BBC news and obesity

[Squire Fulwood]

I watched the BBC television news this morning who reported that obesity in Britain was on the increase. They said that voluntary food labelling does not appear to be working so it is proposed to introduce legislation on the subject.

I can be cynical at times and this news report made me wonder, if you have a system that is making things worse, why you now needed to make it compulsory.

The new legislation will be designed to cut the amount of sugar, fat and salt in our food. This might be considered as good healthy eating by some but as I said, I am a cynic at times.

 

[noblehead]

As a type 1 who carb counts I think compulsory food labeling is an excellent idea, often you will find people won't look at food labels unless they are trying to lose weight or have a medical condition that requires they must......for example diabetes, heart disease, celiac disease etc.

 

[AMBrennan]

To be honest, I'm skeptical about labelling alone fixing the problem because it relies on supermarkets actually making healthy options when they would sell less; my favourite example is salt in ready meals (my grandmother lives alone and ready meals is the only real option) - I quite literally checked every microwaveable ready-meal and all of them had 50-80% of GDA salt per (small) serving...

Industry will always pick profit, and unhealthy food is more profitable (otherwise everyone would be eating it and there'd be no need for voluntary labelling or legislation)

 

[Squire Fulwood]

I know that I expressed myself badly when I made the original comments and I will start to put matters right.

I too am very much in favour of food labelling especially of the type that tells me how much of what is in where. It is invaluable in avoiding high carb items and other things. Sadly, most people do not seem to consult the labels and buy things which are "Low Fat" on the front of the box.

This site has many members who support eating fat in the diet and indeed fat will lower the glycaemic index of foods if eaten at the same time.

The trend to low fat has resulted in more sugar being put into foods in order to make them taste better than they would without fat. In fact the number of prepared foods consisting mainly of flour and sugar but little fat are legion. The NHS consider this healthy eating but evidence from the members of this forum suggest it isn't.

The traffic light labelling has a red indicator if the fat level exceeds a certain level although I don't know what that level is.

My concern is that, as a diabetic,I disagree with what the NHS considers healthy eating and now food labelling to consolidate this advice is to be made compulsory. If the high amount of flour and sugar in food has any causative effect then this could result in more obesity and/or diabetes.

 

[Squire Fulwood]

I tried to rip this off of the Wikepedia site but I anticipate formatting problems


The use of traffic light labeling is supported by many physician groups including the British Medical Association and welcomed by consumers.[2] Despite worries from some in the food industry that red foods would be shunned, the British Medical Association, Food Standards Agency and others agree that consumers interpret the labels sensibly, realise they can have red foods as a 'treat', and they are easier to understand than lists of percentages.[2]
Criteria for Traffic Light Labeling for food per 100 g[3]Ingredient

Green (low content) Amber(medium content) Red (high content)
Fat less than 3 g between 3 g and 20 g more than 20 g
Saturated Fats less than 1,5 g between 1,5 g and 5 g more than 5 g
Sugar less than 5 g between 5 g and 12,5 g more than 12,5 g
Salt less than 0,3 g between 0,3 g and 1,5 g more than 1,5 g



Currently the traffic light label is used in some European countries on a voluntary basis.