According to The Express, “The Government’s Food Standards Agency is said to be considering using shock tactics to persuade Britons to cut down on their consumption of saturated fats. A consumer study conducted for the agency by CMI Research found that graphic images of fat – the kind shown on popular TV shows about food and health – had a big impact on viewers.”
Many have shunned the report as another means of being controlled by the Government, rather than a campaign for better health.
NannyKnowsBest said:
“It seems that this time next year we will have to endure yet another one of Nanny's remorseless campaigns warning us about the dangers of our everyday, simple pleasures. Nanny and the FSA need to remember that, unlike smoking, we really all do have to eat food everyday. You cannot, and should not, criminalise food and eating!”
Providing a similar message, Harpoon asked:
“What about warnings on every loaf of bread? On every bottle of Coke? How about putting pictures of gangrened limbs on the front of every fish & chip shop with a warning that consumption of batter fried in vegetable oil can eventually lead to heart disease and diabetes?”
The point is interesting and very much plausible. And like Chow.com, which points out other products with warning labels such as Cigarettes, Handguns, Liquor, Prescription drugs and Pornographic DVDs, an increasing number of products are being labelled as dangerous and toxic, possibly un-necessarily, but it is claimed to be in the matter of public interest.
The FSA claims that these dairy foods that may require labels, is to increase awareness of their fatty nature in order to “slash Britain’s soaring levels of obesity and heart disease” but unless warning labels are places on every item that could cause these illnesses, it may not be enough. Does this mean the nutritional information on packaging is not useful after all? A change in lifestyle will most likely not occur through labels and shock tactics, but it somewhat relieving that at least some action is being taken.
Many have shunned the report as another means of being controlled by the Government, rather than a campaign for better health.
NannyKnowsBest said:
“It seems that this time next year we will have to endure yet another one of Nanny's remorseless campaigns warning us about the dangers of our everyday, simple pleasures. Nanny and the FSA need to remember that, unlike smoking, we really all do have to eat food everyday. You cannot, and should not, criminalise food and eating!”
Providing a similar message, Harpoon asked:
“What about warnings on every loaf of bread? On every bottle of Coke? How about putting pictures of gangrened limbs on the front of every fish & chip shop with a warning that consumption of batter fried in vegetable oil can eventually lead to heart disease and diabetes?”
The point is interesting and very much plausible. And like Chow.com, which points out other products with warning labels such as Cigarettes, Handguns, Liquor, Prescription drugs and Pornographic DVDs, an increasing number of products are being labelled as dangerous and toxic, possibly un-necessarily, but it is claimed to be in the matter of public interest.
The FSA claims that these dairy foods that may require labels, is to increase awareness of their fatty nature in order to “slash Britain’s soaring levels of obesity and heart disease” but unless warning labels are places on every item that could cause these illnesses, it may not be enough. Does this mean the nutritional information on packaging is not useful after all? A change in lifestyle will most likely not occur through labels and shock tactics, but it somewhat relieving that at least some action is being taken.
