Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Food Pyramid, Safefood and non-competition entries

Options
12467

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Elohim
    Registered Users Posts: 334 ✭✭Elohim


    Safefood should also realise what they have on their website is a food triangle, not a pyramid. Fix your graphics Safefood!

    I haven't read the entire thread but if they cut off the bottom level of this triangle then i'd say people would start losing inches fairly rapidly, not the best way to do it but recommending 6 bowls of cereal and what not is just a joke.


  • Options
    #93
    winning
    Registered Users Posts: 50 ✭✭winning


    This thread is bewildering. I can't believe a government agency is recommending you eat loads of bread, rice and pasta. No wonder Ireland is full of fat people! What do they think everyone will drop dead if they don't load up on carbs every day?

    Also pretty funny that the Safefood people just say oh such and such a survey said the food pyramid is good. Refusing to acknowledge the bias that can be in commissioned surveys.

    Paints a sorry picture really. Safefood people should be ashamed they are representing these views and 100% misinforming the average stupid member of the public.


  • Options
    #94
    Zamboni
    Registered Users Posts: 4,305 ✭✭✭Zamboni


    safefood: Aileen wrote: »

    While Safefood is not responsible for food policy development, we did want to pull together some documents to try to explain the rationale for our national food based dietary guidelines and why we support them.

    It is not my intent to be disrespectful but if this was a university setting you would probably get some marks for the writing and content but you would fail based on not answering your own question and giving a history lesson instead.
    To paraphrase and summarise what you have actually said - this is how the guidlelines have developed over the years and we've gone along with it.
    You haven't addressed why Safefood support these guidelines at all.

    Also, the use of unscientific terminology is exasperating to say the least.
    Words like balance, adequate and plenty are highly subjective.

    I had hoped after Darragh's intervention this would have become more productive but it's just one dissapointment after another.


  • Options
    #95
    Gauge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,818 ✭✭✭Gauge


    winning wrote: »
    This thread is bewildering. I can't believe a government agency is recommending you eat loads of bread, rice and pasta. No wonder Ireland is full of fat people! What do they think everyone will drop dead if they don't load up on carbs every day?

    Also pretty funny that the Safefood people just say oh such and such a survey said the food pyramid is good. Refusing to acknowledge the bias that can be in commissioned surveys.

    Paints a sorry picture really. Safefood people should be ashamed they are representing these views and 100% misinforming the average stupid member of the public.

    It really is interesting, as about 2 years ago I would have been pretty much the exact person they were targeting with this ad- not obese by any means, but someone living a very sedentary life with an ever-expanding waistline.

    So if I had measured myself and gone onto safefood.eu and found out what I needed to do to sort myself out... their website would essentially have advised me to keep eating what I was already eating, and what was slowly making me gain weight! The bulk of my diet was carbs. Toast or cereal for breakfast, a roll for lunch, pasta or rice for dinner. I work at a computer. I don't need 6 servings of carbs a day! On top of that, as the pyramid advised, everything I ate was "low fat". Flora spread, low fat yogurts (totally unaware they were crammed with sugar).

    This is all PURELY anecdotal of course but it depresses me. Almost every woman in my family struggles with her weight. My grandmother embraced the low fat trend like nobody else. All I remember growing up in the early 90s visiting her house were the bowls of Special K and the low fat spreads. She developed Type 2 diabetes. All of my other female relatives struggle with their weight. They all do weight watchers. They all follow the low fat, high grain based diet recommended by Safe Food. And they yo-yo, they reach their goal weight, they gain it back and then some. The amount of times I've heard people talk about limiting eggs because of the fat and cholesterol in the yolks, and then they eat Special K with low fat milk for breakfast instead and think they're being healthy!

    I'm not knowledgeable when it comes to nutrition, not even close to it and I'm very thankful I checked out these forums instead of following what the government touts to us as "healthy". Discovering I was eating WAY too many carbs for someone with a desk job and that fat is not something to be afraid was the turning point for me. I steadily lost the weight which in turn encouraged me to start exercising. Coming from the position of someone who WAS totally and utterly ignorant about nutrition, I would say this campaign will ultimately be a failure.

    The reasons behind it are sound of course, I'm not saying they're wrong to encourage us to get healthier. A lot of people are unaware about the dangers of belly fat and think they're grand as long as their actual weight remains okay. But at worst the misinformation is disastrous. Very few people seem to understand the concept of portion size, especially as it pertains to grains like rice and pasta- I know I was one of these people and I was shocked when I saw what an actual portion of pasta looked like! So lack of knowledge about portion size, combined with the government telling us to eat plenty of grains, combined with the sedentary lifestyles a lot of adults lead... the mind boggles. I don't see how this will possibly work.

    I think the importance of reading nutritional information also needs to be promoted. How many people think they're being healthy eating brown/multigrain bread? The food pyramid says it's grand, AND it's multigrain. Again, I was the person thinking this. Then I found out I was eating the same bread, just with some seeds thrown in, at over 100 calories a slice. The same goes for "wraps" (everyone I know thinks this is the healthy option) and bagels.

    Sorry for the insanely long post, but when I saw this ad, and read the information they were pushing, I thought of my family- the women who have struggled for years and years with their weight, eating what they think are healthy choices. And are now being told they're part of an obesity epidemic and they should go find out about nutrition which will tell them to... keep eating what they're eating. And so it continues. I think of myself two years ago and how ignorant I was and how this campaign possibly could have pushed me to become even more unhealthy.

    Oh yes, and I feel like I should thank the people of this forum and the Nutrition and Diet forum. Lurking here taught me a lot and I probably owe my weightloss to you knowledgeable people :)


  • Options
    #96
    Blatter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,832 ✭✭✭✭Blatter


    ^^^^^

    Fantastic post


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    Hanley
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 21,981 ✭✭✭✭Hanley


    SOCCER4LIFE wrote: »
    ^^^^^

    Fantastic post

    +1

    Shows the importance (and results) of being accountable to ones self and actually doing a little bit of research.


  • Options
    #98
    winning
    Registered Users Posts: 50 ✭✭winning


    Hanley wrote: »
    +1

    Shows the importance (and results) of being accountable to ones self and actually doing a little bit of research.

    +1 Imagine if the government could control what we eat?

    I wonder if there is a decent journalist out there who could promote this disgrace of misinformation? The "health" journalists I see writing for the likes of the Indo and Times come out with the same drivel as the likes of Safefood.


  • Options
    #99
    columok
    Registered Users Posts: 2,398 ✭✭✭columok


    Great post Gauge.

    If we took Safefood's advice of primarily eating a high grain based diet what benefit would this serve? It could hardly be argued that people aren't consuming sufficient calories or enough carbs to fuel their lifestyles and that grains represent a better option than starvation! There is zero societal gain in encouraging people to eat plenty of bread or pasta. If a low fat dogma is being promoted then why not advocate a large vegetable/fruit intake as a primary food source and then bump bread/pasta/grains onto a higher level on the pyramid.


  • Options
    #100
    teacosy
    Registered Users Posts: 154 ✭✭teacosy


    Elohim wrote: »
    Safefood should also realise what they have on their website is a food triangle, not a pyramid. Fix your graphics Safefood!

    I haven't read the entire thread but if they cut off the bottom level of this triangle then i'd say people would start losing inches fairly rapidly, not the best way to do it but recommending 6 bowls of cereal and what not is just a joke.

    It doesn't recommend eating 6 bowls of cereal. It recommends eating a variety of foods. The amount of breakfast cereal which counts as "one" of the bottom shelf foods is a "small bowl". If you take a large bowl, this would count as 2.


  • Options
    #101
    fatmammycat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,208 ✭✭✭fatmammycat


    teacosy wrote: »
    It doesn't recommend eating 6 bowls of cereal. It recommends eating a variety of foods. The amount of breakfast cereal which counts as "one" of the bottom shelf foods is a "small bowl". If you take a large bowl, this would count as 2.

    Really? where does it indicate that?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    teacosy
    Registered Users Posts: 154 ✭✭teacosy


    fatmammycat wrote: »
    Really? where does it indicate that?

    http://www.safefood.eu/en/Consumer/Healthy-Living/Eating-Well/Eating-well1/

    That's where it has the variety bit anyhow - older versions of the food pyramid used to suggest "small bowl" of cereal - but the current site info does say "bowl".
    When teaching people to use this tool, i would always say "small bowl".... the website should be clearer.


  • Options
    #103
    fatmammycat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,208 ✭✭✭fatmammycat


    Ah, I see. But it still recommends 6 carb portions, so in effect somebody eating 6 bowls of ceral a day would be aok with this system, no?


  • Options
    #104
    teacosy
    Registered Users Posts: 154 ✭✭teacosy


    fatmammycat wrote: »
    Ah, I see. But it still recommends 6 carb portions, so in effect somebody eating 6 bowls of ceral a day would be aok with this system, no?

    Not if you take the advice to "eat a wide variety of foods" which goes hand in hand with the pyramid tool. It's a guide/educational tool, not a prescription.


  • Options
    #105
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    The low-fat stuff is utter crap. One morning I wanted a drink besides water before work, and there was no orange juice in the canteen so I had a diet 7up. I was literally shaking by 11am - and of course starving and craving bad stuff for most of the day. Blood sugar was totally screwed up. The industry that makes zillions from diet/low-fat foods needs people to fail, otherwise it wouldn't exist. And low-fat spreads - euch! Why not just have a thin spreading of butter?


  • Options
    #106
    fatmammycat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,208 ✭✭✭fatmammycat


    teacosy wrote: »
    Not if you take the advice to "eat a wide variety of foods" which goes hand in hand with the pyramid tool. It's a guide/educational tool, not a prescription.

    It's a pretty poor guide or tool. If I ate the way the pyramid suggests I would be 7 kilos heavier than I am currently.


  • Options
    #107
    columok
    Registered Users Posts: 2,398 ✭✭✭columok


    teacosy wrote: »
    It doesn't recommend eating 6 bowls of cereal. It recommends eating a variety of foods. The amount of breakfast cereal which counts as "one" of the bottom shelf foods is a "small bowl". If you take a large bowl, this would count as 2.

    What is good about the bottom of the pyramid nutritionally aside from low cost and abundancy? What component of grains is nutritionally necessary that cant be found from other food stuffs and therefore must make up the core of a diet.


  • Options
    #108
    Elohim
    Registered Users Posts: 334 ✭✭Elohim


    teacosy wrote: »
    It doesn't recommend eating 6 bowls of cereal. It recommends eating a variety of foods. The amount of breakfast cereal which counts as "one" of the bottom shelf foods is a "small bowl". If you take a large bowl, this would count as 2.

    The whole point of this pyramid thing is that I can look at it and choose what I can eat, it doesn't tell me anything about matching them, just as long as 6 portions are from this and 5 from that and stuff. I shouldn't have to read any extra information, that's the whole point of it. Anyways it's crap so it doesn't matter.


  • Options
    #109
    Elohim
    Registered Users Posts: 334 ✭✭Elohim


    Dudess wrote: »
    The low-fat stuff is utter crap. One morning I wanted a drink besides water before work, and there was no orange juice in the canteen so I had a diet 7up. I was literally shaking by 11am - and of course starving and craving bad stuff for most of the day. Blood sugar was totally screwed up. The industry that makes zillions from diet/low-fat foods needs people to fail, otherwise it wouldn't exist. And low-fat spreads - euch! Why not just have a thin spreading of butter?

    That's actually a very good point. *Dons tinfoil hat* These people definitely lobby the governments to encourage the population to eat it. It's made in such huge abundance and so cheap that they have to sell it somehow. Any politician would be killed if he said we should eat less bread, potatoes, cereals etc.


  • Options
    #110
    Doug Cartel
    Registered Users Posts: 2,188 ✭✭✭Doug Cartel


    Sorry if this has already been said, but one of the main issues I have with the food pyramid is that so many of the things that should be seen as "sweet treats" are marketed as something else.

    For example breakfast cereals should be labled as a high sugar snack, but somehow they're at the bottom of the pyramid. Then there's things like smoothies, flavoured yoghurt, salads with loads of dressing.

    Not to mention that the portion sizes in the recommendations have nothing to do with the portion sizes used in the real world.


  • Options
    #111
    gavtron
    Registered Users Posts: 304 ✭✭gavtron


    Gauge wrote: »
    It really is interesting, as about 2 years ago I would have been pretty much the exact person they were targeting with this ad- not obese by any means, but someone living a very sedentary life with an ever-expanding waistline....
    <SNIP>
    ...
    Sorry for the insanely long post, but when I saw this ad, and read the information they were pushing, I thought of my family- the women who have struggled for years and years with their weight, eating what they think are healthy choices. And are now being told they're part of an obesity epidemic and they should go find out about nutrition which will tell them to... keep eating what they're eating. And so it continues. I think of myself two years ago and how ignorant I was and how this campaign possibly could have pushed me to become even more unhealthy.

    Oh yes, and I feel like I should thank the people of this forum and the Nutrition and Diet forum. Lurking here taught me a lot and I probably owe my weightloss to you knowledgeable people :)


    Here, this post should get a hundred Euro...fair play to you for educating yourself!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    cc87
    Registered Users Posts: 1,368 ✭✭✭cc87


    I have to say to see someone throw out a few guidelines in order to back up their statements and as a way to dismiss published studies is quite disappointing.

    I ask once again, without any disrespect to Aileen, to prove what they are saying is in the best interests to the Irish public??

    I think more than a few studies have been posted which refute what they are saying.


    Also, has anyone taken a look around that EUFIC site??

    I was looking at the FAQ section, they pretty much say processed food is better than food in its natural state.
    In one question they say limit your fruit intake to 2/3 a day and on another to eat as much fruit as you like.
    Looks like something thrown together overnight.


    At least they openly admit that they are supported by European food and drink companies.


  • Options
    #113
    Mellor
    Registered Users Posts: 39,142 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    sambuka41 wrote: »
    Secondly Australia, really?? You can compare Ireland and its piss poor weather to Oz, people over there have the opportunity to get out and exercise way more in those climates than here in the rain. I've tried to walk my dog everyday this week and she will not budge when its raining (she has sensitive ears and the rain can really bother her, so the vet says!!) So there was my chance to get a tiny bit of exercise gone. (not that Im really trying hard) Basically weather and availability of local resources like swimming pools should all be taken into account.
    Obviously the weather being better for the summer makes it easier to exercise outside but there's no reaon why you can't go to the gym. And FYI, at this time of the year its pretty cold and damp in the southern parts of Oz, really no different to ireland.
    If you want to exercisem there's nothing stopping you. Saying the dog has sensitive ears is a cop out
    Tirabaralla wrote: »
    And secondly...Australia, really?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obesity_in_Australia
    Australia ranks 21st among the world "fattest" countries, Ireland ranks 103rd...

    I suppose it depends at what you look at, if you go and take a look at the young surfers on the beaches they won't be fat. It's a matter of distorted perception, like many things, unfortunately.

    Prob true, but your making a huge jump suggesting this directly relates to exercise. Fast food is huge, which prob counts for the overweight people. There's also a significant portion of the population who are pacific island decent that tend to be higher in weight.

    In my experience, oz is a country of extremes. Those that eat poorly are overweight, and they embrace it whole hog. The rest of the country are pretty dedicated to fitness.
    teacosy wrote: »
    That's where it has the variety bit anyhow - older versions of the food pyramid used to suggest "small bowl" of cereal - but the current site info does say "bowl".
    When teaching people to use this tool, i would always say "small bowl".... the website should be clearer.

    The fact that a normal sized bowl counts as two portions should be the first sign that something is wrong with that method.


    The Advisory Board is a key element in safefood’s advisory structure. A broadly representative 12-member group, the Board usually meets every six weeks and provides strategic advice to the Chief Executive and senior management team.
    So far so good, but who exactly are these advisors?
    http://www.safefood.eu/en/About-Us/Who-we-are-2/Advisory-board/Advisory-Board-Members/

    Basically farmers, teachers and restaurant owners.
    Impartial advice? I doubt it


  • Options
    #114
    Doug Cartel
    Registered Users Posts: 2,188 ✭✭✭Doug Cartel


    Mellor wrote: »
    So far so good, but who exactly are these advisors?
    http://www.safefood.eu/en/About-Us/Who-we-are-2/Advisory-board/Advisory-Board-Members/

    Basically farmers, teachers and restaurant owners.
    Impartial advice? I doubt it
    Hmmm, I know that doesn't look good, but safefood is really about promoting food safety among the public. I think it's more a marketing thing than a decision making/enforcing body like the FSAI.

    That said, given that safefood are responsible for promoting food safety, are they maybe overreaching themselves by moving into the area of healthy eating?


  • Options
    #115
    Roger Marbles
    Registered Users Posts: 208 ✭✭Roger Marbles


    This thread confirmed my initial fears and expectations.

    No proper engagment from safefood, just post some links and be done. Let the thread drift off the front page and just focus on the competition one.


  • Options
    #116
    Hanley
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 21,981 ✭✭✭✭Hanley


    Roger Marbles wrote: »
    This thread confirmed my initial fears and expectations.

    No proper engagment from safefood, just post some links and be done. Let the thread drift off the front page and just focus on the competition one.

    Yah... I'm not that surprised either!


  • Options
    #117
    columok
    Registered Users Posts: 2,398 ✭✭✭columok


    Roger Marples wrote:
    This thread confirmed my initial fears and expectations.

    No proper engagment from safefood, just post some links and be done. Let the thread drift off the front page and just focus on the competition one.
    People in safe jobs in the midst of a recession will simply not be seen to contradict the policy of their bosses, department, government etc. to appease some random internet people on a public forum.

    Unfortunately regardless of the science and research most medical and health professionals will ultimately tow the food pyramid line until the pyramid itself is changed. This is likely to only change through international pressure (EU)


  • Options
    #118
    Ouchette
    Registered Users Posts: 243 ✭✭Ouchette


    If Aileen could post a link to the meta-analysis that the food pyramid is based on, in particular the carbs vs sat fats recommendations, I'd be very grateful.

    If she could also do the same for studies showing a link between populations adopting food pyramid guidelines and improving health, I'd be very interested in reading those too.


  • Options
    #119
    Transform
    Registered Users Posts: 6,394 ✭✭✭Transform


    Such a disappointment.

    "You got to put your bodies upon the gears.. and you got to make it stop"

    This is what you get when 'authority' meets proper education on a public forum where there are wayyyy more informed people on this very topic and people that actually work with clients week in week out to make fat loss happen.

    Stop the machine and own your own education on the topic then go bloody take action!


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIMo1WoHcfE


  • Options
    #120
    Darragh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,241 ✭✭✭Darragh


    Roger Marbles wrote: »
    This thread confirmed my initial fears and expectations.

    No proper engagment from safefood, just post some links and be done. Let the thread drift off the front page and just focus on the competition one.

    Okay, just to come back to you on this - I've read the other posts too - I had originally requested
    Darragh wrote: »
    Okay, can I ask a favour then please?

    Can someone take charge and collect questions that we can put directly to safefood on this issue and put them in one post that they can reply to?

    It would help an awful lot!

    I don't see this as having being done?

    I'm just wondering if someone can explain to me what it is they realistically expect here? What questions you want answers to and how you expect them to be replied to by safefood.

    If it's not working out to the satisfaction of our members, can you tell me what it is you are looking for and I'll do my best to work with safefood and get it for you.

    Cheers

    Darragh


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    Roger Marbles
    Registered Users Posts: 208 ✭✭Roger Marbles


    Questions were originally going to be collated by moderator briankeating on page 3-4. I have all of them here I think:

    1) What about the industrialisation of our food chain? And the hyper-patability of said industrial food stuffs? Not to mind the poor nutritional quality of these foods?

    2) If you could remind your colleagues (with the Ph.D in Nutrition) that you'd like their opinion on the saturated fat issue. I'd like to hear their take on it and the studies they've been using to back up their views.

    3)I'm curious, Aileen, why you use the food pyramid as a mode to follow, when it has pretty spectacularly failed as a model for healthy eating.

    4) I saw that Nevan Maguire is on the board of advisors to Safe Food and I think that there is a real opportunity to be exploited there. I know from watching his cooking program that he visits lots of different places to show his viewers where food comes from. And I think that that is all great.

    But I think that there could be more done from this point of view. Like why does Nevan use vegetable oil when he is cooking? Does he not know how bad that stuff is for you? And why doesn't he know that it is bad for him?

    5) Why do they recommend lowering saturated fat intake when all evidence points to no risk of cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disease risk?

    6) Why do they call grains "superfoods" and recommend more than 6 servings of bread etc per day considering that they are empty carbs devoid of any significant nutritional quality compared to vegetables, cause gut irritation and autoimmune disease in many and research up to 1 year from the NEJM shows that low GI diets perform better in terms of weight loss? Also considering insulin being one of the main hormones involved in body fat loss, does it not seem at odds with this?

    7) Why do they only recommend modest amounts of protein when our ancestors ate much more, when it's scientifically unproven the link between high protein diets and either renal disease or colon cancer in healthy individuals?

    8) Do you believe us that the Food Pyramid is wrong? Do you believe us when we say that a diet primarily containing bread, pasta, rice, potatoes etc. with moderate to low servings of protein and fat is actually conducive to weight gain, and not weight loss?

    9) If not, why not? We have provided the latest studies and research. We have provided plenty of evidence in favour of our argument and disspelling your argument. Many of us posting here are also speaking from our own experience.

    If so, can anything be done to change the advice/guidelines that are on your website? On a bigger scale, can you change future advertising campaigns or inform the public of the new measures?

    10) Why are all the school science textbooks that deal with Nutrition full of misleading information?? We're setting kids up for a life of unhealthy eating by what we're telling them and teaching them

    11) Again I ask the question, can I please have the references of prospective human trials that shows an reduction in heart disease from reducing saturated fat?

    Please stop linking to guidelines. Pubmed or nothing.

    12) Are you suggesting a more heavily grain based diet is important for the development of children? it seems to be the case from the first paragraph above

    13) Look at the food pyramid, look at the increase in the types of food being sold and consumed, look at the rates of obesity. Do you not see correlative factors there? Taken in the context of the overwhelming body of evidence available, who you disagree that they're also causitive?

    14) You've said "The Food Pyramid attempts to guide people so that they will consume enough essential nutrients for good health while protecting themselves from chronic diseases" - can you please explain how a heavily grained based diet achieves any of this? If we were to cut out the base of the pyramid and start with fruit and veg instead, what 'nutrients' and 'protection' would be lost?

    15) You've said "This table (which I'm having trouble formatting here, apologies) may help illustrate why moving towards higher fibre foods, more fruit and vegetables, adequate amounts of low fat dairy products and lean meats and a reduction in ‘treat foods’ are valid aims. " - would you agree then that since no heavily grain based food like rice, bread or pasta has been mentioned there that they are not neccessary?

    16) What was the thinking behind using imperial measurements? Sure older people will understand it better but we need to be educating the children and teenagers too. Schools use the metric system now so 32 inches won't mean much to anyone under 20. How many of them will bother to find out?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement