Scrutable

Tessa K wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 12:15 pm

shpalman wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 11:19 am But the cake is included. If you want to just buy and eat icing and you think that's therefore a healthy choice I don't know what to tell you.

Yes it seems like the components are not included. This would be because if you're making something yourself you know what's going into it, as compared to buying a cake which has a shocking amount of sugar hidden in it. And certain things require the calculator because some breakfast cereals are basically shredded cardboard while others are pure sugar extruded into shapes.

Even homemade cakes have a lot of sugar. Just because you know whhat's in something doesn't make it healthy.

Anything has a lot of sugar in it, if you put a lot of sugar in it. But that's your responsibility.

shpalman wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 12:16 pm

Tessa K wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 12:15 pm

shpalman wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 11:19 am But the cake is included. If you want to just buy and eat icing and you think that's therefore a healthy choice I don't know what to tell you.

Yes it seems like the components are not included. This would be because if you're making something yourself you know what's going into it, as compared to buying a cake which has a shocking amount of sugar hidden in it. And certain things require the calculator because some breakfast cereals are basically shredded cardboard while others are pure sugar extruded into shapes.

Even homemade cakes have a lot of sugar. Just because you know whhat's in something doesn't make it healthy.

Anything has a lot of sugar in it, if you put a lot of sugar in it. But that's your responsibility.

If you eat cake you have to bite the bullet on sugar wherever it comes from. It's sugars in products people wouldn't expect to have them that are a bigger problem. Most cereals, especially the ones aimed at kids, should have SUGAR all over the packaging.

The upside is that soon people will be too poor to give the kids any breakfast at all so that will solve the sugar issue.

shpalman wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 11:19 am But the cake is included. If you want to just buy and eat icing and you think that's therefore a healthy choice I don't know what to tell you.

I'm really not sure what point you're making here. The same could be said of all sweets, cakes and biscuits but those are specifically included, not excluded. I'm certainly not arguing that icing is healthy, I'm not sure why you would think I would think that.

My point can be summed up thus: Why are jelly sweets - pretty much pure sugar - included while icing - pretty much pure sugar - is excluded? What is it about icing (and also syrups) that makes it OK to be sold with 2 for 1 offers, while sugar sweets and cakes cannot be?

bagpuss wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 12:27 pm

shpalman wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 11:19 am But the cake is included. If you want to just buy and eat icing and you think that's therefore a healthy choice I don't know what to tell you.

I'm really not sure what point you're making here. The same could be said of all sweets, cakes and biscuits but those are specifically included, not excluded. I'm certainly not arguing that icing is healthy, I'm not sure why you would think I would think that.

My point can be summed up thus: Why are jelly sweets - pretty much pure sugar - included while icing - pretty much pure sugar - is excluded? What is it about icing (and also syrups) that makes it OK to be sold with 2 for 1 offers, while sugar sweets and cakes cannot be?

Because the government presumably expects that people don't just buy icing or syrup to eat directly when it's on special offer, whereas people do buy sweets, cakes, and biscuits to eat directly when they are on special offer.

Is actual pure sugar on the list?

shpalman wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 12:30 pm

bagpuss wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 12:27 pm

shpalman wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 11:19 am But the cake is included. If you want to just buy and eat icing and you think that's therefore a healthy choice I don't know what to tell you.

I'm really not sure what point you're making here. The same could be said of all sweets, cakes and biscuits but those are specifically included, not excluded. I'm certainly not arguing that icing is healthy, I'm not sure why you would think I would think that.

My point can be summed up thus: Why are jelly sweets - pretty much pure sugar - included while icing - pretty much pure sugar - is excluded? What is it about icing (and also syrups) that makes it OK to be sold with 2 for 1 offers, while sugar sweets and cakes cannot be?

Because the government presumably expects that people don't just buy icing or syrup to eat directly when it's on special offer, whereas people do buy sweets, cakes, and biscuits to eat directly when they are on special offer.

Is actual pure sugar on the list?

Oh, the innocence of government if so. OK, maybe not when it comes to syrups but sponge fingers and meringues?

Sugar doesn't seem to be - it appears to be ignored, along with the likes of butter, as it's a single ingredient. I haven't found yet where that is made clear but I assume it is in there somewhere.

I think the answer to a lot of the discussion on this thread is "because government regulations trying to decide what people eat are always going to be at best very arbitrary"

EACLucifer wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 2:03 pm I think the answer to a lot of the discussion on this thread is "because government regulations trying to decide what people eat are always going to be at best very arbitrary"

Good point

Tessa K wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 12:15 pm If you need Bran Flakes to help you poo you should really be looking at the rest of your diet.

I use it as a substitute for thinking about it.
I would prefer I was joking.

Martin Y wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 12:27 pm

Tessa K wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 12:15 pm If you need Bran Flakes to help you poo you should really be looking at the rest of your diet.

I use it as a substitute for thinking about it.
I would prefer I was joking.

My dad's version of the phrase "belt and braces" is "prunes on your All Bran".

dyqik wrote: Thu Jun 02, 2022 11:53 pm

Martin Y wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 12:27 pm

Tessa K wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 12:15 pm If you need Bran Flakes to help you poo you should really be looking at the rest of your diet.

I use it as a substitute for thinking about it.
I would prefer I was joking.

My dad's version of the phrase "belt and braces" is "prunes on your All Bran".

I just googled to see why prunes are good for constipation. It's the high sorbitol content. It's in a lot of other fruits as well as avocados.

However, it's not good for everyone, eg people with IBS.

https://www.healthyfood.com/advice/what ... ow-fodmap/

Mod note: this is the part of nezumi's post which is relevant to this thread.

I do have the experience of being so poor I didn't know where my next meal was coming from. I lived on smartprice crisps and soft cheese sandwiches (and 9p noodles). My food budget for a week was about a fiver. It was a long, long time ago, but I remember always being hungry, losing a lot of weight and having constantly aching bones. The consequences of this period of about 6 months was about 7-8 years of recovery after I moved back in with my Dad (I slept in the living room on an airbed as we were overcrowded). Yes, it was mostly my own fault for reasons I won't go into but I can empathise viscerally with what people are going through. You absolutely wouldn't be able to do my old diet on a fiver a week now anyway - everything has gone up in price too much (strange how wages are only about £1.70* per hour higher than they were 20 years ago when the cheap soft cheese is now triple the price it was back then.)

So yeah, I find MP suggestions about eating to be exactly as insulting as "let them eat cake", if not more so, as Mme Antoinette would not have had access to ordinary people and would almost certainly not have really known the impact of her words. These MPs do have access to ordinary people, their job is to represent those people and the understand them. Actually, I correct myself, I find their words far more insulting than Mme Antoinette's because it is their business to represent their ordinary constituents. As much as I strongly doubt the British public has it in them, they're going the right way to enjoy the same fate as Mme Antoinette.