https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/...ians-blame.html

I hope that the UK is successful with the proposed actions. Unfortunately, those actions will not be allowed in the US. Our lobbies will toss enough money to politicians that no controls will be allowed.

Call me a sceptic but... it’s the ultra-processed food that makes the most money for manufacturers and ultimately investors. I would expect the definition of “junk food” to be stretched and twisted due to lobbying as to be almost meaningless. And I bet they go after “fat” rather than sugar/grain.

There's no science behind "plant based." That's pure money and ultra processed.

Given that people have been ultra-compliant in those countries who have published dietary guidelines and have demonstrated that they want to do the right thing to achieve better health, isn't it about time that unbiased factual information is provided to support better food choices? Taxing foods and government involvement will not help, as that's exactly what's been going on since the late 70s when the USA created the food pyramid. Unfortunately, the "science" used currently is principally funded by food manufacturers resulting in a very inaccurate, distorted message that people want to believe. When people are able to choose foods based on accurate health score assignments, they've demonstrated good choices. I've thought long and hard about this dilemma and the challenge is that we've got too many food evaluators ("experts") making claims that are founded in agendas that do not share an objective to improve and achieve health. Add in the major pharmaceutical companies who currently think this is a wonderful world, and those sharing these concerns understand how much work remains to be done. Having someone like Michael Mosley ascribe blame is the equivalent to spitting into a blazing inferno in a futile attempt to extinguish the fire. While he makes a point and he's not wrong, it's a much larger problem than this. Some of us benefit from this awareness today, and I'm continually staggered by what more needs to be done to benefit the population.

Government telling people what to eat (or not) has never been a popular application of public resources. "Food Pyramid"? Forget it.

I wish the health effects of sugar consumption could be documented as vividly as the effects of, say, smoking. People are also finding out that opioids can kill. Sugar? Not so fast.

Nutrition should be part of every child's elementary education. But controversies and economic pressures will never allow it, any more than leaders can agree on the ingredients and definitions for a school-provided lunch.

So...parents are given the task of educating and restricting the behaviors of their children. A very tough task in a world overwhelmingly in favor of "whatever feels good."

Those of us who choose wisely are, unfortunately, stuck with the bill for those who don't.

P. S. Posting simultaneosly with Rob. Essentially in agreement. "Freedom" includes the freedom to eat what we want, although we may be badly persuaded.

Not only that. Science tells us different approaches will work for different people. So now we need to know how people can tell which thing they might try first and hopefully find success.

One real problem with the food pyramid is how it seemed to work for some people, so everyone else was told they must be doing it wrong. That's simply not true.

This is an important point and not a hyperbolic statement, as those of us on Medicare in the US realize direct costs of our premiums based on a number of factors, the primary being the subsidization of prescription drug costs.

This issue has gone back and forth with a drug where the trial results were questionable and the decision to release the drug resulted in resignations of decision makers in protest. But the larger issue is the fact that Americans, particularly over the age of 65, are extremely over-prescribed for many maladies resulting from lifestyle issues with poor food choices being at the core. We can only presume there is more to come in future years. Today, governments are not able to become beacons of common sense in these cases, as they are unable to guide people to better food choices.

My bold. Because they are stuck on the track of dissolving those plaques, even though we have done that... and no one gets better.

Like the statins increasingly shoved at people over the past few decades, yet only a 3% prevention rate for heart attacks. The reason people take the drug.

If this was Brazil nuts that's enough to eat them, but with the side effects -- and what I consider a giant increased risk for memory issues -- I view statins as essentially a crime for profit.



As someone who loves both of the bolded categories, that's shocking. They push statins on EVERYONE. Even though studies on women indicate they have zero benefit.

Zero.