The Obesity Epidemic - Causes and solutions.

[DynamicSpirit]

Mods note. Split from this thread:

Has taxation for unhealthy items, such as cigarettes, gone too far in the UK?

I am currently in shock having been relieved of £13 in Tesco for 20 Benson & Hedges Gold o_O My latest "fag run" to Luxembourg last weekend was cancelled by The Foreign and Commonwealth Office's untimely intervention. Had I been able to go I would have been sourcing stock at around £5 a...

www.railforums.co.uk

But the cause of the obesity epidemic is mainly political, and driven mainly by poverty.

that seems pretty unlikely to me. Consider that overall living standards today are much higher than they were 30, 50 or 100 years ago. 100 years ago, most of the population had a standard of living that would today be considered to be extreme poverty. Yet obesity levels then were tiny compared to today.

The statistics I've seen do seem to indicate some correlation between obesity and poverty, but it doesn't necessarily follow that the poverty is the cause of obesity. It could be, for example, that obesity and poverty are both influenced by things like lower education levels.

I could imagine that possibly poverty levels contribute something to obesity levels, if (as is claimed) poverty makes it harder to buy healthy food, but it seems implausible that poverty is the main cause of obesity. That is almost certainly going to be down to people's individual life choices regarding how much they eat and how much they exercise.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Such as sat in front of the TV for far too long perhaps?

 

[Bald Rick]

that seems pretty unlikely to me. Consider that overall living standards today are much higher than they were 30, 50 or 100 years ago. 100 years ago, most of the population had a standard of living that would today be considered to be extreme poverty. Yet obesity levels then were tiny compared to today.

The statistics I've seen do seem to indicate some correlation between obesity and poverty, but it doesn't necessarily follow that the poverty is the cause of obesity. It could be, for example, that obesity and poverty are both influenced by things like lower education levels.

I could imagine that possibly poverty levels contribute something to obesity levels, if (as is claimed) poverty makes it harder to buy healthy food, but it seems implausible that poverty is the main cause of obesity. That is almost certainly going to be down to people's individual life choices regarding how much they eat and how much they exercise.

Very well put. At a physiological level, obesity is usually caused by eating the wrong kind of food, or too much food, or not doing enough exercise and often all three. Clearly buying less food will help the finances of those in poverty, and it simply isn’t the case that buying healthy food is more expensive. Changing dietary habits to eat more healthily is incredibly hard though - I’ve done it myself.


Back on topic, it also seems that people who smoke tend to be people at the lower range of income levels. At £13/ pack a 10 a day habit is costing £2,300 a year.

 

[Starmill]

that seems pretty unlikely to me. Consider that overall living standards today are much higher than they were 30, 50 or 100 years ago. 100 years ago, most of the population had a standard of living that would today be considered to be extreme poverty. Yet obesity levels then were tiny compared to today.

The statistics I've seen do seem to indicate some correlation between obesity and poverty, but it doesn't necessarily follow that the poverty is the cause of obesity. It could be, for example, that obesity and poverty are both influenced by things like lower education levels.

I could imagine that possibly poverty levels contribute something to obesity levels, if (as is claimed) poverty makes it harder to buy healthy food, but it seems implausible that poverty is the main cause of obesity. That is almost certainly going to be down to people's individual life choices regarding how much they eat and how much they exercise.

You can blame people for being fat if you want by invoking their "life choices", but that's a popular perspective from people who are not overweight themselves and who have had choices. Funny that eh?

The whole point of being in poverty is that you do not have many choices. Especially as a child, when you have absolutely zero choices.

I would rather people have access to resources and be empowered to eat healthy and get more exercise. Unfortunately the reality is that we don't allow large sections of society to do that, regardless of their choices, and then wonder why it is a public health problem. If you can't engage without just blaming people for their own "life choices" then I'm not sure you've much to contribute to the discussion.

This hardly means there aren't reasonably well off people who are overweight, far from it.

 

[najaB]

You can blame people for being fat if you want by invoking their "life choices", but that's a popular perspective from people who are not overweight themselves and who have had choices. Funny that eh?

The whole point of being in poverty is that you do not have many choices. Especially as a child, when you have absolutely zero choices.

Even accepting that poverty limits access to a wide range of food choices, at the end of the day the *only* way you can be obese is to consume more calories than you expend. That is invariably as a result of choices at an individual level.

 

[Bald Rick]

The whole point of being in poverty is that you do not have many choices. Especially as a child, when you have absolutely zero choices.

Whilst I accept the argument that poverty limits choices, particularly for children, I don’t agree that one of the choices it limits is the ability to eat healthily, or give their children healthy food.

I find it difficult to believe that anybody in this country finds it difficult to access healthy food over unhealthy alternatives.

 

[ComUtoR]

I find it difficult to believe that anybody in this country finds it difficult to access healthy food over unhealthy alternatives.

What woud convince you ?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I find it difficult to believe that anybody in this country finds it difficult to access healthy food over unhealthy alternatives.

I think that's a slight sidetrack, in any case. The reason people get fat (as distinct from unhealthy in other ways, e.g. high cholesterol or vitamin deficiency, but this thread is specifically about obesity) is because they eat more calories than they burn. There are ways to muck about with the metabolism that change the number of calories burnt without changing the level of activity (stuff like Atkins) but in the end the basic calories in vs calories out thing pretty much stands. So if you eat 3000 calories of Tesco Value "chicken" nuggets and oven chips each day and your basal metabolism is 2500, you just need to reduce the number of them you eat accordingly, and you will stop gaining / start losing weight as appropriate. Similarly, you might cook a healthy vegetable chilli and rice[1] but eat 4 portions of it - you'll get fat just the same way.

The reasons why people (including me) find this difficult are many and varied, and probably need looking at from more of a "mental health" type perspective.

[1] Rice is normally considered "healthy", and it's not bad for you per-se, but it is hellishly calorie-dense. Interestingly, brown rice is more calorie-dense than white rice, which I bet most people don't know. There are other reasons to eat brown, but this misunderstanding could cause weight gain.

 

[Bald Rick]

What woud convince you ?

Evidence to the contrary!

 

[Techniquest]

I would back up the 'life choices' thing, I used to be a pretty heavy chap. 17 and a half stone I think was my heaviest! I used to eat more than I should have, and exercise on a regular basis just wasn't happening much.

I moved out of my Mum's house in December 2017 and that made a difference. More cooking for myself, but there were other circumstances that led to an enormous increase in exercise and a big drop in the food intake. In just under 7 months I shredded 5 stone!

2 and a bit years after finishing that mission, which did leave me much weaker, and in general my food intake is much more sensible these days. I generally have 3 meals a day now, and sensible ones for the most part. I've also got heavily back into getting the exercise ramped up, but I do still have junk food.

My point being, my life choices were terrible back in 2017. There's an argument for saying they only finally got better in 2020, but let's not go there. If I had been in the mindset to cook healthier meals, snack on junk food less and ramp up the exercise, I would have probably got thinner a lot sooner.

I did it, and admittedly let things slide a fair bit, so I'm reasonably certain anyone who wants to lose weight can. It's all about the mindset...

 

[Bald Rick]

I would back up the 'life choices' thing, I used to be a pretty heavy chap. 17 and a half stone I think was my heaviest! I used to eat more than I should have, and exercise on a regular basis just wasn't happening much.

I moved out of my Mum's house in December 2017 and that made a difference. More cooking for myself, but there were other circumstances that led to an enormous increase in exercise and a big drop in the food intake. In just under 7 months I shredded 5 stone!

2 and a bit years after finishing that mission, which did leave me much weaker, and in general my food intake is much more sensible these days. I generally have 3 meals a day now, and sensible ones for the most part. I've also got heavily back into getting the exercise ramped up, but I do still have junk food.

My point being, my life choices were terrible back in 2017. There's an argument for saying they only finally got better in 2020, but let's not go there. If I had been in the mindset to cook healthier meals, snack on junk food less and ramp up the exercise, I would have probably got thinner a lot sooner.

I did it, and admittedly let things slide a fair bit, so I'm reasonably certain anyone who wants to lose weight can. It's all about the mindset...

Excellent advice sir. As you say, it is all in the head. The degree of difficulty varies considerably by individual, of course; for some it is relatively easy, for others it is very hard.

My parents have always struggled with their weight. They are both good cooks and know what is healthy and what isn’t. But they won’t choose the healthier options. I know that if I went and lived with them for a month and did all their meals they would both be at least a stone lighter at the end of it. Albeit within about 3 hours my dad would be moaning like hell about me taking away the butter, cheese, full fat milk, mayonnaise, salad dressing, chocolate etc etc.

 

[Bletchleyite]

My parents have always struggled with their weight. They are both good cooks and know what is healthy and what isn’t. But they won’t choose the healthier options. I know that if I went and lived with them for a month and did all their meals they would both be at least a stone lighter at the end of it. Albeit within about 3 hours my dad would be moaning like hell about me taking away the butter, cheese, full fat milk, mayonnaise, salad dressing, chocolate etc etc.

Literally none of those are a problem used in sensible quantities. I think this is where we fundamentally get it wrong. Portion control is by far the biggest problem.

As I said, vegetable chilli and rice is "healthy" but you'll still get fat if you eat 4 portions of it in one go. Similarly, if you stick half a bag of grated cheese on it (mmm) you'll probably triple its calories, but if you sprinkle a teaspoonful over the top you'll be fine.

 

[Bald Rick]

Literally none of those are a problem used in sensible quantities. I think this is where we fundamentally get it wrong. Portion control is by far the biggest problem.

As I said, vegetable chilli and rice is "healthy" but you'll still get fat if you eat 4 portions of it in one go. Similarly, if you stick half a bag of grated cheese on it (mmm) you'll probably triple its calories, but if you sprinkle a teaspoonful over the top you'll be fine.

Agreed, but it is the sensible quantities combined with everything else that he eats. My dad refuses to even try any low fat version - even where it tastes practically the same, an I suspect he is not alone!

I agree about portion control - to an extent. If you eat 4 portions of anything but salad or veg in one go yes you will take on a lot of calories. However a large portion of vegetable chilli is going to be about half the calories of a large portion of beef chilli; ie to get yourself ‘full’ you will take on twice as many calories with beef chilli than veg chilli. So, it is about portion control, but also about what you eat to satisfy your appetite.

There’s also the point that some people need more food to ‘feel full’ and for some people part of the process of losing weight is understanding that and training your mind and body to deal with it one way or another.

 

[yorksrob]

It's an interesting subject. When I was growing up, I used to live off of beans and spaghetti on toast, and as a consequence was reasonably svelte.

Now I still eat those things, but I eat a lot of others as well as beer and am considerably more lardy.

I definitely think that reducing sugar and salt from basic, healthy foods such as baked beans for example, is entirely counterproductive as people (including myself) will just forego what was previously a reasonably healthy choice, for something much more unhealthy.

 

[yorksrob]

Agreed, but it is the sensible quantities combined with everything else that he eats. My dad refuses to even try any low fat version - even where it tastes practically the same, an I suspect he is not alone!

I agree about portion control - to an extent. If you eat 4 portions of anything but salad or veg in one go yes you will take on a lot of calories. However a large portion of vegetable chilli is going to be about half the calories of a large portion of beef chilli; ie to get yourself ‘full’ you will take on twice as many calories with beef chilli than veg chilli. So, it is about portion control, but also about what you eat to satisfy your appetite.

There’s also the point that some people need more food to ‘feel full’ and for some people part of the process of losing weight is understanding that and training your mind and body to deal with it one way or another.

Doesit "tast the same" though. Really ? I find that such things rarely do.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Agreed, but it is the sensible quantities combined with everything else that he eats. My dad refuses to even try any low fat version - even where it tastes practically the same

There may be reasons to choose such a version, but I can't think of one single thing that tastes "practically the same", it's always a compromise. I'm happy with that compromise with, for example, Lurpak Lightest Spreadable (and ONLY that, none of the imitations taste anything remotely like butter), but it is still a compromise.

 

[Techniquest]

Indeed, moderation and portion control are two huge, HUGE, factors in shredding excess mass.

As I'm much more active these days, I don't necessarily mind so much that I have a fairly significant amount of intake. My protein and carbs intake is fairly high, but that is because I'm using it as fuel for cycling. If I'm not out riding, my mindset is that I don't need as much.

Sugar remains my biggest enemy, but I'm working on that again. I do like some sugary stuff, after all the muscles need glucose to work well.

I do recognise it's extremely hard for most people to get into the right mindset for healthy eating and drinking. Cutting out the fizzy drinks was an enormous improvement for me, I still have some now and again but it's a treat when I do. My main intake drinks wise is plain water and black coffee. If I'm out exercising, then I do up that to include isotonic drinks too.

Which was another thing I did almost right at the beginning of 2020, cut out the alcoholic drinks. Yes, I turned tee-total! I've still got the beer gut, but that's at least in part due to excess sugar and fats consumption earlier in the year when I was on comfort food. Now that injury is nearly sorted, I'm on much less comfort food and it's starting to show. I still have some, obviously, just not anywhere near as much.

The TV lives in a mostly unplugged condition these days!

 

[Techniquest]

I definitely think that reducing sugar and salt from basic, healthy foods such as baked beans for example, is entirely counterproductive as people (including myself) will just forego what was previously a reasonably healthy choice, for something much more unhealthy.

Well I bought those reduced sugar and salt baked beans the other day, but I also go with the normal ones. Depends on the mood!

What I found slightly interesting is that there's 0.8g of protein less in the reduced sugar and salt Asda baked beans per half of a tin. Not a huge difference, granted, but it is interesting. 9.2g per half tin, compared to the normal tins which are 10g per half tin. Surely less sugar and salt would not make that much difference?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Literally none of those are a problem used in sensible quantities. I think this is where we fundamentally get it wrong. Portion control is by far the biggest problem.

you named that tune in one. I live in the USA - trust me I know from first hand experience

 

[ComUtoR]

Evidence to the contrary!

Sorry, not good enough.

There are plenty of scholarly articles linking Obesity and Poverty, there are statistics freely available which links obesity and poverty, and there are various charities, government policies, campaingns etc that all support that Obesity is linked to poverty Evidence is available. Feel free to google it.

I am one of those people in society who has suffered the many inequalities in life. I'm from a working class, low income, single parent, below the breadline families. Life, quite frankly has been a bit harsh. Living hand to mouth is exceptionaly difficult. You really are limited in your choices. Sticking to topic, food is only what you can afford or what is available in your community. Cheap food is not healthy. It isn't specifically unhealthy but you get what you are given. Healthy food has always been notoriously expensive and still often comes at a premium. It's got a lot better over the years but cheap food is full of crap.

One of the other problems with food is that food education is lacking. My anklebiters go to a comprehensive. Their canteen food is disgraceful. In contrast a few of my friends have kids in, shall we say, 'better' schools and their food is so much better. They are also educated about what they are sticking in their mouth. I found it interesting that @Bletchleyite mentioned Chicken Nuggets. A food notoriously linked to 'poor' people. A quick shufty on the Tesco website highlights how important food education is. The "cheapest" option available at £2.66 per kg has 14g of fat per 100g. Compare that to the More expensive on the scale at £10.00 per kg which only has 6.8g per 100g of fat. That disparity between products is very important. Also because I'm a little more clued up on food. I'm looking at the food label and compaing cost at the cost per kg etc. Also look at how food is sold. Cheap bargain products are frequently on offer and sold in 3-4-2 kinda deals. All aimed at the family who needs food in bulk and cheap.

If you still want 'evidence' just look out the window. There is a reason you see the dumpy little 'chavletts' and don't see chubby posh totty. You can literally see the disparty for yourself on the high street. You can see in the statistics that areas of low income have higher obesity rates. As I say, I'm from a low income background. When I was groing up we spent most of our time on the streets playing. We had parks and local community centres (typcially run by the local church) My only outlet for exercise was 'playing out' I didn't go to the Gym like the middle classes do. Most of us couldn't afford a bike so were sharing one for the whole family. I certainly didn't get lycra'ed up and go for a ride round the countryside :/ Slowly over time. Community areas have been removed. Local youth clubs are a rariety and parks and recreation spaces have been built over. Not great if your poor because you have nowhere to go. Everything costs so you end up sitting indoors on your playstation. I'd love to be more middle class and pop down to David Lloyd for a natter and afternnoon tea while the kids play tennis. That lack of available activity space is vital for the 'poor' Even going for a swim down the local pool is freaking expensive. Seriously, wt absolute f. When I was young we went down Crystal Palace pool or South Norwwod baths for a few pence and swam all day. My local pool proces bring a tear to my eye.

Forgive me for the slight moral outrage. I do understand why people see fat poor kids gulping cola by the bottle as a life choice; I see it too. Life has been kinder in recent years and my job notoriously pays the bills and then some. This has allowed me to better educate my children, provide healthy oportunities, buy sensibly and at the higher end, take the kids swimming every other weekend (not now they are teenagers) and generally live a healthier life. My kids are a healthy size, they are active and make decent choices. This has come because I have had the income to support their lifestlyes. Even if I discounted the scientific evidence I can see it with my own eyes.

The evidence is out there. I am unsure why people are ignoring it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I found it interesting that @Bletchleyite mentioned Chicken Nuggets. A food notoriously linked to 'poor' people. A quick shufty on the Tesco website highlights how important food education is. The "cheapest" option available at £2.66 per kg has 14g of fat per 100g. Compare that to the More expensive on the scale at £10.00 per kg which only has 6.8g per 100g of fat. That disparity between products is very important.

It is, but the fact remains that whether you get fat or not depends on how many you eat based on the calorific content of each. (It's the overall calorific content, not just the fat).

 

[ComUtoR]

Agreed, but it is the sensible quantities combined with everything else that he eats. My dad refuses to even try any low fat version - even where it tastes practically the same, an I suspect he is not alone!

Sugar/Salt has always been used as additives to make food taste nicer.

I agree about portion control - to an extent. If you eat 4 portions of anything but salad or veg in one go yes you will take on a lot of calories. However a large portion of vegetable chilli is going to be about half the calories of a large portion of beef chilli; ie to get yourself ‘full’ you will take on twice as many calories with beef chilli than veg chilli. So, it is about portion control, but also about what you eat to satisfy your appetite.

There’s also the point that some people need more food to ‘feel full’ and for some people part of the process of losing weight is understanding that and training your mind and body to deal with it one way or another.

This is where food education is so important what your describing is not taught in schools and not taught to 'low income' families. One of thse things that divides in terms of class; is education.

 

[ComUtoR]

It is, but the fact remains that whether you get fat or not depends on how many you eat based on the calorific content of each. (It's the overall calorific content, not just the fat).

Again, its about food education. Higher fat food also leads to bad health. higher colesterol etc. Fat is also higher in calories

 

[Bald Rick]

Doesit "tast the same" though. Really ? I find that such things rarely do.

There may be reasons to choose such a version, but I can't think of one single thing that tastes "practically the same", it's always a compromise. I'm happy with that compromise with, for example, Lurpak Lightest Spreadable (and ONLY that, none of the imitations taste anything remotely like butter), but it is still a compromise.

Well, for some things I think they do taste the same - I can’t tell the difference between Hellmans normal mayo and the extra light version, nor between Philadelphia light and normal versions, but I grant you that those are exceptions

However for many other items I think it comes down to mindset. I just treat reduced fat versions as a different version or brand of the product. Cheese for example - I often have reduced fat pilgrims choice extra mature cheddar, whilst it does taste different to full fat it is lovely - one of the nicest cheddars of any type on the market, in my opinion. It’s just another cheddar to me (in a very wide market!), and usually on offer in Sainsbury’s or Morrison’s too.

However I guess that a lot of it is subjective, and for some products it comes with training yourself to accept the ‘new normal’. Some people can just swap, some can’t. Last year I swapped from semi skimmed to skimmed milk - it took me about 2 weeks of mixing the two in increasing proportions of skimmed. Previously skimmed was little better than water in my mind. Now semi skimmed tastes really thick and sweet to me, and skimmed is much more preferable* Conversely I found giving up sugar in tea and coffee so hard that I couldn’t do it, so gave up tea and coffee instead to cut it out at source! Like @Techniquest, refined sugar is a big problem for me.


*Whilst it is one small example, swapping milk has saved me about 30kcal a day. Almost negligible, but every little helps, and it’s effectively a kilo a year saved for next to no effort.

 

[yorksrob]

Well I bought those reduced sugar and salt baked beans the other day, but I also go with the normal ones. Depends on the mood!

What I found slightly interesting is that there's 0.8g of protein less in the reduced sugar and salt Asda baked beans per half of a tin. Not a huge difference, granted, but it is interesting. 9.2g per half tin, compared to the normal tins which are 10g per half tin. Surely less sugar and salt would not make that much difference?

I just find they taste like cardboard. And I absolutely love baked beans !

Well, for some things I think they do taste the same - I can’t tell the difference between Hellmans normal mayo and the extra light version, nor between Philadelphia light and normal versions, but I grant you that those are exceptions

However for many other items I think it comes down to mindset. I just treat reduced fat versions as a different version or brand of the product. Cheese for example - I often have reduced fat pilgrims choice extra mature cheddar, whilst it does taste different to full fat it is lovely - one of the nicest cheddars of any type on the market, in my opinion. It’s just another cheddar to me (in a very wide market!), and usually on offer in Sainsbury’s or Morrison’s too.

However I guess that a lot of it is subjective, and for some products it comes with training yourself to accept the ‘new normal’. Some people can just swap, some can’t. Last year I swapped from semi skimmed to skimmed milk - it took me about 2 weeks of mixing the two in increasing proportions of skimmed. Previously skimmed was little better than water in my mind. Now semi skimmed tastes really thick and sweet to me, and skimmed is much more preferable* Conversely I found giving up sugar in tea and coffee so hard that I couldn’t do it, so gave up tea and coffee instead to cut it out at source! Like @Techniquest, refined sugar is a big problem for me.


*Whilst it is one small example, swapping milk has saved me about 30kcal a day. Almost negligible, but every little helps, and it’s effectively a kilo a year saved for next to no effort.

I'm sure that some low fat/sugar versions of things taste better. Can't think of any (but then I do tend to avoid them).

The beans thing is a particular bugbear as you find cafes selling low fat/sugar versions so you don't have the choice.

 

[Bald Rick]

Sugar/Salt has always been used as additives to make food taste nicer.



This is where food education is so important what your describing is not taught in schools and not taught to 'low income' families. One of thse things that divides in terms of class; is education.

It is absolutely taught in schools - my daughter confirms! And so does the national curriculum.

National curriculum in England: design and technology programmes of study

www.gov.uk

However, as with all subjects taught in schools, those from lower income families tend to do worse in exams, on average, which one suspects means they absorb less of the learning.

 

[ComUtoR]

What I found slightly interesting is that there's 0.8g of protein less in the reduced sugar and salt Asda baked beans per half of a tin. Not a huge difference, granted, but it is interesting. 9.2g per half tin, compared to the normal tins which are 10g per half tin. Surely less sugar and salt would not make that much difference?

The fat content changed and the altered sugar content also tweaked the calorie content too.

https://groceries.asda.com/product/...-sugar-salt-baked-beans-in-tomato-sauce/19523 31p
https://groceries.asda.com/product/baked-beans/asda-baked-beans-in-tomato-sauce/19525 29p

If they priced that the other way around which do you think people would choose ?

Or do you go "healthy" with Weight Watchers https://groceries.asda.com/product/baked-beans/weight-watchers-baked-beans-in-tomato-sauce/23578 75p

 

[ComUtoR]

It is absolutely taught in schools - my daughter confirms! And so does the national curriculum.

My kids will tell a different story.

However, as with all forms of education, those from lower income families tend to do worse in exams, on average, which one suspects means they absorb less of the learning.

Which is something we need to address. Education is not even and has numerous issues that need resolving. However; it is clear that the more you pay for your education.... Education in itself is a topic worthy of discussion. As a Parent you and I both want the best for our children. It is not always provided by the education system

On topic... just... My kids school tried to ban a popular fizzy drink. (not coke) My kids came home kinda distraught about the school trying to ban it as it was their most popular drink (yes, it was cheap). One parent.. (who will forever remain nameless) put it to their children that the sugar content in their drink was actually less than the replacement offered and may or may not have had a discussion with a Teacher about checking the nutritional values in the stuff they sell or indeed what they are trying to ban.

 

[ComUtoR]

Well, for some things I think they do taste the same - I can’t tell the difference between Hellmans normal mayo and the extra light version, nor between Philadelphia light and normal versions, but I grant you that those are exceptions

Helmans light every time. Importantly the kids didn't notice the change.
Marks and Spencer - Garlic Mayo- OMG !

But...

I've recently gone Vegan(ish). My Sister is a Vegan and she remarked on a product I bought being "Vegan". It wasn't deliberate, just the company remarketing their product. However, I said that I would make a more conscious decision in the future. Leon Garlic Aioli... Ooooh yeah.

However for many other items I think it comes down to mindset. I just treat reduced fat versions as a different version or brand of the product. Cheese for example - I often have reduced fat pilgrims choice extra mature cheddar, whilst it does taste different to full fat it is lovely - one of the nicest cheddars of any type on the market, in my opinion. It’s just another cheddar to me (in a very wide market!), and usually on offer in Sainsbury’s or Morrison’s too.

Waitrose Wookie Hole Cheddar... Yummmm


Isn't it great being "Middle Class"

 

[Bald Rick]

Which is something we need to address. Education is not even and has numerous issues that need resolving. However; it is clear that the more you pay for your education.... Education in itself is a topic worthy of discussion. As a Parent you and I both want the best for our children. It is not always provided by the education system

Agreed it’s a different subject. Mrs BR had a very expensive private education and hasn’t got a clue about nutrition. Meanwhile I went to the worst school in the city I grew up in, and know quite a bit about it.