"Rich in glucose"

tallaght01

I've noticed this on the wrappers of a lot of sweets that the kids eat while they're in hospital.

Because they're sick, they often get spoilt by their parents and visitors. Entirely appropriate, in my view. No harm in letting a kid have lots of sweets when they're ill, and in a scary hospital environment.

But something I often notice when I see them eating sweets is the misleading claims on the packages. The usual is "99% fat free" on, say, a massive sugar-filled illuminous green chewy bar. Now, fair enough, there may not be any fat in the bar per se. But there's lots of calories. They're not lying, but I think it's pretty misleading.

Yesterday i saw a kid eating something called a "fizzer" They had printed in big yellow illuminous writing on the package "rich in glucose". Again, they're not lying. But they are, to my mind, capitalising on the fact that the public often don't equate "glucose" with sugar. It's like the old mars bars ads. When I was a kid loads of people thought mars bars and lucozade were good for you. Pharmacies even sold lucozade!

Now, i know there are bigger issues in healthcare out there. But more kids than ever are now obese. We're even seeing teenagers with "type 2" diabetes.

Should there be tighter legislation regarding this type of thing? Or is feeding your kid "fizzers" because you think they're healthy just darwin in action?

Sangre

yes i think so. if something is low in sugar, its probably high in fat and vice versa. well it is in diet treats e.g nutrigrain, elevenes, special k cereals etc.,. companies shouldn't be allowed to advertise one without stating the other.

lynnsback

The main difference between refined sugar and fat is that fat is an essential macronutrient. It has many functions in the body. A very low fat diet is unhealthy and leads to all sorts of health issues such as poor fat soluble vitamin absorption. It can also really mess with the thyroid and the female sex hormones. Hence why many people on ultra low fat diets end up battling hair loss and depression amongst other charming symptoms. Refined sugar on the other hand has ABSOLUTLEY no nutritional value, is highly addictive and elevates glucose and insulin levels.

Kids eat this junk every day. The majority of stuff people feed to their children nowadays I wouldn't even give to a dog. I am dead serious. There is a reason our grandparents generation did not battle with metabolic syndrome and heart disease and diabetes. They ate real, non processed food. Meat, dairy, potatoes, veg and fruit. Sugar was not a daily item, present at every meal. We ate a good amount of fat in those days but our diet was really lacking in sugar, additives and processed foods.

I really feel for children nowadays. Unless they are blessed with tremendous genes they are very likely to have to deal with all the so called "diseases of civilisation" at younger and younger ages.

taram

At work we have a "snack station" and most of the girls bring low-fat products such as the weightwatchers range, I brought a small chocolate bar as a treat for myself one day, it came to less sugar and fat than one of their biscuits, but sure, they're low fat biscuits, why not have 4 :rolleyes: Same girls will drink a bottle of wine because it has no fat in it, but think fruit is too high-calorie. Wish I could make it complusary to take classes on basic nutrition and meal planning!

tallaght01

All the vending machines in our area have been changed so they only sell "healthy" snacks. You should see the high sugar crap they sell under the guise of being healthy.
I was amazed the hospitals got taken in like that. Same rubbish, different wrappers.

Dr Galen

tallaght01 wrote: »

Should there be tighter legislation regarding this type of thing? Or is feeding your kid "fizzers" because you think they're healthy just darwin in action?

no more legislation please.....

we're already a nanny state as it is. people have to have the freedom to chose what THEY want to do/put into THEIR bodies.

now if you were to suggest a government run or sponsored education programme on nutrition, so that people could make informed choices then i'd be all for that. It's easy to blame the big businesses for this, and certainly clever advertising has a lot to do with it, but they wouldn't do it if people didn't fall for it.

It's like the myths surrounding organic foods, everyone assumes that they are healthier for you. But in reality, the may be no more healthy than what you pay €2 less for in the value ranges in the supermarkets.

Personal responsibility has to come into it, and this is something that we're not very good at, especially in Ireland

tallaght01

But maybe legislation is neccessary to protect the people who eat more of this stuff....the less well off/less well educated.

No one in my university class or yours believes that "fizzers" are not bad for you, because they've got "99% sugar free emblazoned" on the pack.

It would be interesting to study people's perceptions about this kind of thing. Ask a load of punters what they thought was unhealthy, and what wasn't. It may not make a huge difference to people's spending, as we now that it's the middle classes who'll pay extra for healthier food, but they also eat less stuff like "fizzers".

sunnyjim

But maybe legislation is neccessary to protect the people who eat more of this stuff....the less well off/less well educated.

More unnecessary legislation that people will probably get around anyway, like the paracetamol one? I don't think we can do anything that will prevent it, unless we stop them being manufactured in the first place.

the less well off/less well educated.

You mean the same types who throw a fiver at their kids everyday to get McDonalds for lunch? The same as those who don't bother with breakfast? Or the ones who would rather find excuses and blame others for being fat/diabetic/etc?

These are the type of people who will take the easy route no matter what, so protecting them from one small part of their diets still won't protect them from the rest of the right-at-hand crap stuff they are eating everyday.

I think that there needs to be a few streams of education to get better diets aimed at boys, girls, men, women, babies, families etc. As a population we actually know very little about our food - not to mention how to cook it. Gone are the days when children helped their mammy/daddy with the cooking and baking on the days they were housebound. Now they're plonked down on front of TV, PSP, computer etc. Missing out on something that can really help them for life.

sam34

tallaght01 wrote: »

I've noticed this on the wrappers of a lot of sweets that the kids eat while they're in hospital.

oh yeah, you just "noticed" this while passing by.

expect us to believe that, do ya?

be a man.

admit it.

you've been stealing sweets off the poor defenceless kids, havent ya.

shame on you, tallaght

lynnsback

The sad truth of it is most people really don't know what healthy eating is. They think if their fridge is filled with "low fat" products they are eating healthy. They think if they don't go to fast food outlets they are eating well. Look at the millions of euros Weight Watchers earns every year for an example of how people can be duped.

The truth of healthy eating is so simple that marketing gurus can't spin it. Human should eat fresh unprocessed meats, veggies, fruits, nuts, seeds etc. Some people do not tolerate grains and dairy well but otherwise the basis of a healthy diet is: Eat real food. If you could theoretically hunt it, milk it or grow it is is okay.

People will continue to be duped by marketing unless they have a reason to go and research nutrition.

Am I allowed recommend books here?

Dr Galen

tallaght01 wrote: »

But maybe legislation is neccessary to protect the people who eat more of this stuff....the less well off/less well educated.

No one in my university class or yours believes that "fizzers" are not bad for you, because they've got "99% sugar free emblazoned" on the pack.

It would be interesting to study people's perceptions about this kind of thing. Ask a load of punters what they thought was unhealthy, and what wasn't. It may not make a huge difference to people's spending, as we now that it's the middle classes who'll pay extra for healthier food, but they also eat less stuff like "fizzers".

well see I'd have a fundamental issue with any legislation, on any topic, that states it's aims as protective, but thats more of a political debate than a Bio/Med one. In fact I have an issue with over legislation in general, and as a rule feel we need less laws and better enforcement.......but I digress

Being less well off or under-educated is a problem though, and thats why instead of a program of law making, I'd much prefer a program of proper education about the basics of nutrition. Really it should be taught in school, starting off young. But that would need to work in tandem with adults also receiving education on the subject too, so that kids would come home and not see a totally different story

Dr Galen

lynnsback wrote: »

The sad truth of it is most people really don't know what healthy eating is. They think if their fridge is filled with "low fat" products they are eating healthy. They think if they don't go to fast food outlets they are eating well. Look at the millions of euros Weight Watchers earns every year for an example of how people can be duped.

The truth of healthy eating is so simple that marketing gurus can't spin it. Human should eat fresh unprocessed meats, veggies, fruits, nuts, seeds etc. Some people do not tolerate grains and dairy well but otherwise the basis of a healthy diet is: Eat real food. If you could theoretically hunt it, milk it or grow it is is okay.

People will continue to be duped by marketing unless they have a reason to go and research nutrition.

Am I allowed recommend books here?

as long as it's not Witchface McKeith I think you'll be ok

lynnsback

God no!! Mckeith's diet is so unhealthy. Plus I wouldn't take advice from someone who looks as emaciated as she does. Not to mention all the incorrect science she spouts.

Anyway for those interested in nutrition I would highly recommend:

The Diet Delusion* - Gary Taubes

The Schwarzbein Program - Diana Schwarzbein

Nutrition and Physical Degeneration* - Weston A. Price

lynnsback

Also, do medical professionals in this country get any training on nutrition? Or just a few hours over the four years?

Vorsprung

lynnsback wrote: »

Also, do medical professionals in this country get any training on nutrition? Or just a few hours over the four years?

Did not get one hour of dietetics/nutrition training during my undergrad life. And all I know now is that:

a) Albumin isn't a great indicator of nutrition (but then what is - touché)
b) Anyone on TPN needs random lipids done on Wednesdays

lynnsback

bigjimthefirst wrote: »

Did not get one hour of dietetics/nutrition training during my undergrad life. And all I know now is that:

a) Albumin isn't a great indicator of nutrition (but then what is - touché)
b) Anyone on TPN needs random lipids done on Wednesdays

Wow. That is scary. All doctors should read the two books above anyway IMO. Are you a doctor?

mardybumbum

lynnsback wrote: »

Also, do medical professionals in this country get any training on nutrition? Or just a few hours over the four years?

I have only had two nutrition lectures, and a PBL block on nutrition so far. Although I do have another 4 and a bit years to go. But at the moment, it doesnt seem to be an important part of our course.

Dr Galen

i'd say during 4 years of nursing I got about 6 or 7 hours in total. Not a lot really. Anything I know has been self-reading etc as I do have a bit of an interest.

Glad to hear that you recognise McKeith and her ilk as the charlatans they are

Fluffybums

If most people paid attention in their basic science classes at school - the glucose, fructose, maltose etc sugar confusion would not happen. Meat and two veg (in the nutritional sense, though.......) is a good place to start with regards to a well balanced diet. If you don't know how to cook this kind of basic diet - God alone knows there are more than enough cookery books out there - some of them even tell you how to cook a roast.:eek: How often on the house make over shows do we see people waxing on about having this sort of thing in the kitshen or that, I know people who have fabulous kitchens but who can barely boil an egg (at least it saves cleaning the oven, a pet hate of mine). None of this is rocket science and all the education is already there - people just want an easy fix.
As for childhood obesity - one TV in the main room, the games consols in the main room and parents acting like parents would solve some of this.

I should add that I am overweight myself but I accept that this is my fault, as I need to get off my a**e more and sort out my fridge. My only saving grace is that my kitchen doesn't look like a show house because I actually use it.

Vorsprung

lynnsback wrote: »

Wow. That is scary.

Well, is it really? I mean, a basic knowledge of nutrition would be great, for sure, but to what extent do doctors need to know about it. Why teach it in any great detail when all you might say could turn out to be completely wrong when the ward dietician comes along!

NB partly playing Devil's Advocate here, partly not.

lynnsback

bigjimthefirst wrote: »

Well, is it really? I mean, a basic knowledge of nutrition would be great, for sure, but to what extent do doctors need to know about it. Why teach it in any great detail when all you might say could turn out to be completely wrong when the ward dietician comes along!

NB partly playing Devil's Advocate here, partly not.

Because there are so many illnesses and conditions that can be prevented by good nutrition. Illnesses that can be controlled by good nutrition. Metabolic syndrome is a perfect example http://www.prweb.com/releases/2005/11/prweb311399.htm or http://www.nrjournal.com/article/S0271-5317(08)00213-3/abstract. PMS is another. PCOS is another. Endometriosis. Hypothyroidism. The list goes on and on.

Doctors need to be educated about nutrition because as you all are telling me; you receive very little education about it in med school. And as the saying goes, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Also, some of the dieticians I have met have so obviously NOT kept up to date with the most recent research and are still recommending outdated ideas such as very low fat diets and telling diabetics that carbohydrates don’t matter and all they need to do is take insulin. A disturbing lack of knowledge of the cause and health consequences of hyperinsulinemia is evident in some dieticians. I find this worrying when research is showing us more and more how prevalent metabolic syndrome is becoming.

Finally, doctors are only human and many of them deserve to have the chance to get a good solid education on nutrition. They deserve to know what to do for their own health too. Medicine can be very stressful and good nutrition can help. There are a lot of debates in the nutrition world, but how can a person make up their mind on what is best for them or their patients when they don't even know these arguments exist??? As doctors I assume the goal is to offer patients all the options to get as healthy as possible rather than just immediately reaching for the prescription pad.

It is late and I am tired but I can come up with further research if you would like.