Saturday, 23 August 2014

Things that you learn from venturing into Crazy Town

From the Australian National Heart Foundation (aka Crazy Town)

"There is no scientific consensus that sugar as a nutrient causes heart disease. While overall kilojoule intake is important, other factors such as reducing levels of salt,and saturated fat are more important in preventing heart disease."

Yes, yes, we (the ignorant unwashed) all know the big white tick is basically a bullshit concept, based on nonsense and mind-blowing pompous arrogance, but it may interest you to look at just a sample of the AHF genius that is their list of tick approved foods.
Buying food with this on it is guaranteed to increase your smugness

Just a few examples of foods that are considered "heart healthy" and have the tick:


Milo Crunchy Bites – 24.2% sugar  
Sultana Bran Buds – 23.8% sugar  
Kellogs K-time Twists – 36.2% sugar 
Oats Express liquid brekkie – 23.5 – 25.3g sugar per 250mL serve.
Healthy Choice Apricot Chicken – 24.5g sugar per serve.  
Kantong Sweet & Sour sauce – 23.3g sugar per serve, 18.2% sugar  
That is all I could be buggered looking up - there are surely many more with similar sugar content. All low in saturated fat and salt, of course.

But never mind that - they have a perfectly good reason for sugar being heart healthy:
  • "Sugar is not a Tick criterion because, based on the current level of evidence, the major public health problems facing Australians such as obesity and overweight, diabetes, heart disease are related to excess energy (kilojoule) intake, not solely sugar as an ingredient.
  • For cereals with sugars present as dried fruit, eg. Just right or Sultana Bran, the sugar content will always appear higher due to the natural sugar content of dried fruit.  It is important to note that a sugar criterion in this instance would present Sultana Bran as a poorer choice than Coco-Pops."
So, it's fairly clear - don't worry about sugar content and your heart and body will do just fine. Call me a conspiracy-theorist, or a knowitall keyboard warrior (I'm not denying either), but that is just totally idiotic. Do they actually believe that to be true, or do they just have no other way of making their stupid scheme work given the fucked up national guidelines on healthy eating? Sort of a no brainer really. Honestly, if you can't eat fat or salt - they can't really come out and say 'no' to sugar because there's nothing left to eat except dry toast and water with some steamed broccoli on the side.

Exactly how you would get the tick on your product is spelled out here. But when I say 'exactly', it gets a bit vague when you try to figure out how much it'll cost you:

Fascinating, I'm sure. They also seem to be a little touchy when it comes to criticism on who uses the tick.

I learned some other fascinating tid-bits on my visit to the town populated by Simple Jacks, but they'll have to be the subject of other posts. There's only so much stupidity a person can deal with in one sitting.

Have a good one.

6 comments:

  1. "There's only so much stupidity a person can deal with in one sitting."

    ........ and there is still a big need for us to keep on spreading good news on dietary stuff and not drivel and mis-information.

    Have a good weekend

    All the best Jan

    ReplyDelete
  2. I am stunned. But if you believe sat fat is bad, meat is murder, and so on, there's not much left to eat, and out of that, only sugar tastes good without salt, so...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Their audaciousness was a bit of a surprise to me, too. They certainly make themselves an easy target for anyone with half a clue.

      I see you have a new post. Cheers.

      Delete
  3. Hi Chips - off topic, a bit!

    But just wanted to say thanks for joining our new low carb diabetic forum. It's good to see you over there. I know you've posted but please feel free to stop by, say hello and leave a comment on a topic/post. Tess put up a great stuffed chile pepper recipe............

    Cheers and .......

    All the best Jan

    ReplyDelete