It’s not fat that is the enemy alone, surely? Of course, unsaturated fat is not great for the arteries (although if the Daily Mail is to be believed, even that changes with the wind) but it’s sugar, it’s salt… well, let’s be simultaneously less and more specific… it’s processed food that is the problem.
Everything in moderation, you’d think, including the ‘processing’ of our foods from cheap gunk into ‘added value’ products that can still be 2-for-1’d at enormous profit. Or identify trans-fats as the enemy, as was attempted in Scotland. (It failed because of a bit of local politicking, disappointingly, but it was a truly stellar move.) Keep yer paws off my personal (moderately processed and unsalted) butter mountain, basically.
That’s where our government should be looking to act, not following the Danes, and it should be dealing with the problem at source, not hitting the pockets of the poor people who the education system ‘forgot’ to teach how to cook.
Related Posts:
Tags: butter fat Danish Tax
| Tweet |
Baby-led weaning in the Guardian »
Your last point has me standing and clapping and whistling. All of these “food banning” initiatives are just pushing down bubbles in the wallpaper of processed food — as soon as someone says “fat” is bad, they’ll just replace the fat with corn syrup and say “LOW FAT!” If someone says sugar is bad, they’ll replace the corn syrup with aspartame or some other chemical and say “SUGAR FREE!”
Meanwhile, it’s poor folks who can’t afford organic free-range free-trade foods. And even if they could, they don’t have the time to prepare it when they’re working full+ time just to be able to afford to eat. And even if they had the time, nobody’s teaching kids (or adults) how to cook basic, nutritious, tasty food from whole ingredients.
Argh! Sorry, pet issue. Taxing butter, indeed.
exactly, joszefja. would that it were not so, of course, but big business should not have to be brought round to this by the consumer paying through the nose. they should be kicked up the arse at source.