I didn't read the media headlines, so I'm not going on those.

I think it's a telling point that the same studies are used for two different conclusions. The evidence is poor and widely open to interpretation. There's no evidence of causation and very little of correlation. The media headlines were probably grossly misinterpreted for both sets of papers - why wouldn't they be?

Incidentally, the doctor who made the video I posted a link to eats very little meat. Not for health reasons, because there's no good evidence either way. They changed their diet for environmental reasons, for which there is solid evidence. I strongly recommend watching that video because it's a bona fide attempt at an unbiased summary of the medical evidence, by someone suitably qualified to do so.

 

A married couple in their 50's who are good friends of mine told me a story about some friends of theirs (also a couple) who they've known since their uni days. They became vegan a few years ago and have become consumed by it to the point that it dominates their lives and apparently they talk about little else. Last year they visited my friends and stayed with them for a couple of weeks. They refused point blank to sit on their sofa because it was leather. My friends were't amused by it at all and are dreading the next visit.

 

It's a good state to be, I think personally. It's cheaper too!

 

NVM

 

Its the opposite, the food industry has evolved massively, its followed populism, which is to provide cheap tasty food, and sod the consequences. The fact that cheap food plays most easily into the hands of big industry is just a mega bonus, although arguably they kick started part of the trend and left the rest to evolve into what it is now.

The industry will supply what consumers demand, its a highly reactive industry actually, far from failing to evolve.
It would be super happy to provide to all differing demands of people. What it needs and we are starting to see is the government trying to balance the scales a bit, going after the worst and taxing it to bring it in check.

The "over population" is no such thing, its just a lazy way for many to say they think we should be able to live as we do now and thats what we want.
Humans until very recently did not have constant simple easy and cheap access to high calorie and wide variety of foods. A lot was and always has been seasonal. Meat was not so widely available as to be the staple, and fish was far more prevalent.
There was actually legislation hundreds of years ago that land owners could only feed their workforce trout 3 times per week, otherwise they would have been given it daily, it was so prevalent and cheap.

There is massive potential to grow far more food in denser and more controlled environments insects for protein, salads and veggies in multistory or underground. The issue isn't the ability to do it, the issue is the fact we want cheap food, really cheap food. For most people now, food is about the cheapest its ever been (relative to incomes).

 

NVM

 

Carrots apparanly are one of the best, And my favourite. 150g for carrots, 350g for potatoes and 1500g of carbon for meat.


I still maintain someone try wean themselves a bit to Irish soup. Carrots leek and celery stalk chopped and add chopped celery leaf and parsley. Serve with boiled potatoes and hotdog rolls on the side. I like to juice celery leaf also and add this near the end it is amazing stuff when the soup goes a little green and you smell the leek it always has people talking about the earthly homely smell of food.


It helps also with the bowels, Two serving here literally makes me need to go #2.

 

No industry evolves ethically or healthily from choice, its practically impossible. Its where politics and industry collide. As I said, consumers have dictated the direction, and the industry supplies all demands. If you want free range chicken you can have one, but more people want cheap chicken.

Your very confused on how we have always lived. If you take a very narrow time period over the last 2000 or so years it will in pretty much all cases give you a different "as we always have done". Food has evolved many times and continues to do so.

Food is very very cheap, generally and in comparative terms for most. Peoples will power and advertising are nothing to do with it. For most its a simple cheap, widely available commodity, they pay little attention to it, and as such they take little interest and then they will do things like uber eat each night, preferring to watch someone cook rather than engaging themselves.

Value ranges are nothing to do with overpopulation, they were and remain a marketing battle between the supermarkets, trying to be all things to all men. Trying to create segments and live within them.

Meat has always been common, its a good store of food, it can be fed on a small scale with little effort (waste/grazing etc), then killed when times are hard, but those days were when many things were pre-industrial
What percentage of the population could have a couple of chickens for example, maybe a pig or a goat or a cow per family?

Rabbit is just a fad, its like certain beef cuts. They were low demand so they were cheap, as the prices have gone up for popular cuts then people looked at other often previously popular cuts and sources and suddenly they gain some attention, often these are actually higher falvour but need more prep effort, hence why the demand went down initially. Oddly where I live was once a rabbit farming area (for the crown), when rabbit fell out of fashion it stopped and went normal agricultural. Rabbit used to be popular for people as you could hunt them, and also keep them. I can keep rabbits on my allotment, along with chickens, but no one does, where as there are about 20% or so of the plots with people who keep chickens. There is no problem with commercially farming rabbits, its just not been popular enough for people to do it, the majority of rabbit comes from pest control.

Fish farming can be done, its harder for deep sea fish hence why those got fised to hell, but its possible. Again the problem is what people want to pay, we could do low density, very welfare friendly fish farming, but with a price premium, but people will pick up the intensively farmed lower welfare ones generally, exactly the same as the free range vs battery chicken.

Food hasnt become cheap to gain more of peoples money, the ratio we spend on food is one of the lowest in the developed world, UK consumers have wanted it, they have changed tastes, changed wants, changed the time they are willing to spend cooking, and have demanded more, faster, cheaper food. The industry has leapt to that challenge, just look back to the original ready meals, and how they have changed. Things like pasta sauces, curry sauces etc
Trust me as someone who works in the industry, the whole supply chain would love to have more of your money for less volume, unfortunately the UK consumers generally want more for less, and most are willing to sacrifice the quality in order to achieve that balance of price/volume.

 

NVM

 

Relative food prices for a load of close nations to us.
Ours is cheap.

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/stati...,_beverages_and_tobacco,_2017_(EU-28=100).png

 

they wouldn't be given another invite from me.

 

NVM

 

Your using irrelevant data when you compare globally
You need to look at similar countries, diets are completely different in other places, as are incomes.

 

NVM

 

is this comparing apples against apples ... the uk obesity issue is partly because of the diet, so I would contend we are spending our lesser money on poorer quality goods too, the cheaper 'crap' as he said. ...
yes - did the supply or the demand come first

re-posting ... it's shockinglaughable

Spoiler: chart

I take that programme now as an abuse of the BBC's charter to educate people ... should have been gone long before kyle :
.. without admonishment ,participants joviallly talking about their inability to stick to diabetic constraints, in an excerpt last week.

Could people afford to spend the same % of wage, on food as european countries, like France(13% vs 8%) for better health, or, is it just misplaced prioritization of tech/cars/holidays ?


Radio4 farming today yesterday , apparently beef consumption down 13% now (last 3 months) , in preference to chicken and fish, without price shifts, so consumer choice is changing (look out for good beef deals)

 

Problem with that table is it isnt comparable, France vs UK is almost a 20 year gap, as we know the UK is getting worse.

But anyway go back, most countries the population mainly ate what was local. Only the rich ate heavily from imported goods because they were expensive. Its partly why the UKs food was such a joke to many nations. The staple UK foodstuffs not being that great for potions of the year due to climate.
It improved a lot as imports fell in price, and also tech improved, but then it carried on, we imported far more US food culture. That lack of good british food meant we were open to new foods, so where as we had previously imported from places like India where the diet was funadmentally better, we started importing US type. Just a simple pizza, an italian pizza is very different to a US pizza, typically smaller, thinner and with the main focus on the topping, where as US is about size, deep pan, stuffing the crust etc

Wehn you add in the changes to lifestyle the work pressures its easy to see why the trend continued. I mentioned ready meals, you can youtube clips of the first microwave meals, they were not that great, look at the options now. Its the food industry reacting to demands.
I dont think the UK food industry is as bad as the US. The US has massive lobby groups wanting to push corn syrup etc we dont really have that in the UK, but we do have an environment of a very effective industry in supporting customer wants. Lots of data and lots of analysis looking for the next thing to offer the consumer.

We choose to spend less on food, I am not certain its to do with iphones or anything like that, personally its competition doing what competition does.
If your the sort to want to cook at home using very good ingredients you can, you have plenty of companies ready to offer you that option.
If you want to do minimum work, you have that option, you can live on takeaway if you want. Again plenty there to compete for your money.

I dont believe the offering of low quality cheap food stops people who want to eat well from doing so, I do believe that those who want to eat as cheaply as possible or are forced to have that available as well.

Our food education is terrible, as someone who works in the industry we see it all the time.

 

NVM

 

yes
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0009fn0/eat-well-for-less-series-6-episode-4 ~ 9:30 say .. black humour tv. ... maybe it's a spoof.

those programmes exemplify/glorify that.

The data may not be the most recent, but as you say, we have imported the ultra-proceesed food diet, and obesity that accompanies it from the USA,
and with lack of education, to understand manipulation that is present in advertising, and nutritional knowledge it has proliferated, to the benefit of the profits of those companies.

Even the mindset that takeaways represent a culinary experience or aspiration (curious - what kind of takeaway would appeal ttaskmaster?) that's a marketting creation, I find an anathama, the analogy to smoking, remains appropriate.
I'd like to see a study on take-away consumption versus health outcomes.

 

NVM

 

Yea, same here. Hanging a few rabbits in the living room before they arrive might do the job without having to say a word.