on 05-05-2015 07:59 PM
Would you consider that option with your ideas?
I personally love this idea:
Solved! Go to Solution.
on 06-05-2015 12:30 PM
@imastawka wrote:OK let's discount the Heart Foundation.
The comparison of fats and sodium still makes a good case
on 06-05-2015 12:32 PM
If margarine is so great, why do they try to make it look like butter?
on 06-05-2015 12:34 PM
@j*oono wrote:If margarine is so great, why do they try to make it look like butter?
Money - this is an excellent interview about the food industry http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2015/s4225649.htm?WT.mc_id=Innovation_News-Lateline%7CCardiol...
on 06-05-2015 12:38 PM
@*julia*2010 wrote:Heart Foundation will give their tick to anyone who will pay for it.
not a good idea to be posting defamatory
statements on a public forum.
This information was given to me and others by a Heart Specialist at the Alfred Hospital many years ago, when my previous husband was treated for Cardio Myopathy and I asked about a diet for him.
I was told to read the ingredients on the containers and I would find many items suitable for Heart Patients that do not have the HF tick, because the tick costs to much and smaller companies can not afford it.
What is derogatory about a fact?
Erica
on 06-05-2015 12:40 PM
For those that do not want to click on the link, these paragraphs in particular in relation to the food industry:
So we have to think in a much more nuanced way about our health. And to be honest, the food industry: you know, they're there to sell food. They're there to make a profit. They have no interest in your health. That's a legal responsibility.
So they've manipulated things and bent the rules in a way where they've associated junk food and sport, which I think, really, is quite shameful. We have to end that association. This is having a negative impact on our children. The perceptions is that you can basically have a sugary drink or, you know, junk food, a burger and chips: as long as you exercise, that's fine. Well, actually, that's misleading and unscientific.
EMMA ALBERICI: Isn't it a little alarmist to be comparing the food industry to big tobacco, as you've done?
ASEEM MALHOTRA: It's not alarmist, Emma; it's the actual truth. Kelly Brownell, a professor at Yale, said - public health professor at Yale, very distinguished professor - said that he can think of nothing the food industry is doing that the tobacco industry didn't do.
And you've got to remember: it took 50 years from when the first links between smoking and lung cancer were raised, published in the British Medical Journal, before any effective regulation happened. And that's because big tobacco adopted what I call a "corporate playbook" of denial that their cigarettes were harmful, planting doubt, buying the loyalty of scientists and confusing the public.
And that level of denialism, just to put in perspective: in 1994, the CEOs of every major tobacco company went in front of US Congress and swore under oath they did not believe nicotine was addictive or smoking caused lung cancer. Let's remember. Let's learn from history and not let the same mistakes happen with the food industry in sugar. And I'm very concerned about that.
on 06-05-2015 12:49 PM
@lind9650 wrote:
@*julia*2010 wrote:Heart Foundation will give their tick to anyone who will pay for it.
not a good idea to be posting defamatory
statements on a public forum.
This information was given to me and others by a Heart Specialist at the Alfred Hospital many years ago, when my previous husband was treated for Cardio Myopathy and I asked about a diet for him.
I was told to read the ingredients on the containers and I would find many items suitable for Heart Patients that do not have the HF tick, because the tick costs to much and smaller companies can not afford it.
What is derogatory about a fact?
Erica
i was referring to this statement:
Heart Foundation will give their tick to anyone who will pay for it.
the tick can't be bought.
all products are tested before being approved.
you also stated it was a scam.
on 06-05-2015 12:50 PM
on 06-05-2015 01:04 PM
@donnashuggy wrote:
@imastawka wrote:OK let's discount the Heart Foundation.
The comparison of fats and sodium still makes a good case
Nature doesn't make bad fats? ^^ Look at the right hand side of that poster
Canola - soybean - sunflower - corn - safflower - grapeseed
How are they not nature, and how are they bad?
on 06-05-2015 01:11 PM
i don't think they actually read past the
slogans lol
on 06-05-2015 01:30 PM
@am*3 wrote:My marg isn't claggy.
glad to read it!