PDA

View Full Version : Jamie's Food Revolution Season 2 ~ Battle LA



Pages : 1 [2] 3 4

Prancer
05-29-2011, 12:04 PM
I'm not sure about that, but I definitely don't think that's a position that's been adopted in this thread or on Jamie's show, which is the topic of the thread.

I rather thought this thread moved beyond just being about Jamie's show in the very first post, but perhaps that's just me. And I believe healthy food was already being equated with organic food before I made that comment, but again, that could just be my reading of it all.

This being FSU, thread topics are, after all, more like guidelines, anyway.

modern_muslimah
05-29-2011, 02:37 PM
:confused: That must have been an exceptionally expensive soda or some exceptionally cheap fruit.

Soda is really cheap. McDonald's near me sells any size soda (including the large) for $1.00. Most of the other fast food places I've seen sell soft drinks for similar prices. Even the Family Dollar near me sells cheap 1 liter soda for a dollar. I'll be lucky if I can get a couple of apples from the grocery store for that price.



Those things are also often on sale and there are usually coupons for those who do that. Few things are cheaper than junky food on sale. Ramen noodles sure aren't healthy, but they are incredibly cheap. And food is one of the few expenses that can be controlled; you can't change your rent or your loan payments, but you can cut your food budget.

ITA.


I think that a lot of people are also quite confused about what "healthy" means. Sometimes I see people post here that this food is healthy or that one isn't, and I think "What the hell?" But then I realize that most of us--including me--really don't know much. Are carbs evil or beneficial? Is fat bad or good, or does it depend on the fat, or does the type of fat even matter? Will red meat kill me or is it a great source of protien and iron? That red wine--is it really good for me, or will a glass of grape juice do? Is organic food actually good for you or is it a bunch of hype--or even harmful for you and the environment?

You're right. This is definitely another point that gets lost in these discussions. There's lots of food that is healthy beyond fruits, vegetables and free range meat. The definition of healthy tends to become really narrow in these conversations. We all need carbs, fat (saturated fat included), protein and other nutrients to survive and most foods, even some labeled "junk food", have some of these nutrients. Yet, with food policing we tend to overlook this. People may hate chocolate milk but it does have protein. Lattes have protein too. An egg mcmuffin from McDonald's has a good proportion of carbs to protein and has under 300 calories. Yet I'm sure there is someone somewhere who labels all of these food as bad.


I certainly think that price is a factor, but I don't think it's as huge as some people make it out to be, and it's too easy to dismiss the issue just based on cost.

Do you have to buy all of your food on food stamps or frequent kitchen cupboards or soup kitchens? Are you unemployed and have a really tight food budget? If not, then it may be really difficult to understand it is a HUGE factor in how people shop.



Many people on tight budgets do buy junk food. IMO, if someone can afford to buy potato chips, twinkies, and soda, they can afford to buy fruit and vegetables, though certainly not berries and fresh vegetables that are out of season.

I'm going to go back to a point I made earlier about food perishables. Chips, twinkies, and soda, while not having the most nutrients are cheap and they don't spoil. They're also calorie dense. Berries and fresh vegetables, while having lots of nutrients, can spoil, will not last long and aren't nutrient dense.


But, if a person can afford soda, they can afford a few apples, and those don't go rotten very quickly.

Seriously, I want to know where you shop. Soda is definitely cheaper than apples. The last time I went to the market, apples were about $1.50 a pound. These were pretty big apples, so I would have gotten maybe two apples for $1.50 a pound. A two litter soda would be about the same price and last longer. However, I really think this is a poor comparison. I've never met anyone who passed up apples for soda. Plus, getting a soda doesn't preclude getting apples if you want them.


And for many families, getting enough calories is not the issue. Their kids are getting too many calories, even in families on tight budgets.

If families just ate fruits and vegetables, they wouldn't be getting enough calories and they would know it. My point is that the processed foods we all lament do have a lot of calories and are often filling. Ramen noodles are filling. Cans of Spaghettios are filling. They're also cheap. Families may be getting more calories than they need but at least they're getting enough.


And I don't think that money plays a role in the issue of pouring sugar and coloring into milk, which is one of Jamie's chief concerns.

Maybe it doesn't but chocolate milk, like I mentioned before, still has all of the protein of regular milk. I don't drink it but I'm not going to begrudge children for drinking it.


Jamie's standards are very different from Michael Pollan's. Jamie's not asking for organic fruit and vegetables or organic, pasture-raised meat. He is asking for better nutrition. That the kids be given nutritional, real food instead of fried foods and sugar and stuff that can barely be classified as "meat." Take a look at the ingredients for the nuggets those kids were eating in West Virginia schools and the ground beef Jamie talked about in L.A..

I mentioned both of them because I think they both have their heads in the sand about why people don't eat the way they want people to eat. Class somehow magically disappears from their discussions. They seem to think that if poor people were just taught better and worked harder to eat better, than they really could. Actually, they seem to think the same way about middle class people too. They've both managed to turn food into a moral issue when it shouldn't be.


He is not naive about cost. If you saw his show last season, much of it was about meeting the budgets of the schools. Though, yes, he does think that school food budgets should be increased. This country has an obesity and diabetes epidemic on its hands and that seems to be Jamie's main concern, which is very different from Michael Pollan's main concerns.

I think Pollan is concerned about obesity and diabetes too. He seems to be under the impression that if we were to all eat more unprocessed, organic food then there wouldn't be high rates of obesity. I also think there is some fat prejudice going on as well but I digress.


[B]The reality is that people don't like to be lectured, and they don't like to be told what to do.And it is hard to avoid feeling like there's a class issue when you do have the perception that it is predominantly white upper-middle class people seeming like they are wagging their finger at poor or working class people for not eating properly.

This is what it comes down to.

Anita18
05-29-2011, 10:47 PM
The reality is that people don't like to be lectured, and they don't like to be told what to do. And it is hard to avoid feeling like there's a class issue when you do have the perception that it is predominantly white upper-middle class people seeming like they are wagging their finger at poor or working class people for not eating properly. I know that's in some ways a simplification but I think it's the perception that exists and it may be where a lot of resistance to change comes from.
Definitely true. And you could say that for anything you try to change in society. :shuffle:

allezfred
05-29-2011, 11:11 PM
It doesn't help that even though he's right Jamie Oliver is a smug annoying twat. :P

skatesindreams
05-29-2011, 11:26 PM
In order for changes in behavior to occur, and become routine, people have to see the need for it; and more importantly; want to change.

Until that happens all the wise advice and good intentions of Jamie - and others - mean very little.

Allskate
05-30-2011, 03:38 AM
Soda is really cheap. McDonald's near me sells any size soda (including the large) for $1.00. Most of the other fast food places I've seen sell soft drinks for similar prices. Even the Family Dollar near me sells cheap 1 liter soda for a dollar. I'll be lucky if I can get a couple of apples from the grocery store for that price.

That's a current promotion that McDonalds has going. It's not their usual prices. But, I still maintain that it's smarter to get two apples instead of a cup of soda. Even if soda is cheap, why would someone struggling financially buy it when it has no nutritional value?


People may hate chocolate milk but it does have protein.

Regular milk has protein too. Why should we be feeding schoolchildren the sugar, especially at a time where there is an epidemic of childhood obesity and diabetes?


An egg mcmuffin from McDonald's has a good proportion of carbs to protein and has under 300 calories. Yet I'm sure there is someone somewhere who labels all of these food as bad.

But I'm sure someone could make scrambled eggs and toast at home for less than the price of an Egg McMuffin and with less fat and better ingredients.


Do you have to buy all of your food on food stamps or frequent kitchen cupboards or soup kitchens? Are you unemployed and have a really tight food budget? If not, then it may be really difficult to understand it is a HUGE factor in how people shop.

I have no desire to detail my personal history or current job situation. Suffice it to say, aside from the soup kitchens, I've been there and when my mother was struggling to support five kids on food stamps, we weren't eating Twinkies and soda and we definitely weren't eating at McDonalds. I remember my mother instead buying powdered milk to try to mix with and stretch the regular milk she would buy. I simply don't buy the idea that soda and Twinkies, which have absolutely no nutritional value, are a wise cost and health option. We're just going to have to agree to disagree on this. And, once again, this issue isn't simply about cost. There are people who are struggling financially who aren't eating tons of junk food and people who are very well off who are.


I'm going to go back to a point I made earlier about food perishables. Chips, twinkies, and soda, while not having the most nutrients are cheap and they don't spoil. They're also calorie dense. Berries and fresh vegetables, while having lots of nutrients, can spoil, will not last long and aren't nutrient dense.

You're setting up false dichotomies. Nobody is saying people who are financially strapped should go buy berries. But the alternative is not chips, Twinkies, and soda, and nobody is so desperately in need of calories that they need to eat junk food. There are much healthier carb alternatives. Carbs that don't spoil and are more filling and healthier than soda and chips. And, as I said, there are canned foods. I was in the dollar store today and they had canned green beans for 79 cents. I was able to buy two cans of baked beans for a dollar. But, I should buy soda instead?



Seriously, I want to know where you shop. Soda is definitely cheaper than apples. The last time I went to the market, apples were about $1.50 a pound. These were pretty big apples, so I would have gotten maybe two apples for $1.50 a pound. A two litter soda would be about the same price and last longer. However, I really think this is a poor comparison. I've never met anyone who passed up apples for soda. Plus, getting a soda doesn't preclude getting apples if you want them.

If someone is on a very limited budget, then buying soda does preclude buying apples. If you're spending a dollar on soda, that's one less dollar to spend on nutritional food. This whole conversation started when I pointed out that a family had told their pre-diabetic child that she couldn't have a pear because they couldn't afford it -- but they had just bought her a cup of soda at the drive-thruk, which would have paid for a couple of pears.

As for where I buy my fruit, where I live the situation is different from yours. It's the small neighborhood shops that are most affordable and I can get apples for 99 cents per pound a lot of the time. There also are some good farmers markets year round. At the height of orange season, I could get medium oranges for less than a quarter. I don't usually buy my fruit and vegetables in the grocery store.


If families just ate fruits and vegetables, they wouldn't be getting enough calories and they would know it. My point is that the processed foods we all lament do have a lot of calories and are often filling. Ramen noodles are filling. Cans of Spaghettios are filling. They're also cheap. Families may be getting more calories than they need but at least they're getting enough.

You're shooting down straw men. Nobody is saying that people should just eat fruits and vegetables. But, rice, pasta, beans, and bread are better options than soda, chips, and twinkies. And, there are ways to use things like pasta in healthier ways, and Jamie has tried to advocate for that.


I mentioned both of them because I think they both have their heads in the sand about why people don't eat the way they want people to eat. Class somehow magically disappears from their discussions. They seem to think that if poor people were just taught better and worked harder to eat better, than they really could. Actually, they seem to think the same way about middle class people too. They've both managed to turn food into a moral issue when it shouldn't be.

Yes, they definitely are not just talking about poor people. And I've made it clear that I'm not either. You mentioned Pollan when you were talking about organic food. The impression I get from Pollan is that he is more concerned with environmental issues and animal cruelty. In any event, as I said, I don't think Jamie is advocating free-range meat and organic vegetables in school lunches. And that's not what most parents who want improved school lunches seem to be asking for either

You don't see food as an ethical issue. I do. I think it's wrong for us as a nation to be giving so much sugar and junk to our schoolchildren in their lunches. There is no need for pink or brown milk and no need for french fries every day. IMO, it's not fair to have a school lunch system that is creating or contributing to an epidemic of childhood obesity and diabetes.


In order for changes in behavior to occur, and become routine, people have to see the need for it; and more importantly; want to change.

Until that happens all the wise advice and good intentions of Jamie - and others - mean very little.

Agreed. Though I think that part of what Jamie wants to do is have people see a need for change. He does have this problem that Allezfred points out, though:


It doesn't help that even though he's right Jamie Oliver is a smug annoying twat. :P

And, on that note, I'm done. Promise. :D

Civic
05-30-2011, 04:39 AM
......You don't see food as an ethical issue. I do. I think it's wrong for us as a nation to be giving so much sugar and junk to our schoolchildren in their lunches. There is no need for pink or brown milk and no need for french fries every day. IMO, it's not fair to have a school lunch system that is creating or contributing to an epidemic of childhood obesity and diabetes...
Actually, I do view food as an ethical issue. It's just that you and I seem to disagree on who the biggest culprits are. I think the companies that make and peddle the fatty, high calorie fast and snack foods you deplore deserve most of the blame. They have a vested interest in Americans eating their products and aggressively market them to kids.

AragornElessar
05-30-2011, 07:48 AM
Actually, I do view food as an ethical issue. It's just that you and I seem to disagree on who the biggest culprits are. I think the companies that make and peddle the fatty, high calorie fast and snack foods you deplore deserve most of the blame. They have a vested interest in Americans eating their products and aggressively market them to kids.

But in the end, it's the grown ups who should be the ones realizing that's not healthy for our kids and taking the responsiblity for that. ITA w/you about Big Companies and how they have too much influence on what's out there in the Marketplace. However, it's a matter of Choice whether or not that stuff ends up in our Grocery Cart. Sure there's ads up the wahzoo, but it's not like the Consumer doesn't have any choice in the matter either.

As for not wanting to buy Berries because they'll spoil, ever think about freezing them? Or your Veggies? We do all the time and both myself and my parents are on fixed incomes, but we seem to be able to eat plenty of fruits and veggies on our limited incomes. Both fresh and frozen. We don't eat canned due to the salt content in canned stuff.

We also have a Garden though and while I know everyone doesn't have that option in their home, there are Community Gardens out there. Not to mention Window Gardens, which a good friend of mine has in Toronto. That way she's got fresh produce available whenever she needs it and all she has to do is go into whichever room that particular "plot" is. She's also on a fixed income and needed to change her diet after a Major Health Scare last year.

As for other healthy options, such as brown rice, whole wheat pasta, various flour and whatever, we buy bulk. It not only helps the pocketbook as you're not buying staples every month, but every three to four months instead.

It *is* doable if you're willing to do the work needed to make it doable. Can we also stop bringing Whole Foods into this? You don't need premium organic fruits, veggies and what not to eat more fresh fruits and veggies/a more healthy diet.

As for whomever said we need Saturated Fat in our diet...Are you kidding? That's one of the biggest problems facing North America right now and you think that's a thing we need? Excuse me while I pick my jaw up off the ground.

Do we need fats, carbs and protein in our diets? W/out a doubt as they're all building blocks in the body. However, there's a big difference between using Avocado mixed w/a little ground mustard to use as a spread for a Tuna sandwich and using a fat laden Mayo or using Olive Oil to make an omlette instead of butter. There are ways to get all of that w/out having to turn to Garbage Food and it is affordable if you're willing to learn a few tricks.

Which is what Jamie is trying to get across.

Prancer
05-30-2011, 10:06 AM
As for whomever said we need Saturated Fat in our diet...Are you kidding? That's one of the biggest problems facing North America right now and you think that's a thing we need? Excuse me while I pick my jaw up off the ground.

Well, this is another example of conflicting information about the healthiness or lack thereof of certain foods. The most well-known article on this subject (http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/07/magazine/07FAT.html)was published by the New York Times nearly a decade ago; I'm actually shocked that you are shocked by the saturated fat comment.

There are many, many more articles on the subject if you care to look for them. And you will find conflicting information, just as you will with almost anything having to do with nutrition. Researchers can't even agree on what it is that is making us fat. Theories abound.

Meanwhile, the infamous Food Pyramid is about to be replaced by a Dinner Plate: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/28/health/nutrition/28plate.html The plate is designed to encourage people to eat more fruits and vegetables. Now that can only be a good thing, right? But I've already seen some nutritionists expressing concerns.

skatesindreams
06-01-2011, 04:07 PM
At least Jamie is trying to deliver his message; while providing reasonable and realistic alternative menu choices that the consumer can find - and might actually eat.

"Healthy Eating" is not limited to one specific diet or philosophy.
It should be about making the best choices from the options available.
That list can include some things that we "enjoy", as well as what is "good for us".

Healthy options should be readily available at every price point/budget.
The public needs more awareness/education in how to use them.

Prancer
06-01-2011, 04:11 PM
"Healthy Eating" is not limited to one specific diet or philosophy.

But what exactly IS "healthy" eating?

manhn
06-01-2011, 06:20 PM
When I go to Costco in the US, I get 6 bananas for 1.49, which is not much higher than a supersized drink. And 6 bananas can last you awhile.

That all said, I HATE when people comment on how I eat, when I eat, how often I eat, how much I eat, what I don't eat, what I eat, who I eat with, where I eat, etc. I can understand why people would be so resistant.

overedge
06-01-2011, 06:23 PM
As for not wanting to buy Berries because they'll spoil, ever think about freezing them?
It *is* doable if you're willing to do the work needed to make it doable.

It's doable if you have a freezer. A lot of lower-income people don't, or can't afford one. And a lot of lower-income people, especially in the US, don't have easy access to places that sell berries and fresh produce. They're buying their food and/or eating out at 7-11, McDonalds, etc. etc. because that's all there is in their neighbourhoods.

Jenny
06-01-2011, 06:36 PM
It's doable if you have a freezer. A lot of lower-income people don't, or can't afford one. And a lot of lower-income people, especially in the US, don't have easy access to places that sell berries and fresh produce. They're buying their food and/or eating out at 7-11, McDonalds, etc. etc. because that's all there is in their neighbourhoods.

I have a freezer with about double capacity of the freezer in a standard fridge. Takes up very little space, cost me $150, and has more than paid for itself in the opportunity to take advantage of sales on frozen fruit and breads.

IMO whether or not people can "afford" things is almost always more about priorities than actual cash flow.

Andrushka
06-01-2011, 08:48 PM
None, I would think, as sugar doesn't make kids hyperactive?

http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=52516
http://articles.cnn.com/1999-11-22/health/9911_22_diet.sugar.myth.kids.wmd_1_sugar-and-hyperactivity-hyperactive-children-researchers?_s=PM:HEALTH
http://healthlibrary.epnet.com/GetContent.aspx?token=9076b2c9-0730-4f1a-b6fa-5a462bb0a011&chunkiid=157003
http://news.consumerreports.org/health/2009/01/medical-myths.html
http://www.nytimes.com/1995/11/22/garden/study-disputes-link-of-sugar-to-hyperactivity.html

And so on and so on.

true,but it does compromise ones immune system.And give your body a temporary rush of energy that then crashes leaving the person drained.