Not shunning fat and still keeping good health-Another obesity control theory

Food and nutrition sciences seem to be turning upside down if a latest report by a charitable trust in the UK is to be believed! In essence the "scientists" in the trust are saying the eating more fat is the solution to overcome obesity epidemic that is ravaging wealthy nations in the world! It is not that the main stream health experts are sitting quite without challenging this new theory which does not appear to be based on any great scientific study and they have cautioned consumers not to "trust" this Trust for changing their food habits. Here is a take on this report and readers can come to their own conclusions regarding the credibility of the claims made. 

Thirty years of official health advice urging people to adopt low-fat diets and to lower their cholesterol is having "disastrous health consequences," a leading obesity charity warned yesterday. "Eating fat does not make you fat," argues a new report by the National Obesity Forum (NOF) and the Public Health Collaboration, as they demanded a major overhaul of official dietary guidelines. Promoting low-fat foods is perhaps the biggest mistake in modern medical history according to Dr Aseem Malhotra, consultant cardiologist. The report says the low-fat and low-cholesterol message, which has been official policy in the UK since 1983, was based on "flawed science" and had resulted in an increased consumption of junk food and carbohydrates. The document also accuses major public health bodies of colluding with the food industry, said the misplaced focus meant Britain was failing to address an obesity crisis which is costing the NHS £6 billion a year. The authors call for a return to "whole foods" such as meat, fish and dairy, as well as high-fat healthy foods like avocados. The report, which has provoked a broad backlash among the scientific community, also argues that saturated fat does not cause heart disease while full fat dairy products such as milk, yoghurt and cheese, can actually protect the heart. Professor David Haslam, NOF chairman, said: "As a clinician treating patients all day every day, I quickly realised that guidelines from on high suggesting high carbohydrate, low-fat diets were the universal panacea, where deeply flawed."Current efforts have failed, the proof being that obesity levels are higher than they have ever been, and show no chance of reducing despite the best efforts of government and scientists." Processed foods labelled "low-fat", "lite", "low cholesterol" should be avoided at all costs and people with Type 2 diabetes should eat a fat-rich diet rather than one based on carbohydrates, the report urges. Dr Aseem Malhotra, consultant cardiologist and member of the Public Health Collaboration, a group of medics, said dietary guidelines promoting low-fat foods "is perhaps the biggest mistake in modern medical history, resulting in devastating consequences for public health". "Sadly this unhelpful advice continues to be perpetuated," he said. Eat fat to get slim. Don't fear fat; fat is your friend says Dr Aseem Malhotra. The current Eatwell guide from Public Health England is in my view more like a metabolic timebomb than a dietary pattern conducive for good health." Dr Malhotra also suggested the scientific integrity of the PHE advice had been compromised by commercial interests. "We must urgently change the message to the public to reverse obesity and Type 2 diabetes," he added. "Eat fat to get slim," he concludes. "Don't fear fat; fat is your friend." Snacking between meals is one of the main causes of the current obesity crisis, the report argues, while added sugar should be avoided because it has "no nutritional value whatsoever".Snacking will make you fat, the report warns. Calorie counting is also a damaging red herring when it comes to controlling obesity, said the NOF report, as calories from different foods have "entirely different metabolic effects on the human body, rendering that definition useless". Similarly, "you cannot outrun a bad diet" the authors state, citing the "incorrect" assumption among the public that the solution to obesity is to burn more calories than are consumed. Our populations for almost 40 years have been subjected to an uncontrolled global experiment that has gone drastically wrong Prof Iain Broom. "Obesity is a hormonal disorder leading to abnormal energy partitioning which cannot be solely fixed by increasing exercise," the report says. Responding to the NOF document, Professor Iain Broom, from Robert Gordon University, said: "The continuation of a food policy recommending high carbohydrate, low fat, low calorie intakes as healthy eating is fatally flawed. "Our populations for almost 40 years have been subjected to an uncontrolled global experiment that has gone drastically wrong."
However, scientists from a range of fields have criticised the report and questioned its evidential basis. Dr Mike Knapton, Associate Medical Director at the British Heart Foundation (BHF), said the NOF findings were "full of ideas and opinion" but could not be counted as a comprehensive review of the evidence. The report's main headline – simply to eat more fat – is highly contentious and could have adverse public health consequences says Dr Mike Knapton. "This country's obesity epidemic is not caused by poor dietary guidelines; it is that we are not meeting them," he said. Professor Naveed Sattar, Professor of Metabolic Medicine at Glasgow University, said: "The report's main headline – simply to eat more fat – is highly contentious and could have adverse public health consequences."

It is true that all the actions and programs taken by the countries suffering from obesity have not brought any positive results so far and on the contrary the obesity population is surging at an unprecedented rate. Whether it is low carbohydrate diet or massive promotion of low fat food products, there is no dent in the galloping growth of overweight people. Naturally this has given opportunity to some "queer" people to try to swim against the tide and gain some popularity and attention. But the damage such unproven claims on the health of the people is forgotten by them while propagating such outlandish claims. It is understandable that those practicing low fat diets have to depend on carbohydrates for bulk of their energy needs and white sugar and HFCS provide the same. There are scientific evidence to show that too much carbohydrates in the diet can be a worrisome factor that can precipitate metabolic syndrome disease and other disorders. The lesson that is to be learned is that there is no sure recipe or quick fix for maintaining healthy weight and following a balanced diet giving importance to fat, proteins and carbohydrates derived through natural diet ingredients combined with regular physical activity is the best approach for good health

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

WHAT IS A JUNK FOOD? NO ONE KNOWS!

Can there be a more ridiculous situation than what had happened in the Supreme Court some time back when GOI was quizzed regarding the prevalence of selling junk foods near the school premises? In stead of explaining to the court that the term junk food is an anachronism because all foods provide some calories or nutrients if they are edible. In stead the FSSAI, representing GOI informed the court that it is going to lay standards of safety for the so called "junk foods". Also FSSAI tried to prevaricate on the issue by diverting the attention of the court by fulminating against trans fatty acids which are supposed to be in all junk foods! It is a pity that in stead of agreeing to ban all unhealthy foods in or near educational institutions, this responsibility was shifted to the states most of which have lowest priority for matters connected with consumer safety. HRD Ministry which controls policies related to education must have pitched in by agreeing to bring out guidelines for foods that could be sold to children near the school. Here is a report on this case which was carried by major news agencies recently. 

"Most of the junk foods have high quantity of trans-fatty acids and is low in minerals, vitamins and other essential food nutrients. And, said to be a major reason for obesity among children in schools in cities such as Delhi and Mumbai. The ministry told the court that the authority has constituted a scientific panel to prescribe standards for fatty acid residues, poisonous metals and microbiological parameters in food items including those considered junk food. Once the new standards are prescribed, the ministry has said that its enforcement will be responsibility of the respective state governments. Such (state government) authorities are required to collect samples of food and take action on the findings of the tests reports based on safety parameters and standards prescribed by the authority, the ministry reply to the court said. The food safety law provides the power to the state governments to impose a fine on those selling sub-standard food not adhering to the standards. Despite that action against adulterated or sub-standard has not been of desirable levels. On the bigger question raised in the Public Interest Litigation of Rahul Verma regarding imposing a ban on junk food in schools and educational institutions, the ministry said it was an administrative decision to be taken by respective educational institutions. The ban cannot be imposed under the food safety and standard act of 2006, the ministry said".

While reporting on the Supreme Court proceedings, no one seems to have been bothered by thousands of push carts operating near every school in this country selling cut fruits, ice candy, local sweets etc under most insanitary condition. Why FSSAI chose to highlight dangers of trans fats could have been to exhibit its technical prowess vis-a-vis food safety to the court! Probably it is time stern action is taken against school management if such unhygienic foods are allowed to be sold to students in their schools. Cut fruits are by far the most dangerous source of infectious food borne pathogens and the tender body system of the children is more vulnerable to infections by consuming these fruits and other similar risky food products. Parents also have an obligation towards their wards and the practice of giving hefty pocket money to school going kids spawns many undesirable activities in and near the school.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

SUBSIDIZING "ILL HEALTH-NEED FOR A POLICY RE-LOOK

Policies on farm subsidies in a few developed countries are holding up any agreement on evolving universal trade regimes with minimum distortion and such subsidies are supposed to help the domestic farmers to ensure growth of the agriculture sector. It is however known that these subsidies are not reaching the intended beneficiaries viz small farmers and are mostly conferred on a few big farms cultivating thousands of hectares. Added to this it has been brought out recently that such subsidies are harming the health of the consumers by driving the junk food industry offering calorie rich food products at low prices. In contrast nutrient dense foods like fruits and vegetables are ignored making them relatively costlier. A country like the US cannot wish away the above irrefutable fact and must address this issue on a priority basis before it assumes monstrous dimension. Here are the facts brought out recently by a study in that country.

"It's a well known fact that most farm subsidies go to crops, like feed corn, that aren't exactly healthy. They're crops that are easy to grown en masse and in the heartland. But a new study from the US Public Interest Research Group, called "Apples To Twinkies," shows just how unhealthy most subsidized food is. According to the report, the vast majority of produce subsidized by the USDA ends up in junk food. According to the study, a whopping $17 billion of the total $260 billion the government spent subsidizing agriculture went to just four common food additives: corn syrup, high fructose corn syrup, corn starch and soy oils. By comparison, the government spent just $261 million subsidizing apples, and far less still supporting fruits and vegetables, like spinach, broccoli and blueberries, that public health experts say encourage better health. To put things in perspective, the PIRG study said that, if the government had given taxpayers the subsidies instead of the farmers, each one would have been given $7.36 to spend on junk food and just 11 cents to spend on apples a year. This is a key factor that makes junk food more expensive than healthy food — and, by extension, that makes many Americans obese. It's possible, though, that the era of huge farm subsidies may be coming to a close. Food Safety News notes that Obama called for a massive cut to farm subsidies for the 2012 budget. The cuts were proposed as a part of his deficit reduction plan — but this new study shows how far subsidy changes could go towards cutting obesity rates as well. Mark Bittman, for his part, has repeatedly called for farm subsidy reform rather than elimination, in the hopes that the government will make it easier for Americans to afford healthy food".

The recent UN meeting on the emerging non-communicable diseases points out clearly that Tobacco, Alcohol and unhealthy processed foods are responsible for most of these diseases reaching crisis proportion and all countries must address this problem urgently without further prevarication. In fact serious suggestions are being made to make the unhealthy foods costlier through imposition of high taxes with a hope such fiscal measures would reduce consumption of these foods significantly. In spite of years of appealing to the food industry to moderate their food processing regime shifting the product mix to healthier ones, the ground reality is that no measurable achievement is still perceptible calling for mandatory action by the governments. Against such a background how can one justify the prevalent farm subsidies with devastating impact on the health of the citizens? The bad politics of farming being followed are causing harm both nationally and globally!

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com