I'm always wary of programmes that rather grandly put phrases like "The Truth" in their titles - it smacks too much of Here Come The Clever TV People To Put Us Right, of which there's FAR too much these days. And the content wasn't much better. Jane Moore portentously intoned about how we're being conned by the supermarkets, but it was all very overstated.
Much was made of how the "premium" range pie of one supermarket had more fat than the economy version from a different outlet... Er, yes, so? What was that supposed to tell us? There might be some question over how much more we're charged for these premium items but they aren't necessarily pitching them as healthier. She then spooked us by highlighting the 60% difference in fat of a low-fat pudding, compared to what it stated on the packaging. Yes - but that amounted to about half a gram.
I'm no defender of supermarkets but if a programme is going to put them under the microscope it needs to do better than this. It did the televisiony thing of giving us 3 families, each subjected to a different eating regime for a week, and presented the findings as though they had concrete meaning and conclusive evidence. To cobble this together, overlay it with a tone of doom-laden warning and call it "The Truth" just isn't good enough.
I found the programme quite eye opening. What's the point of having the traffic light labelling system, (or any other), if it's still giving us the wrong information. The discrepancy might only be small, but surely if we're all meant to be eating healthier then we need to know exactly what's in the food we buy. I know we need to eat more fruit and veg, which isn't labelled anyway, but with the busy lives we all lead people do need to have the choice of some well made, healthy convenience food sometimes too.
I'm glad you wrote this if you hadn't i would have. You should take this to right to reply. It was bad science poorly presented in a jumped up claim of the truth. Just because a so called 'healthy' ready meal has 10 more kcal more than the non healthy one doesn't mean that it doesn't contain less fat, salt, sugar and additives. And theres more fat in premium products than ordinary products - wow there's a revelation maybe beacuse they are loaded with butter and lard for flavour - no discussion about transfats, cholesterol, omega 3,6,9 nope ...all fat must be bad. Rubbish programme - I turned it off halfway becasue it was drivel!
quote:
Originally posted by suburbanite: Did anyone else see this?
I'm always wary of programmes that rather grandly put phrases like "The Truth" in their titles - it smacks too much of Here Come The Clever TV People To Put Us Right, of which there's FAR too much these days. And the content wasn't much better. Jane Moore portentously intoned about how we're being conned by the supermarkets, but it was all very overstated.
Much was made of how the "premium" range pie of one supermarket had more fat than the economy version from a different outlet... Er, yes, so? What was that supposed to tell us? There might be some question over how much more we're charged for these premium items but they aren't necessarily pitching them as healthier. She then spooked us by highlighting the 60% difference in fat of a low-fat pudding, compared to what it stated on the packaging. Yes - but that amounted to about half a gram.
I'm no defender of supermarkets but if a programme is going to put them under the microscope it needs to do better than this. It did the televisiony thing of giving us 3 families, each subjected to a different eating regime for a week, and presented the findings as though they had concrete meaning and conclusive evidence. To cobble this together, overlay it with a tone of doom-laden warning and call it "The Truth" just isn't good enough.
Rubbish programme - I turned it off halfway becasue it was drivel!
Absolute agreement from me - the programme used the language of previous interesting programmes but the words were about nothing.
The example I will give has been omitted by others, presumably because of the blatant nonsense hiding the slightly less stupid stuff; the cheap value muesli consisting mostly of oats was compared with the luxury muesli with all the dried fruit and nuts and it was pronounced in deathly portentous tones that the luxury stuff - gasp - contained more sugar because of the fruit.
It was a prime example of a programme about an important and interesting matter made by a person who was simply not up to it.
