity I just looked up the stats for sesame seeds.
24 kJ per gram.

For comparison, pure sugar is 16 kJ per gram.

Surprising. I’d expect it to be high, but not that high.

dv said:

Rule 303 said:

See? There it is. Marketers call this ‘buy-in’.

All you need now are a couple of mates who have lost 40kg and reversed their TII DM on the ‘Green Diet’ and you will never eat Tim Tams again.

I already don’t eat tim tams.

But if you like I can be part of your campaign and say that your damned labels is what enabled me to lose 25 kg.

Rather than my spreadsheet …

Lovely.

Bubblecar said:

dv said:

Out of curiosity I just looked up the stats for sesame seeds.
24 kJ per gram.

For comparison, pure sugar is 16 kJ per gram.

Surprising. I’d expect it to be high, but not that high.

Straight fat is 38kJ/g

Rule 303 said:

The Health Star Rating is a front-of-pack labeling system that rates the overall nutritional profile of packaged food and assigns it a rating from ½ a star to 5 stars. It provides a quick, easy, standard way to compare similar packaged foods. The more stars, the healthier the choice.

Health Star Rating

Now all we need is an energy density indicator and some of the most dangerous food manufacturers in the world will go broke overnight.

:-)

Oh yuk!

We already have that on the back of all packets.

I guarantee, 100% certain, that they’ll get it massively wrong.

Rule 303 said:

The Health Star Rating is a front-of-pack labeling system that rates the overall nutritional profile of packaged food and assigns it a rating from ½ a star to 5 stars. It provides a quick, easy, standard way to compare similar packaged foods. The more stars, the healthier the choice.

Health Star Rating

Now all we need is an energy density indicator and some of the most dangerous food manufacturers in the world will go broke overnight.

:-)

Unlikely, for example people ‘know’ KFC isn’t a health food, but every night, the drive through here has quite a large queue – and two lanes…

There was a time … I know it’s impossible to believe now, but there really was a time when star ratings actually meant something.

Mmmmmmmm.. Tim Tams