Low fat food is a scam

TheyKnowMyIP

Now I am no genius or anything, but the concept of paying the same amount for less never quite crossed my mind as a good idea. Infact, any time I see "low fat" or "0% that" one word shines instantly in my mind like a blinding spotlight: Scam.

Why are we content as a society to spend money on this marketing masquerading as Science? Is this some mass conspiracy to lower the average spending and brain power of the man on the street? One word: self preservation.

Low fat me hole.

Senna

Got a problem fatty??

TheyKnowMyIP

FFS. NOBODY has pointed out the obvious mistake yet.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

TheyKnowMyIP wrote: »

Now I am no genius or anything, but the concept of paying the same amount for less never quite crossed my mind as a good idea. Infact, any time I see "low fat" or "0% that" one word shines instantly in my mind like a blinding spotlight: Scam.

Why are we content as a society to spend money on this marketing masquerading as Science? Is this some mass conspiracy to lower the average spending and brain power of the man on the street? One word: self preservation.

Low fat me hole.

At this risk of taking you too seriously, it has to be able to prove it's claims or the compamy will be done for fraudulant advertising. You believeing it's bull**** is more likely to be a scam.

Wertz

But....but....the cholsterol...and and the calories....and does my bum look big in this?
I'm on a diet btw...can you tell? God I feel so guilty that I don't look like those people in the magazines...

Let me see....paying more for less calories...that's a great idea. Skimmed milk? Yeah I'll just take the full fat and piss it out with tap water thanks.

TheyKnowMyIP

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

At this risk of taking you too seriously, it has to be able to prove it's claims or the compamy will be done for fraudulant advertising. You believeing it's bull**** is more likely to be a scam.

Is that why they don't supply citations in the adverts? Oh yeah, they are banking average jane or joe isn't likely to debunk their bull****. Look at that Danone ****e for instance. L casy I immunitas this and healthy tummy that. This is just marketing disguised as legitimate science.

If something isn't cited, never trust that claim. This is common knowledge, no?

mickrock

It is a scam, not just monetarily but health-wise too.

Fat is an essential part of a healthy diet. Also it's not eating too much fat that makes people fat.

TheyKnowMyIP

mickrock wrote: »

Also it's not eating too much fat that makes people fat.

I think it's stupidity. Never trust any claim made on the basis of no evidence. If only everybody followed this simple piece of advice:o The ethical standards in this arena are quite low, assuming your product does not kill somebody or cause em to grow horns or something.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

TheyKnowMyIP wrote: »

Is that why they don't supply citations in the adverts? Oh yeah, they are banking average jane or joe isn't likely to debunk their bull****. Look at that Danone ****e for instance. L casy I immunitas this and healthy tummy that. This is just marketing disguised as legitimate science.

If something isn't cited, never trust that claim. This is common knowledge, no?

No, it's your personal opinion. Just because the ad does not carry the citation does not mean the citation doesn't exist.

http://www.research.danone.com/ - perhaps you could point me to the specific point of their research that you disagree with it?

TheyKnowMyIP

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

At this risk of taking you too seriously, it has to be able to prove it's claims or the compamy will be done for fraudulant advertising. You believeing it's bull**** is more likely to be a scam.

Sure, no marketing junk has ever resulted in a court case. Not once in the history of the human race. Blindly accepting these "claims" on the basis of no evidence is akin to a belief system. I for one won't believe this crap.

Blatter

The 'low fat' theory is the biggest (and most successful) diet scam in history.

It's said to think that our national ditery guidelines are based on it.

Hasmunch

TheyKnowMyIP wrote: »

Never trust any claim made on the basis of no evidence

But it says now with added fecial bacterium

It must be great so.....

TheyKnowMyIP

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

No, it's your personal opinion. Just because the ad does not carry the citation does not mean the citation doesn't exist.

http://www.research.danone.com/ - perhaps you could point me to the specific point of their research that you disagree with it?

Seems legitimate to me:pac:

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

TheyKnowMyIP wrote: »

Sure, no marketing junk has ever resulted in a court case. Not once in the history of the human race. Blindly accepting these "claims" on the basis of no evidence is akin to a belief system. I for one won't believe this crap.

Do you not think that, if they were full of ****, that it would?

You're trolling. That or email Danone for a copy of their scientific research, read it (!), and then report back in the morning. I'm going to bed.

TheyKnowMyIP

Most of the "research" facts they list on that site are basically just a bunch of public domain facts mixed together with some cool futuristic sounding terms to get you to buy their product. Isn't that the idea?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Hasmunch wrote: »

But it says now with added fecial bacterium

It must be great so.....

Ah, now there is the question that the OP should be asking: just how nessecary is it, not how real is it.

It's case of, we have this, we have the scientific proof, now how can me market it so hat people really think they need it? Not we'll make something up and wing it.


Ok, NOW I'm goin to bed.

TheyKnowMyIP

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

It's case of, we have this, we have the scientific proof, now how can me market it so hat people really think they need it? Not we'll make something up and wing it..

Point to it. Just because they pass it off as legitimate science, does not make it so. That is what I would refer to as "cargo cult science". The truth will always ferret it's way out eventually. If it's built on a shaky foundation from the start, what else can you expect?

Saila

mickrock wrote: »

Also it's not eating too much fat that makes people fat.

Ive just seen a shooting star, either that or it was someones head exploding in a far away galaxy

Wertz

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

No, it's your personal opinion. Just because the ad does not carry the citation does not mean the citation doesn't exist.

http://www.research.danone.com/ - perhaps you could point me to the specific point of their research that you disagree with it?

AFAIR Danone or one of the other manafacturers of cultured dairy drinks were forced to change the wording of their ads to allow for a lack of proper evidence to back up their bold claims...I don't recall the precise deatsil but wording was changed form "can" to "could" or "will" to "may"...they can't be definitive about something which hasn't been proven beyond a doubt.
Research can also be carried out to back up certain wordings for ads that can send an ambiguous messages to viewers of those ads...and all they have to do is flash up some wording on screen to cover any dsicrepancy.
"May lower cholesterol as part of a calorie controlled diet" for instance...

Saila

Wertz wrote: »

AFAIR Danone or one of the other manafacturers of cultured dairy drinks were forced to change the wording of their ads to allow for a lack of proper evidence to back up their bold claims...I don't recall the precise deatsil but wording was changed form "can" to "could" or "will" to "may"...they can't be definitive about something which hasn't been proven beyond a doubt.
Research can also be carried out to back up certain wordings for ads that can send an ambiguous messages to viewers of those ads...and all they have to do is flash up some wording on screen to cover any dsicrepancy.
"May lower cholesterol as part of a calorie controlled diet" for instance...

and its in a half translucent tiny white text, cnuts

Lucy8080

low fat foods tend to have more sugar/carbs than their full fat equivalent. a check on the labels of the two prodects will confirm this. take out the fat and you need sugar to make up for flavour.

eating too much fat is hard. you will soon get full. fat does not make you fat.....surprisingly.

now sugar and carbs....being instantly used for energy ...means we can store fat until we run out of a source of sugar and carbs.

eat the sugary sweet harvest of autumn....store fat...get through winter on the stored fat....

the problem today is that the corner shop doesnt close for the winter.

fat good. no make u fat.sugar and fat..tasty...fat stored because sugar realeases enrgy quicker...and body saves fat in the bank. i see lots of people who have been earning compound interest for years.

them have penguins and low fat spreads piled high in shopping trolley.

them block up ailses. and toilet pot.

LighterGuy

TheyKnowMyIP wrote: »

Low fat me hole.

'Low Fat' foods are just a marketing tool.
Look at Weight Watchers. They cost more than the actual 'more fat/unhealthy' equivalent food and Weight Watchers is a multi-million revenue food product.

Its a great business model. They bring it to great lengths too. They even have weight watchers cake. ... thats right cake!
All they are selling is that "this cake is not as bad as others, there for more good for you" ... Its a brilliant con

Spunge

Basically, people think fat makes you fat. Make something low fat (take out fat, replace with salt/sugar), people buy it thinking its healthy.

I wish there were more "low sugar" foods.

whirlpool

The real scam is the fact that fat does not make you fat.

And most foods labelled "low fat" are instead filled with the ingredients that DO make you fat.

This is not up for discussion or interpretation - it is fact.

Food companies play off the general public's ignorance of this fact.

And that's the way the cookie crumbles.

K-9

I'd take butter over Flora or any of that nonsense any day.

whirlpool

It's also worth noting that the incidence of cholesterol and heart problems in the USA skyrocketed after the introduction of the food pyramid, and have been on the increase ever since.

People are surviving longer these days, due to medication (pharmaceutical industry WIN), but are unhealthier than ever and need the medication in the first place due to bad diet (food company WIN.)

strobe

Spunge wrote: »

I wish there were more "low sugar" foods.

Just eat fresh whole foods rather than 'processed'.

eightyfish

Organic food is a scam.

silverharp

it is funny/sad to see all the big birds at work with their low fat crackers and the rest. The low carb appraoch is the only way to treat obesity. The low fat approach is just there to make sugar companies rich.

of course it's a scam, they're pumped with sugar

Feisar

I don't know if its been said but low or zero fat foods are often loaded with sugar to make them palatable. So the calories are still there.

There's nothing wrong with fat, one third of a persons diet should be fat. Which in turn should be broken up equally between mono, poly and saturated fats.

Its hydrogenated fats that are bad, there the unnatural ones.

And FYI the fat in grass fed beef is good for you. Its cattle raised on grain that have a skewed omega profile. It's also the grain that gives beef the much desired marbling but its not a sign of healthy meat.

Feisar

bluewolf wrote: »

of course it's a scam, they're pumped with sugar

Beat me to it!

Scanlas The 2nd

Blatter wrote: »

The 'low fat' theory is the biggest (and most successful) diet scam in history.

It's said to think that our national ditery guidelines are based on it.

The food pyramid has to be the biggest scam ever . Wholegrains are not healthy, they cause heart disease, diabetes, autoimmune disease as well as cancer.

Spunge

silverharp wrote: »

it is funny/sad to see all the big birds at work with their low fat crackers and the rest. The low carb appraoch is the only way to treat obesity. The low fat approach is just there to make sugar companies rich.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAIkPx9dRaA

eating fat makes you fat just like eating french fries makes you french

it has L casei fakelatinitass so it must be true

bnt

The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) realised their food pyramid was flawed, and have been making changes to it. This year they started talking about a Plate instead of a Pyramid - see here for details.

The thing about fat is: that's where the flavour is - literally. Take out the natural fat, you have to try and replace the flavour, and that explains why low fat foods can taste worse. Your body creates fat from carbohydrates, so this idea that low fat food must mean a low fat body is just plain wrong. And that's before you ask questions like "what's the fat being replaced with?", which is when you read about the Olestra controversies.

foxyboxer

It's like the vilification of saturated fat by the 'Health' industry.

It's a naturally occuring fat and is needed by the body in certain quantities.
What your body doesn't need is low fat yoghurts where the ingredients list is akin to that of a chemistry experiment with e numbers, glucose fructose syrup etc.

jester77

Low-fat is basically aimed at gullible women who are too lazy to understand nutrition or do some exercise. They just want to have their cake and eat it... literally but without the taste. I don't get this, low-fat products can cost more and they taste crap.

Either enjoy what you are eating and do some exercise or just leave it out of your trolley. Low-fat products are not going to stop you from getting fat.

Spunge

They do have less calories though.

aquaman

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

The food pyramid has to be the biggest scam ever . Wholegrains are not healthy, they cause heart disease, diabetes, autoimmune disease as well as cancer.

Can you expand on this a bit please? Is it that (like anything) too much is bad for you? Or that wholegrains are less healthy than the splitgrain (white) alternative?

Catxscotch

TheyKnowMyIP wrote: »

FFS. NOBODY has pointed out the obvious mistake yet.

Of course they have, but your brilliant topic has side tracked even the most vicious of AH grammer vultures

kylith

Fat is the vehicle by which flavour travels. My nanny always said that you should eat some fat to grease your joints, and she certainly wasn't obese, and never suffered too much from arthritis.

K-9 wrote: »

I'd take butter over Flora or any of that nonsense any day.

People who cook with Flora or similar should be flogged.

TheyKnowMyIP

The l casi i immunatas or whatever the fark they call it isn't even published in clinical trials by the government in the USA, despite numerous claims to the contrary.

"Buy actifeed, it cures the clap":)

*warning - may result in any of the following: death, convulsions. compulsion to kill, the clap, night paralysis, the fear, small children, reduced bank balance, cell mutation, plants eating small animals and possibly anything else we haven't anticipated yet:rolleyes:

Scanlas The 2nd

aquaman wrote: »

Can you expand on this a bit please? Is it that (like anything) too much is bad for you? Or that wholegrains are less healthy than the splitgrain (white) alternative?

Grains of any kind are bad for you. I've stopped eating grains and now fry my food in saturated fat (coconut oil) and eat loads of butter and over 20 eggs a week. My clothes are now hanging off me I've lost so much weight, and most importantly, I feel much better, lots of energy and I don't get tired/sleep at 3 o'clock.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Wertz wrote: »

AFAIR Danone or one of the other manafacturers of cultured dairy drinks were forced to change the wording of their ads to allow for a lack of proper evidence to back up their bold claims...I don't recall the precise deatsil but wording was changed form "can" to "could" or "will" to "may"...they can't be definitive about something which hasn't been proven beyond a doubt.
Research can also be carried out to back up certain wordings for ads that can send an ambiguous messages to viewers of those ads...and all they have to do is flash up some wording on screen to cover any dsicrepancy.
"May lower cholesterol as part of a calorie controlled diet" for instance...

That's what I mean - someone does actually check these claims out and pull the company up on them if they're wrong or misleading. Beyond that, I think a certain amount of responsbility (especially where research is concerned) lies with the consumer.

Spunge

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Grains of any kind are bad for you. I've stopped eating grains and now fry my food in saturated fat (coconut oil) and eat loads of butter and over 20 eggs a week. My clothes are now hanging off me I've lost so much weight, and most importantly, I feel much better, lots of energy and I don't get tired/sleep at 3 o'clock.

Are you in ketosis ?

Snakeblood

kylith wrote: »

Fat is the vehicle by which flavour travels. My nanny always said that you should eat some fat to grease your joints, and she certainly wasn't obese, and never suffered too much from arthritis.

But she was a lobbyist for Big Fat.

DjFlin

The way I see it, if someone can produce a product that tastes just like another one, but isn't as unhealthy. Its worth paying the same price for.

whirlpool

*Thread moved to the nutrition forum.


Oh wait, I'm not a mod.

But if I was!! *shakes fist :mad: :cool:

whirlpool

DjFlin wrote: »

The way I see it, if someone can produce a product that tastes just like another one, but isn't as unhealthy. Its worth paying the same price for.

The problem arises when a person misunderstands what is healthy and what isn't. e.g. "fat is unhealthy."

"Low fat" products are more unhealthy than natural products.

Blatter

whirlpool wrote: »

*Thread moved to the nutrition forum.


Oh wait, I'm not a mod.

But if I was!! *shakes fist :mad: :cool:

It's been done to death tbere, and the conclusion is always low fat = bullish*t.

No harm in educating a few in AH that wouldn't necessarily visit the nutrition and diet forum.