Register

Yet another foodscare :-(

Chill out and chat with the foodie community or swap top tips.
NOTE: THE CURRENT CHATTERBOX IS IN THIS FORUM
User avatar
Posts: 4139
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:02 pm
Location: Stoke Newington, London

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Stokey Sue » Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:50 pm

Stokey Sue wrote:I reiterate my mantra
Eat [real] food. not too much. musty plants


I of course meant

Eat [real] food, not too much, mostly plants


Spell checker excelled itself ergot is genuinely nasty :lol:

User avatar
Posts: 3832
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 6:28 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby jeral » Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:50 pm

Glad I've not tried ergot then ;)

On the possible rosti item, Wikipedia tells me that traditional US hash browns were shredded spud (i.e rosti) and then later some included onion, so maybe it's a US full English?

I find some US meat programmes funny, i.e. the yikes or yuck factor if anything but beef is put before them. So I guess lamb qualifies as a food scare ;)

User avatar
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 6:16 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Petronius » Tue Jan 24, 2017 10:58 am

Mat's cartoon on front of Telegraph - two guys on a nuclear sub, 'This is the navy's latest nuclear sub, it's armed with overcooked roast potatoes.'

And I see some baby food, kettle crisps, Burt's crisps, Hovis, Fox's biscuits and Kenco coffee are also included - that's front page of the Daily Mail.

Looks like we ain't goin' to last long.

Site Admin
User avatar
Posts: 4191
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:56 pm
Location: Bushey

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Sakkarin » Tue Jan 24, 2017 1:05 pm

Just so long as they leave chocolate alone....

Hashed brown? More like trashed brown!

Anyway, ultimately all food is made out of stars, and they're pretty scary.

User avatar
Posts: 4139
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:02 pm
Location: Stoke Newington, London

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Stokey Sue » Tue Jan 24, 2017 1:43 pm

The FSA is of course the original source of the advice

Here it is from the horse's mouth; the "science bit " is right down the bottom, don't think I've ever seen the worlds possibly, probably, potentially and might used so often in one article

This means that acrylamide might contribute to your lifetime risk of developing cancer; although it is not possible to estimate how big this contribution may be


https://www.food.gov.uk/science/acrylamide-0

Having said which, the video at the top of the page does make the warning a little more reasonable, perhaps the FSA have shot themselves in the foot by dumbing down their message too much so that it is risible
From what they say, I do agree that the mechanism of carcinogenicity found in rodents is such that it is quite likely to apply to humans

Having said which, the "golden" roast potatoes they show would not IMO be edible - if you define edible as something you can eat without saying "yuk" and pulling a face (I feel the same about "well-done" burgers, obviously I am not long for this world)

Reckon I had my lifetime exposure to acrylamide in school dinners, those roasties that were the same colour as my polished brown Clarke's shoes, with an outer layer so tough it was all a 7 year old could do to stick a fork in them :lol:

User avatar
Posts: 4357
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: Clayton-le-Woods

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Renée » Fri Jan 27, 2017 12:15 am

.... and yet we're all living longer than ever, so let's not worry too much! Stress does a lot of physical damage too.

Site Admin
User avatar
Posts: 4191
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:56 pm
Location: Bushey

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Sakkarin » Sun Feb 19, 2017 12:25 am

Another horror story. I don't want to know that there is a 1 in 4 chance that my lunch is "contaminated with faecal matter". Could be the most nauseating sentence I've read this year.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... fail-tests

User avatar
Posts: 3832
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 6:28 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby jeral » Sun Feb 19, 2017 1:22 am

The most laughable sentence to me in the article is that no visibly contaminated meat reaches the public.

Now, let me think, when did I myself last spot a microscopic bacterium. I'll have to check my diary. Or I won't bother if once every three years is good enough.

♪ Food glorious food ♪

User avatar
Posts: 393
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Badger's Mate » Sun Feb 19, 2017 10:45 am

I'm reasonably confident there's a greater than 25% chance that my food is contaminated with faecal matter.

There's a lorry-load of it being delivered to the allotment next week... :thumbsup

Sure, we should take care to minimise contamination as far as practicable, but animals and ourselves are homes to bacteria, some of which could make us ill in certain circumstances. Disembowelling and cutting up animals carries a risk of cross-contamination. Always has, always will. However, we need to be aware of this at home too when preparing meat, poultry & eggs as well as risks from soil contamination of fruit and veg. Cooking, washing & peeling things properly is our best defence - additionally taking care to avoid contamination once they're cooked.

Still; get some journalists, add a celebrity scientist who hasn't been interviewed yet today plus if possible an organisation worried about its future funding, and column inches will flow.

User avatar
Posts: 4139
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:02 pm
Location: Stoke Newington, London

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Stokey Sue » Sun Feb 19, 2017 11:21 am

@Badger's Mate :thumbsup


Exactly, all part of the cycle

Faecal contamination of meat is probably historically normal, as long as it comes from the farm yard and isn't human, don't panic

Site Admin
User avatar
Posts: 4191
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:56 pm
Location: Bushey

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Sakkarin » Sun Feb 19, 2017 6:32 pm

I'm reasonably confident there's a greater than 25% chance that my food is contaminated with faecal matter.

There's a lorry-load of it being delivered to the allotment next week...
Good point well made.

I suspect that your produce is treated with a little more loving care and attention than the image of abattoir hell that the article conjures up, though.

But isn't the point of licensing abattoirs to minimise cross-contamination; and if standards are set, they have firstly be agreed, secondly to be monitored and thirdly to be enforced. If 25% of abattoirs are failing to meet the standard, is it that the tests are too stringent (or unrealistic) or that the abattoirs are failing?

Meanwhile you have prompted me to take more care when preparing my veg.

User avatar
Posts: 393
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Badger's Mate » Mon Feb 20, 2017 11:11 am

I wasn't intending to be flippant or belittle the efforts of food safety legislation, more highlight the inevitability of contamination. I doubt that 'no visible contamination' is the same as 'no contamination'. Whatever the rules, surely they don't sterilise the equipment for each cut, so cross-contamination is possible. Whilst contact between food and floor is best avoided anywhere it doesn't mean the operation is incompetent nor unfit for purpose. Every kitchen floor has had food on it. Consequently whilst the 25% with observed failings might be 'at risk of faecal contamination' so would the other 75% and indeed just about any uncooked foodstuff we encounter, for a variety of reasons.

E coli 0157 was mentioned; it does indeed kill people, and my recollection is that in the UK (Scotland iirc) people have died as a result of consuming cooked meat purchased from a butcher, where there is a very obvious risk of cross-contamination. I believe that legal action was taken against the butcher concerned.

I think I was reacting to the simplistic assumptions that 'this food is safe' versus 'this food is unsafe' based on a nonsensical criterion; that of possible contamination with something that most of our raw and unprocessed food is likely to be contaminated with. :thumbsup

User avatar
Posts: 4139
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:02 pm
Location: Stoke Newington, London

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Stokey Sue » Mon Feb 20, 2017 12:54 pm

Badger's Mate wrote:E coli 0157 was mentioned; it does indeed kill people, and my recollection is that in the UK (Scotland iirc) people have died as a result of consuming cooked meat purchased from a butcher, where there is a very obvious risk of cross-contamination. I believe that legal action was taken against the butcher concerned.


There's a real problem with cross contamination form raw it cooked in butchers it seems, it doesn't happen that often that I know of, but when it does it can be nasty

The last typhoid outbreak I am aware of in UK that was not related to travelling, happened in Hampshire ca 1970 and was due to corned beef being cut with a knife previously used for imported (and infected) lamb

But the thing to remember from this is that they had probably been stocking and handling infected lamb for months, not just an isolated carcase, and nobody caught typhoid directly from the lamb, the normal hand washing protected the batchers, and normal cooking protected the consumers, typhoid bacillus is delicate and quite easily killed off. iirc e. coli is a tiny bit tougher, but not much

Site Admin
User avatar
Posts: 4191
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:56 pm
Location: Bushey

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Sakkarin » Fri Apr 21, 2017 11:53 am

Oh for heaven's sake, this has to be the biggest turnaround yet. And after all that fuss about replacing the sugar in Ribena with artificial sweeteners.

I have to say I'd rather die podgy with heart failure than through stroke and dementia. Although some would say the dementia's already set in...

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... tudy-finds

User avatar
Posts: 4139
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:02 pm
Location: Stoke Newington, London

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Stokey Sue » Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:32 pm

I'll have to start drinking the gin without the tonic then - apart from premium brands like Fevertree, most contain both sugar and sweeteners :D

Fevertree naturally low is sweetened with fructose so not a good option

Interestingly some French soft drinks are flashed "pur sucre" as they don't trust the chemicals

User avatar
Posts: 907
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:06 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby strictlysalsaclare » Fri Apr 21, 2017 5:43 pm

Sakkarin wrote:Oh for heaven's sake, this has to be the biggest turnaround yet. And after all that fuss about replacing the sugar in Ribena with artificial sweeteners.

I have to say I'd rather die podgy with heart failure than through stroke and dementia. Although some would say the dementia's already set in...

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... tudy-finds


Thanks for the sharing the article Sakkarin. I can't help thinking that not enough focus was on what the study participants were eating rather than drinking. I've watched enough American and Canadian diner type programmes to become well aware how how much meat they eat in one meal. During a recent job interview as a care home for dementia sufferers, I was informed that Alzheimer's is caused by a large amount of amino acids building up in the brain which resulted in blocking the path that leads to short term memory capabilities. So my reckoning is that the same thing could cause strokes? what are your views Stokey Sue?

Luckily I don't drink that many fizzy drinks these days so I don't think the findings will affect me that much in any case :crossed. My gout also tells me when to back off the proteins for a few days as well!

User avatar
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 6:16 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Petronius » Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:21 pm

A friend frequently sends me information on healthy eating, based solely on American 'nutritionists', hardly relevant as far as I'm concerned.

Does this put things in context?

From an interesting nutritional study, please don't ask which, thanks!

1. The Japanese eat very little fat and suffer fewer heart attacks than we British.

2. The Mexicans eat a lot of fat and suffer fewer heart attacks than we British.

3. The Chinese drink very little red wine and suffer fewer heart attacks than we British.

4. The Italians drink a lot of red wine and suffer fewer heart attacks than we British.

5. The Germans drink a lot of beer and eat lots of sausages and fats and suffer fewer heart attacks than we British.

Conclusion:

Eat and drink what you like, speaking English is apparently what kills you.

:wave

User avatar
Posts: 4139
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:02 pm
Location: Stoke Newington, London

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Stokey Sue » Fri Apr 21, 2017 8:24 pm

So far it's one study
strictlysalsaclare wrote: I can't help thinking that not enough focus was on what the study participants were eating rather than drinking. I've watched enough American and Canadian diner type programmes to become well aware how how much meat they eat in one meal.

The bad news is that this is a properly done study, part of the excellent Framingham data collection programme.

They compared people eating diets that were very similar apart from only the artificial sweeteners.

After adjustments for age, sex, education (for analysis of dementia), calorific intake, diet quality, physical activity and smoking, higher recent and higher cumulative intake of artificially sweetened soft drinks were associated with an increased risk of ischaemic stroke, all-cause dementia and Alzheimer’s disease dementia,” the co-authors write.

However it's so far only one study of 4300 people, which is not in this context a huge number

strictlysalsaclare wrote:During a recent job interview as a care home for dementia sufferers, I was informed that Alzheimer's is caused by a large amount of amino acids building up in the brain which resulted in blocking the path that leads to short term memory capabilities. So my reckoning is that the same thing could cause strokes? what are your views Stokey Sue?


I'm actually surprised that stroke and Alzheimer's would be linked to the same cause

In Alzheimer's you get a build of "stuff" (beta amyloid plaque) in among the nerve cells, which stops them working. This is made up of amino acids

But stroke is related to the build up of cholesterol, fat and junk in the arteries, so different "stuff" in a different place. This stops the blood flow

So no obvious connection :?

Both kinds of stuff are called plaque but that's just what pathologists call stuff not made of cells that shouldn't be there (dental plaque too for example)

User avatar
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 6:16 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Petronius » Mon Apr 24, 2017 5:05 pm

First I admit I'm out of my depth with a lot of the statistics in this study, but 2.96% difference doesn't look like three times to me.

Second, newspapers reports are often sensational. On this occasion the Guardian is reasonably accurate because the headline uses the word 'suggests', the Daily Mail is quite clear, 'Diet drinks TRIPLE your risk of stroke and dementia … '

Despite my stats weakness some statements seem contradictory. The Abstract concludes, “Artificially sweetened soft drink consumption was associated with a higher risk of stroke and dementia.”

But in the body of the actual report it says,

“...the observational nature of our study precludes us from inferring causal links between artificially sweetened beverage consumption and the risks of stroke and dementia." (P7 Stroke Journal May 2017)

Framington data collection does have world wide credibility but it is following (since 1971) a group of people who lived/are living a life style that may be quite different from those of us in the UK. Strictly's statement resonates with me.

I've watched enough American and Canadian diner type programmes to become well aware how how much meat they eat in one meal.


We eat 84kg of meat a year, US 120kg each per year.

Saturday's Guardian said, "The problem with the latest study is that it did not find the same dementia risk from standard sugary drinks = despite the known association between sugar and stroke as well as obesity and diabetes."

User avatar
Posts: 4139
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:02 pm
Location: Stoke Newington, London

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Stokey Sue » Mon Apr 24, 2017 6:11 pm

There are always problems with observational / longitudinal / case control studies

I think "suggests" is right, it "suggest" there's enough to be worth a further look

What I am not sure about is how they control for non-beverage sources of artificial sweeteners, while drinks are a big part I suspect most of what I consume is in pickles, flavoured yogurts etc. Mrs Elswood's dill pickles used to contain so much saccharin I found them inedible, they left a funny aftertaste

And there is also the data quality, I participate in a similar UK study, and I'm not 100% impressed by some of the questionnaires. But sheer numbers do help

The Framingham cohort is quite a middle class bunch, probably less obese and more "European" in life style than many Americans from what I've seen in documentary films, certainly more vegetarians and teetotallers than the average. The American Nurses Study is much more typical I suspect

PreviousNext

Return to Food Chat & Chatterbox

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests