Dear Rusty99992003, Just one area of disagreement. This is NOT and never has been the fault of LEAs. It is totally and utterly the fault of central Government. LEAs/Councils have legal requirements imposed on them by the UK Government, and now Europe. They have no choice but to comply with them. LEAs and schools are forced to serve this cr** because of these legal requirements - it is very very complex and involves a plethora of Education and Local Government Acts and Regulations, and EU Regulations. The way education funding works is also one of the root causes - it is all totally controlled and handed out by central Government and is totally, whether in theory or in practice, ring-fenced by Government requirements. The fact of the matter is that most schools don't even get funding for 37p per meal. Don't blame Councils. I used to until I worked as a lawyer for a number of London Boroughs. I now understand that absolutely everything they do, they have to do, because that's what our esteemed Government said they have to do, and when it goes wrong, the Government blames the Councils. It is not about local decision-making and accountability. It is all about removing accountability from central Government. This is one of the reasons why the DfES is not coping with this issue. They can't move the blame anywhere else, because there is a clear line leading straight back to their luxuriously appointed central London offices. They have been caught out.
The reason the leviathans and wolves you talk about have not tried to crush JO below the wheels of their enormous bandwagon (if that's not mixing metaphors a tad too much) is that he doesn't threaten them.
In fact, he is playing right into their hands!
If the government or LEA spends more on school dinners, where does that go? Straight into the pockets of the wolves! They will be no worse off, because the sheep will still be addicted to the same old Carbohydrate Laden Muck (CLM) they've been eating for the last twenty years.
The only difference will be that the new CLM will cost three times as much!
The food manufacturers and vendors (the wolves) are quite happy that the population are addicted to the CLM they sell. Not only is there a far higher profit margin on CLM than on any other food range, it keeps those who eat it craving more. The sheep are addicted to the stuff that's killing them.
And they don't know it! How neat is that?
Now, if JO was to come out with *that* as the central message of his drive to improve the nutritional condition of the country, you'd pretty quickly see him being attacked heavily by the same vested interest groups who attacked Dr Atkins and anyone else who dared to challenge the status quo.
Politics, power and food have always gone hand in hand, ever since the days when the East India company was bringing back heroin and sugar in equal quantities.
Now the hard stuff is left to smugglers and criminals, whilst the sugar industry goes from strength to strength on the back of low fat hysteria.
Meanwhile we all get sicker and sicker.
It amazes me that someone as turned on and smart as JO cannot see what is going on. Someone should tell him!
"Do what you wanna, do what you will, but don't mess up your neighbour's thrill" F. Zappa
I'm not having ago at periurban I'm just debating and pushing the debate along. What is great is that everyone is so passionate about this subject.
We all wouldn't be here typing if JO hadn't stirred it up. (boy another pun)
Gorbag - you say open your mind regarding my quote of SE Asians. Can you elaborate for me please, I can't understand the real issues unless someone says what they are. Cheers.
periurban - I shall have to watch the consultation with the doc again just to make sure.
Whole grain or white, rice is still a good provider of nutriction. More later see bottom.
Social experiment? Maybe. I will leave this aside as this is not really the debate.
periurban is not a troll. I didn't say you were! I also respect your comments.
I think what we are all getting at here is
All of us (children and adults) require a balanced diet.
I believe that the majority of school meals do not provide a balanced meal. So we should change that. Anyone disagree?
Brundle - the humble sausage has been hijacked. Anyone going to a quality local butcher will find a superiour product.
FAT IS NOT BAD - too much and it is. Fat is a dietry essential.
Brundle states "I think JO needs to concentrate on instilling a 'balanced' diet for our kids, and any balanced diet if good, has room for junk now and again. Failing that, our kids need to get off their backsides & stop watching so much TV!!!!"
I do think that Jamie is trying to instill a balanced diet - starting with school dinners. Room for junk food now and again? - Absolutely!!!!
Karenlp - thanks for that - great post. I didn't realise how centralised the decision making process had become. Perhaps it's time for LEA's and Parents and Governors to stand up to it. If it is as centralised as you say (and I have no reason to doubt you) then this should surely be an election isssue. Yes/No?
periurban - whilst we could debate the low carb option I will say one thing regards to this as I believe it is relevant.
Between the ages of 13 and 19 I was always very active (mainly playing football, lol) but became involved in the then fledging sport of mountain biking around the age of 15 and continued till I was 21. I consumed MASSIVE amounts of carbohydrate, mainly in the form of pasta, rice and potatoes. Sugar was also high on the list (infact before high energy drinks were invented performance cyclists used to consume litres of flat coke during a race) in the form of chewy cereal bars, bananas, raisins, coke etc etc.
I used to burn all this fuel and weighed 10 1/2 stone with a resting heartbeat (as soon as I woke up) of around 42 bpm at the age of 19. I am 6'1". I was very, very fit yet a high carbohydrate diet was what I ate and neeeded. I would hit the dreaded wall during competion if I hadn't prepared (foodwise)the night/days before.
My point is this, JO's campaign is trying to do the fundametal. Provide a balanced midday meal. Whowever, if it could be linked with a campaign to introduce more activity amongst children it would be doubly effective.
Gorbag - you say open your mind regarding my quote of SE Asians. Can you elaborate for me please, I can't understand the real issues unless someone says what they are. Cheers.
Periurban pretty much answered that point. But this is a good article to read.
Regrading your comments about carbs and fitness I was once the same. I was told by a nutritionist to eat lots of carb rich food like pasta, potatos etc etc. I ran, cycled and got pretty fit. Yes carbs will give you a big energy hit. But at what cost?
If you eat a bowl of pasta to carbo-load before exercising, you can burn off the excess sugar as energy but you cannot burn off the excess insulin that has been secreted to match the high sugar. Once insulin levels increase to higher than normal levels, damage begins to occur in your metabolism.
If you drop carbs you can fuel you body very efficiently and naturally on saturated fat. But it takes a little time for the body to adjust.
Unfortunately, we have been pretty much brainwashed in respect to oils and I’m sorry that JO seems to be in that brainwashed brigade; at least, I haven’t seen any evidence that he knows to differentiate correctly between fats.
I believe from my own research that the good-fat, bad-fat confusion is actually at the very root of the obesity and health problem, and the reason I keep sounding off about it here is the (perhaps futile) hope that JO or SOMEONE from the media or whatever will prick their ears and start THINKING.
What JO is doing, however, is stirring the debate on school dinners and junk food in general, and that is good. He is promoting cooking from scratch, and that is also goods. He is promoting fresh fruit and vegetables, and there was never any confusion or controversy about those. It’s a good beginning, but only a beginning.
I tried finding the word thattriggered a rejection to the secon part of my post but each time it was rejected again. Can;tthink what I said wrong. (Ahaa! I think I found the word! Here goes! You wil see the offensive word by the change I make to it!)
There are countless such population studies all of which point to the dangers of unsaturated fats but no-one takes notice of them – at least, no one with authority. The protesters, such as Dr Mary Enig, are usually ignored by the popular press; but there are several interesting books on the market as well as several websites Again, I can’t recommend www.westonaprice.org enough, especially the article “The Skinny on Fats” by Mary Enig, http://www.westonaprice.org/knowyourfats/skinny.html. One should avoid the orthodox sites such as the Food Standards Agency – they only parrot the same old myths.
Another good article is http://www.efn.org/~raypeat/efatox.rtf Unfortunately, we have been pretty much brainwashed in respect to oils and I’m sorry that JO seems to be in that brainwashed brigade; at least, I haven’t seen any evidence that he knows to differentiate correctly between fats.
I believe from my own research that the good-fat, bad-fat confusion is actually at the very root of the obesity and health problem, and the reason I keep sounding off about it here is the (perhaps futile) hope that JO or SOMEONE from the media or whatever will p---k their ears and start THINKING.
What JO is doing, however, is stirring the debate on school dinners and junk food in general, and that is good. He is promoting cooking from scratch, and that is also goods. He is promoting fresh fruit and vegetables, and there was never any confusion or controversy about those. It’s a good beginning, but only a beginning.
Hey guys lighten up it is clear that periurban is in fact winding yous all up - clearly p hasn't watched the program merely discussed it with a pint down the pub
Your experience of being a carb fuelled dude echoes my own. At age 25 I was a sugar fuelled fishy vegetarian (and by "sugar" I mean in all its forms, complex or otherwise). I wasn't overweight and was renowned for my energy levels.
But looking back on it, no wonder! I used to eat almost constantly, with never more than a couple of hours between snacks - breakfast, tea break, lunch, tea break, dinner, supper - all very high in carbs. I didn't know any better!
Twenty years later I had suffered a whole range of minor to serious illnesses, none of which the doctors could link to any underlying cause. The fact that I was barely able to function without eating tons of sweets and crisps (in fact, anything high in carbs), and that my weight was steadily creeping up, was of no interest to the doctors when making their diagnoses.
They are simply not educated to spot the signs of sugar addiction, because it doesn't officially exist! Even if you think I'm talking nonsense about sugar, the whole concept of food addiction is entirely unappreciated by most of the medical profession.
We are all different, we all have a unique metabolism. Some don't put on weight when exposed to high levels of carbohydrate, some do. Some may get MS or cancer, some don't.
Combined with the absence of beneficial fats in the diet (largely as a result of abandoning them to eat carbohydrate instead) almost everyone who has an illness in the western world has it because of their diet. We have now reached the point where if you selected a member of the British public at random there would be more chance of them suffering from a long term illness than not! What we are eating is killing us!
That's going to seem like an appalling thought to many of you. I know how you feel, because I felt the same way when the penny dropped for me. It simply seems like too much to believe.
But the more I read, the more I study, and the more I post on boards like these, the more evidence I find to back up what I say (even though I'd love to be wrong!) Many of the people I'm speaking to directly and through public forums are confirming what I suppose we all know - there is something rotten at the heart of our diet!
Aruna.
The battle is being fought between those who advocate carbohydrate as the body's best fuel, and those who back fats. I think you and I are on the same side, but I cannot believe that good health comes simply from eating good fats. You also have to cut out the bad carbs, or the good fats will simply become part of the wreckage.
Golden Budgies Rule.
I'm trying in my own small way to do what JO is doing. The program is very entertaining, but what I'd like to do here is get good debate going between like minded people - i.e. a group of disparate individuals who may disagree about the details, but who all agree that there is something wrong.
"Do what you wanna, do what you will, but don't mess up your neighbour's thrill" F. Zappa
I am sure the question of cost must come into play when choosing white rice/pasta for schools, Jamie has a limited budget to cope with and i am sure that you are aware that brown rice and wholemeal pasta costs a lot more than white. This diet may not be perfect but it is a lot healthier for children than it was before, i know your views on carbs Periurban and i dont know if this has come up before, but may i ask if you are married and do you have young children, if so do you insist that they eat in the same way as you do? surely children need a balanced diet with plenty of fruit and veggies and no junk food.
The battle is being fought between those who advocate carbohydrate as the body's best fuel, and those who back fats. I think you and I are on the same side, but I cannot believe that good health comes simply from eating good fats. You also have to cut out the bad carbs, or the good fats will simply become part of the wreckage.
I agree with what you say. I just believe that cutting out (or down) on carbs alone won't do the trick. We MUST get rid of processed fats and especially hydrogenated fats if we want to retuen to good health, and replace them with healthy, tarditional fats. The problem with the Atkins diet is that he does not diffentiate between the various fats - and there are huge differences. Read up on Mary Enig on the Weston Price website, the Know Your Fats page.
Having children, I find it very difficult, if not impossible, to cut out carbs completely, I don't even try. But I ONLY use whole grain products, and no ready meals. I threw out the microwave.
Replacing fats however is very easy if tou have children. They don't notice if food is cooked with sunflower or coconut oil, but coconut oil is far healthier. Butter anyway tastes better than margarine. Tackling the obesity problem through fats would be a cinch. Mary Enig has an excellent book called Eat Fat Lose Fat; have a look at it.
I have one lovely young daughter (two years of age), and she eats more or less what I do.
The difference is that her developing constitution can handle carbohydrate rather better than my old clapped out model! She does eat a little bread, and she still drinks cow's milk.
But she eats plenty of fruit and vegetables, along with tons of butter, meat, fish, cheese and eggs. She is beautifully healthy, bright and quite smart (but then *every* parent is going to say that - even the ones whose kids are ugly, sick, stupid and dull! )
Aruna.
Are you saying that simply by replacing the unhealthy fats with healthier saturated fats obesity can be dealt with? I don't think the Know Your Fats article is saying that, is it?
In the presence of high GI carbohydrate the satiety mechanism is masked. That would be the case regardless of the fat that was eaten alongside it. The body's response to a slice of white bread is the same whether it's spread with butter or margarine, isn't it?
That being the case, the carbohydrate is always going to provoke a high insulin response, and the fat is likely to be caught up in that and end up being deposited in the adipose cells.
Are you also saying that if we cut out carbs, but left the unhealthy fats in place that obesity would not be affected? I agree that the bad fats have a significant negative impact on health, but I don't know how the type of fat eaten affects obesity, and I'm not seeing that in the article. Maybe you could point me in the right direction before I splash out on Mary Enig's book?
"Do what you wanna, do what you will, but don't mess up your neighbour's thrill" F. Zappa
The thing with unsaturated fats is that they actually PROMOTE weight gain, which is why they should be one of the first things to go. They drastically slow down the metabolism. Coconut ol on the other hand speeds up the metabolism, which is something you can feel immediately. It is apperently digested like a carbohydrate in that it goes straight to the liver where it produces energy and not fat. That's why it's making such waves at the moment, expecially in America. it worked for me and my daughter. I cut out carbs completely in the first weeks and gradually reintroduced them in the form of whole grain products.
I am not all that versed in the actually chemsitry of how this actually works. But it is definitly the combination of carbohydrate reduction and good fats that help us lose weight.
There are four books that I know of that proogate a change of fats for losing weight; two of them are very low carb or no carb: Barry Gorves, eat Fat get Thin and Cheri Caglom, the Coconut Diet. Barry Groves is not specically about coocnut oil. There are two more books on coocnut oil for weight loss: eat fat Look thin by Bruce Ffe, and the one by Mary Enig. These books have plans which are generally carbohydrate reduced, and ban refined carbs, ready meals and soya altogether.
Having skip read some of the posts, here are my feelings on the matter.
I believe that Jamie has approached this in exactly the right way for the amount of time that he has to put his message across.
I attended the live debate at the College of Physicians last week and it was clear that a lot of important information that should have been included ended up on the cutting room floor due to length of the show and legal reasons.
As a qualified chef and mother of three, I have insight from all angles. I attempted working for my local authority as a "dinner lady" 2 years ago and was only able to stick it for 2 months.
I was so disgusted at what they were feeding the children and felt totally drained at the end of the day, as there was no skill involved putting burgers, pizza etc on a tray!! They didn't need a qualified chef!
What was made very obvious by the show and the debate, school dinners is only the tip of the iceberg and we, as a nation need to look at how we are "neglecting" a large proportion of our society. When I was at school Home Economics was a complusory subject and we learnt the basics of cookery including the nutritional value of food and what was a balanced diet.
A lot of the new parents to the children at school today have never learnt to cook, so are unable to pass on any cooking skills at all.
The list could go on.
What ever is the outcome of this programme it is only the beginning.
I find what you suggest very intriguing. I think you are half right!
If the unhealthy fats are replaced by healthy ones (coconut oil and beef dripping for example) without doing anything else I'm not sure I know what would happen, but I'm not sure that the articles you are pointing me to suggest that weight loss would result from that alone.
The last article you linked to was on a site that was keen to sell me their product, so they are more or less obliged to say nice things about it, although I am already convinced of the benefits of coconut. I'd be wary of extrapolating studies on pigs into human physiology. I'm not an expert, but I'm not sure the metabolisms of pigs and humans are exactly equivalent.
But quite clearly, when healthy fats are eaten and carbs are lowered there are a whole range of health benefits, one of which is weight loss.
I'm a big fan of Barry Groves', and I know his work. I will catch up with the others as time and finances allow!
Chef Clare.
Skip reading? You mean you don't pore over every word?
The main point I am trying to make is that JO and the health authorities are promoting the wrong diet. A high carb, low fat diet of any sort isn't going to solve our problems.
If that kind of diet was healthy then we'd all be thin and fit now, because that is exactly the diet that has been at the core of health policy since the 1980s. It hasn't worked, and shouting the message louder won't make a bad policy, based on bad science, any more effective.
"Do what you wanna, do what you will, but don't mess up your neighbour's thrill" F. Zappa
Originally posted by periurban: I'm afraid Jamie is gloriously, marvelously deluded. He is very entertaining, but doomed to fail in his greater ambitions.
I could not have said it better myself. I came back to YAWYE and found you were gone. One less reason for me to be there...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Diet; n, way of life. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - If you love food, eat less! You will live longer and get to eat more in the long run! - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Diet; n, way of life. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - If you love food, eat less! You will live longer and get to eat more in the long run! - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Originally posted by periurban: I'm afraid Jamie is gloriously, marvelously deluded. He is very entertaining, but doomed to fail in his greater ambitions.
I could not have said it better myself. I came back to YAWYE and found you were gone. One less reason for me to be there...
Basicman! You're back!
I was effectively turfed off the YAWYE forum. I guess my final thread detailing the precise reasons why Gillian's diet wouldn't work as a long term health solution was the final straw!
I seem to be more welcome here, which I think has to do with the very high level of interest that JO himself has created in the whole topic of junk food. The people here are much more motivated to accept alternative ideas, and a lot of them are driven by the same anger that I feel about the terrible situation we find ourselves in.
In a huff I subscribed to the BBC boards, but they are suffering some kind of meltdown at the moment, hence my return to good old Channel4.
Are you gonna stick around this time, or is it a flying visit?
"Do what you wanna, do what you will, but don't mess up your neighbour's thrill" F. Zappa
I am just so impressed with the level of discussion on this thread, its wonderful, once we got arational reply to Periurban's starter...
At least three or four outstanding replys, and whilst I'd like to take some kind of issue with Periurban's low carb philsophy (knowing how the Japanese and Italians eat, who until this generation, had enormously vital and lengthy lives - and not living their last twenty years in hellish homes dribbling over the carpet...
No... I've chosen Chef Clare,
quote:
<What was made very obvious by the show and the debate, school dinners is only the tip of the iceberg and we, as a nation need to look at how we are "neglecting" a large proportion of our society. When I was at school Home Economics was a complusory subject and we learnt the basics of cookery including the nutritional value of food and what was a balanced diet.
A lot of the new parents to the children at school today have never learnt to cook, so are unable to pass on any cooking skills at all.
The list could go on.
What ever is the outcome of this programme it is only the beginning.>
So true, just so true!
But the overall message jamie is passing on, and seems to have been missed by the politicans, LEA's and commerical catering corps (profit sans responsibilite!) is the LOVE factor.
You just wouldn't do this to a generation of children if you had any love in your heart, so they must behind it all be lacking love - probably beating themselves up for selling their souls to local or national policies without the opportunity to make meaningful and proper, right minded decisions.
And I don't agree that LEA's are without blame as someone commented - yes, it is primarily due to central government, and their aceptance of Thatcher's awful legacy, but they should have righted this 8 years ago, as many of us were aware then if not
)
