Junk Food Warning Labels; Good Idea, Bad Idea? [General]
2012 Oct 24
I like that it is on juice boxes in particular because so many people think that juice is something healthy to give to their kids, when in fact it is not. It is concentrated sugar and not much different from gatorade or soda pop when it comes right down to it.
In general I suppor this, as well as taxing junk food at a higher rate.
In general I suppor this, as well as taxing junk food at a higher rate.
2012 Oct 24
I think a greater emphasis on eating healthy would do more good. Who decides what is junk food? What is healthy what is not? I can't wait for them to setup the government dept for this. Is bottled water ok? What about diet pop? Same nutritional value ... maybe diet pop has more sodium. I'm not advocating diet pop, just when people draw lines in the sand it usually get ridiculous. Look the US where pizza and french fries are considered vegetables on the school meal plans to avoid recent "healthy" legislation.
*EDIT* even worse - I just considered what they'd do to bacon. The bacongeddon is upon us.
*EDIT* even worse - I just considered what they'd do to bacon. The bacongeddon is upon us.
2012 Oct 24
I just think it's a slippery slope, as sourdough mentions 'who' decides what junk food is & what isn't? Families need to educate their kids on the value of a good meal. When I was a little guy Mom & Dad made it clear that Pop, chips & candy bars were 'treats' not dinner.
Maybe helping families with the high cost of dairy/poultry & egg groceries in this country; we pay roughly double what our American friends pay & about 35-40% higher than any European countries.
If we eliminated the Dairy board & tariffs on foreign farms prices would plummet overnight because of competition.
This is protectionism at its worst & it affects every family & every restaurant, ever wonder why dinner is so much less expensive in the States?
Write your MP & MPP today!
Terry
Gosh, sorry I sort of fell off the rails there...
Maybe helping families with the high cost of dairy/poultry & egg groceries in this country; we pay roughly double what our American friends pay & about 35-40% higher than any European countries.
If we eliminated the Dairy board & tariffs on foreign farms prices would plummet overnight because of competition.
This is protectionism at its worst & it affects every family & every restaurant, ever wonder why dinner is so much less expensive in the States?
Write your MP & MPP today!
Terry
Gosh, sorry I sort of fell off the rails there...
2012 Oct 24
There is so much wrong with this idea from the distasteful pictures adorning the food products that I pay for to the question of moderation in some choices. And where is choice when our politicians are allowing unelected health people to dictate public policy. That is just wrong. As for the science? Distasteful warning labels have not quantitatively proven that they deter consumption.
2012 Oct 25
I don't agree with the graphic photos of diseased body parts...but I do think a label with a written warning would be effective for some. It's harder to ignore the possible negative health effects when it's written right there on the bag.
I can see myself being shamed enough by these labels to stop me from buying some junk foods...at first. Who knows how long that effect would last?
I agree with some of Terry's thoughts though...who decides what is junk food? It's fairly straightforward when it comes to packaged and processed junk foods (chips, candy, cookies etc)...but what about things like butter, sour cream, cheese, bacon etc....are those going to get the labels as well?
I think more nutrition education in general is required for the public. These labels may make people think anything homemade is far healthier than prepackaged foods... but a batch of grandma's homemade chocolate chip cookies are likely going to have the same effects on your health and waistline as a bag of Chips Ahoy. Of course, you won't be ingesting as many preservatives or chemicals...but the sugar and fat will still pack on the pounds and possibly lead to diabetes, heart disease etc.
I can see myself being shamed enough by these labels to stop me from buying some junk foods...at first. Who knows how long that effect would last?
I agree with some of Terry's thoughts though...who decides what is junk food? It's fairly straightforward when it comes to packaged and processed junk foods (chips, candy, cookies etc)...but what about things like butter, sour cream, cheese, bacon etc....are those going to get the labels as well?
I think more nutrition education in general is required for the public. These labels may make people think anything homemade is far healthier than prepackaged foods... but a batch of grandma's homemade chocolate chip cookies are likely going to have the same effects on your health and waistline as a bag of Chips Ahoy. Of course, you won't be ingesting as many preservatives or chemicals...but the sugar and fat will still pack on the pounds and possibly lead to diabetes, heart disease etc.
2012 Oct 25
Disgusting pictures of diseased body parts may be taking it a bit too far, but I think that was the idea - do this to the extreme, then when the labeling is stepped back a notch is doesn't look so bad.
I fully agree that education is the way to go with this. And I believe that the labels can be made to be an educational tool (who says all education has to happen at school!)
If the plan is the help curb the rate of diabetes, then why not put "education label's" on items that contain High Fructose Corn Syrup and other ingredients that contribute to problems that our health care system is faced with? eg "Did you know that overconsumption of High Fructose Corn Syrup is the main contributor to ___________...."
I do agree with Johnny English in that the government has to step in.
The results from smoking has had a HUGE drain on the Health Care System, and now they are seeing a similar pattern with Obesity.
I fully agree that education is the way to go with this. And I believe that the labels can be made to be an educational tool (who says all education has to happen at school!)
If the plan is the help curb the rate of diabetes, then why not put "education label's" on items that contain High Fructose Corn Syrup and other ingredients that contribute to problems that our health care system is faced with? eg "Did you know that overconsumption of High Fructose Corn Syrup is the main contributor to ___________...."
I do agree with Johnny English in that the government has to step in.
The results from smoking has had a HUGE drain on the Health Care System, and now they are seeing a similar pattern with Obesity.
2012 Oct 25
What Ken V ? Base policy on scientific evidence? If only we could convince our Feds of that too :-)
2012 Oct 25
A few years ago I dated a smoker. He would occasionally give me money to pick up a carton of cigarettes so when I went to the store I would always ask for the carton with the most graphic images. I don't smoke and I was always on an endless cruisade to persuade him to quit. He told me I was fighting a losing battle - it doesn't matter how graphic the images were he had no intentions of quitting. I think labelling junk food with graphic images would have the same effect.
I also agree with the points made above - where do you draw the line? Does this also mean cutting out bacon, cream, cheese, etc.? They are all highly fatty foods that would have detrimental health effects if eaten in large quantities. Two or three times a year I cave in and get a small bag of chips to have with the sandwich I brought for lunch but this would not have the same health effect if I ate a family size bag of chips every day. Everything in moderation as they say.
For the last year I have been purchasing a good food box from my local community health care centre. During the summer they had a display in the lobby with various beverages lined up on a table (a sports drink, a bottle of pop, a can of juice, etc.) and a number of sugar packets piled in front of each item indicating how much sugar was in each drink. I heard a number of people commenting they didn't realize how much sugar was in their drinks especially the juice. We always think of juice as a healthier option than, say, pop but it's surprising how much sugar is in it.
I also have a beef about the government having to get involved with people's poor eating habits. Healthy eating should start at home and become a lifestyle. People should know better is what I think I'm getting at but I also know I'm fighting a losing battle-;)
I also agree with the points made above - where do you draw the line? Does this also mean cutting out bacon, cream, cheese, etc.? They are all highly fatty foods that would have detrimental health effects if eaten in large quantities. Two or three times a year I cave in and get a small bag of chips to have with the sandwich I brought for lunch but this would not have the same health effect if I ate a family size bag of chips every day. Everything in moderation as they say.
For the last year I have been purchasing a good food box from my local community health care centre. During the summer they had a display in the lobby with various beverages lined up on a table (a sports drink, a bottle of pop, a can of juice, etc.) and a number of sugar packets piled in front of each item indicating how much sugar was in each drink. I heard a number of people commenting they didn't realize how much sugar was in their drinks especially the juice. We always think of juice as a healthier option than, say, pop but it's surprising how much sugar is in it.
I also have a beef about the government having to get involved with people's poor eating habits. Healthy eating should start at home and become a lifestyle. People should know better is what I think I'm getting at but I also know I'm fighting a losing battle-;)
2012 Oct 25
Well this is all anecdotal - what does the research show? Show me the numbers.
Here is an anecdote - my father was a heavy chainsmoker for most of his life until about 40 years ago when I was quite young. He saw a TV show that showed the lungs of a heavy smoker. It terrified him and he quit smoking immediately and never had another puff til his dying day last year.
So clearly those sorts of things DO work.
Show me the numbers
Here is an anecdote - my father was a heavy chainsmoker for most of his life until about 40 years ago when I was quite young. He saw a TV show that showed the lungs of a heavy smoker. It terrified him and he quit smoking immediately and never had another puff til his dying day last year.
So clearly those sorts of things DO work.
Show me the numbers
2012 Oct 25
Pasta Lover
What really concerns me is many seem to think its fine to be overweight they take pride in eating junk each day what i find sad is my local store i go to the amount of young kids that are not just overweight but are obese and what do they do they go for the food that has the highest level of fat/sugar.
What really concerns me is many seem to think its fine to be overweight they take pride in eating junk each day what i find sad is my local store i go to the amount of young kids that are not just overweight but are obese and what do they do they go for the food that has the highest level of fat/sugar.
2012 Oct 25
zymurgist I actually meant that story to be anecdotal since I am just contributing to the conversation. I'm not a scientist so I don't have any numbers to provide...
reidjr2012 Agreed! I also think part of the problem is that junk foods are usually cheaper than the healthy stuff so if someone had the choice between that $1 bag of chips or a $5 fruit salad it's the cheaper item they will reach for. As for the kids I agree totally with your comments. I used to work in a couple of centrally located schools. The kids used to often go to the local shopping mall food court, the nearby chip wagon, or the local burger chain for lunch. The kids that did bring lunch to school had alot of highly processed foods in their lunch bags. I worked with older kids - old enough to make their own lunches but not doing the grocery shopping yet. So if mom stocks up on fruit slaps, jello puddings and the like then that's what will go in their lunch bags because that's all they have to pick from.
reidjr2012 Agreed! I also think part of the problem is that junk foods are usually cheaper than the healthy stuff so if someone had the choice between that $1 bag of chips or a $5 fruit salad it's the cheaper item they will reach for. As for the kids I agree totally with your comments. I used to work in a couple of centrally located schools. The kids used to often go to the local shopping mall food court, the nearby chip wagon, or the local burger chain for lunch. The kids that did bring lunch to school had alot of highly processed foods in their lunch bags. I worked with older kids - old enough to make their own lunches but not doing the grocery shopping yet. So if mom stocks up on fruit slaps, jello puddings and the like then that's what will go in their lunch bags because that's all they have to pick from.
2012 Oct 25
As for cheaper in some cases sure but many cases its not you can buy a frozen pizza for $5 or a can of beans and hot dogs for $5 even with milk the store i go to had a sale a few weeks back had low fat chocolate and reg chocolate milk both for 99 cents it was not the low fat one that sold well it was the reg one even jello there is reg one or low sugar its the reg one that sells well.
2012 Oct 25
Pasta Lover - I like that point that you make when you say that if children do not have any other options then they are stuck with what is available to them.
I'm sure everyone can agree that children like to read. Maybe not all kids like to read novels, but they read signs, flyers, packaging etc.
If all of their prepackaged "junk" has a warning label, they will probably read it out of curiosity. When they start questioning their parents about the label and the effects of eating such "junk" then maybe it will help the parents open their eyes and make a change.
I'm sure everyone can agree that children like to read. Maybe not all kids like to read novels, but they read signs, flyers, packaging etc.
If all of their prepackaged "junk" has a warning label, they will probably read it out of curiosity. When they start questioning their parents about the label and the effects of eating such "junk" then maybe it will help the parents open their eyes and make a change.
2012 Oct 31
Hi all - I'm just skimming the posts here but it occurred to me that maybe symbols could be used to indicate the level of sugar or sodium to make it easier and quicker for people to compare. Like a scale of 1-4 or 1-5 symbols like sugar packets or salt packets, etc. Like what Pasta Lover said about the display at a community centre. "grade" the items in terms of level of sodium or sugar per serving. this would help kids make good healthy choices. current labels take a lot of effort to read and compare. I do it but I can't imagine my husband or children would.
2012 Oct 31
flexie It just occurred to me Loblaws introduced a guiding star program last summer: guidingstars.com I believe products are given a debit and credit system so foods high in omega 3's, fibre, etc. are credited with more stars and products high in sodium, fats, etc. are debited stars. Apparently Loblaws is doing this to assist the customer in selecting healthy food choices instead of having to plow through all the information listed on the labels.
2012 Oct 31
Pasta Lover, the guiding star system has been in place for a while in Hannaford stores in the USA. Obviously things like fresh fruit and vegetables get three stars, but where I find it helpful is when you're comparing things like cereal or granola bars (not that I'm a huge fan of either one). There can be a difference between brands, and it's an easy way of checking.
2012 Oct 31
A friend of mine quit drinking, smoking, and chasing women. He was very healthy until the day he killed himself.
Thank you, thank you very much. Don't forget to tip your waitress.
Two words: make-work. Okay, one word hyphenated. Don't believe they care for your health. They want your money, is all.
People find ways to compensate. Junk food is prohibitively expensive now with the new tax? Honey, make some pancakes and French toast twice this week instead of once. No more onesies and twosies of May West (too expnesive); let's get the Costco industrial crate instead to save moolah.
Zym's vote for taxes on junk food reminds me of the woman who voted for Mitterrand. 'I voted for 'im, because 'e promised to make ze rich pay. Now, I realize I am among ze rich.' In other words, you'll be surprised what starts passing for junk food once this is implemented. Then tax on fatty foods, then carbs, then red meat, desserts, fucken tic tacs...
It's all about the money, money, money...
Thank you, thank you very much. Don't forget to tip your waitress.
Two words: make-work. Okay, one word hyphenated. Don't believe they care for your health. They want your money, is all.
People find ways to compensate. Junk food is prohibitively expensive now with the new tax? Honey, make some pancakes and French toast twice this week instead of once. No more onesies and twosies of May West (too expnesive); let's get the Costco industrial crate instead to save moolah.
Zym's vote for taxes on junk food reminds me of the woman who voted for Mitterrand. 'I voted for 'im, because 'e promised to make ze rich pay. Now, I realize I am among ze rich.' In other words, you'll be surprised what starts passing for junk food once this is implemented. Then tax on fatty foods, then carbs, then red meat, desserts, fucken tic tacs...
It's all about the money, money, money...
2012 Nov 2
Slippery slope what will be next? LOL! Smaller government is better government.
www.torontosun.com
video.cnews.canoe.ca
www.torontosun.com
video.cnews.canoe.ca
2012 Nov 2
I like that 2nd one Ken V , and I also wonder why so few people are willing to think for themselves these days. I find it especially ironic in fact given that so many Sun News viewers are so happy to let Sun News do their thinking for them.
2012 Nov 2
Have to agree with you Zym. Wow did I say that out loud. Like your posted pick. That is one thing the government should be doing is disaster relief. On the other hand they really should not be telling me what to eat. That is the big problem people are relying on the government and media to tell them how to think and live. I do not agree with a lot of what Sun news has to say but it sure refreshing to get more than one side of a story.
2012 Nov 2
If you expect people to think for themselves, it doesn't strike me as evil for a retailer to offer a simpler way for consumers to assess the relative "healthiness" of products in their store. The star system is not like the "Heart Smart" check that is bought and paid for by food manufacturers. As someone who DOES read labels, I appreciate being able to do a quicker reality check on processed food items once in a while.
2012 Nov 6
Junk food warning labels is boneheaded. One can argue for more information on the packaging, but warnings are dumb. I agree with sourdough that emphasizing healthy, and not unhealthy is the way to go. I'm not sure we need to fire up the 'less government', or 'more government' crowd to solve this one...
2012 Nov 14
The French just imposed a "Nutella Tax" in hopes to cut down obesity
www2.macleans.ca
Really they should be imposing a grain tax though ... carbs are the ones that get you
www2.macleans.ca
Really they should be imposing a grain tax though ... carbs are the ones that get you
2012 Nov 14
Zym - one tablespoon of Nutella contains half the total carbs as the slice of plain white bread you're putting it on, but five and a half times the amount of sugars. The carb count of the bread is much higher but it's the form in which it's delivered that really matters, and processed sugar is much, much worse for you than the complex carbs and dietary fibre that makes up a lot of the bread. Then factor in that the Nutella contains one third the amount of protein and six times the amount of fat that the bread does and it's a pretty simple process to see that, um, you're wrong.
2012 Nov 14
You appear to get yourself confused on a regular basis with this, zym.
Let me just cut straight to the nub of this here - do you believe that a product that is high in dietary fibre and low in processed sugar is less healthy than a product that is low in fibre and high in processed sugar if the total carbohydrate content is higher?
Let me just cut straight to the nub of this here - do you believe that a product that is high in dietary fibre and low in processed sugar is less healthy than a product that is low in fibre and high in processed sugar if the total carbohydrate content is higher?
2012 Nov 14
What I believe is irrelevant - what is true is what matters.
I used to believe that high fat was bad and carbs did not matter. I no longer believe that.
I currently want to believe that bread is better for me than nutella simply because the bread is less processed, however I've read enough current material to give me some doubts on that.
And then there is the matter of the bread too - because when I say or read "bread", I imagine the kind that I eat - whole grain and artisan. However, most people eating nutella it will be wonder bread - arguably every bit as much processed as the nutella.
More to your question - if there are far more carbs in the bread than in the nutella, I am starting to believe it is worse for me. I'm not quite there yet, but almost. This brings in a whole lot of modern thought on diet including what is currently being uncovered on modern strains of wheat (a la "Wheat Belly") And the fact that I'm not quite there has more to do with me than with the truth of the matter.
I used to believe that high fat was bad and carbs did not matter. I no longer believe that.
I currently want to believe that bread is better for me than nutella simply because the bread is less processed, however I've read enough current material to give me some doubts on that.
And then there is the matter of the bread too - because when I say or read "bread", I imagine the kind that I eat - whole grain and artisan. However, most people eating nutella it will be wonder bread - arguably every bit as much processed as the nutella.
More to your question - if there are far more carbs in the bread than in the nutella, I am starting to believe it is worse for me. I'm not quite there yet, but almost. This brings in a whole lot of modern thought on diet including what is currently being uncovered on modern strains of wheat (a la "Wheat Belly") And the fact that I'm not quite there has more to do with me than with the truth of the matter.
2012 Nov 14
about fat, I'd say what's important to remember is quality of fat.
I have no stats or studies to quote on this, but I think real honest to goodness fats from animals or plants (plants that don't need major processing or factories to produce it) are going to be easier and better for your body to digest.
Not saying you should eat pounds of the stuff everyday, but quality fat is hands down always better for you than highly processed or fake fats. I'd say the same for grains, sugars, and just about any other food I can think of.
Thinking of the original thread here, I think it would be grand of the government had a way to label food that helped prevent health issues in both adults and children, but I just can't see it happening. Our government, bless 'em, can do lots of things (like the search and rescue example above) but sometimes they just make messes of things that they shouldn't be tampering with in the first place.
As someone mentioned above, what about eggs benedict? Healthy? Or on the 'bad' food list? I'd wager a meal of eggs benedict made from all the goodies on my farm would be far more nutrient dense and better for you that some crappy Kellogs cereal bar with a side of factory produced yogurt from confinement cows. But I'll bet the government would see it otherwise.
I've heard of the book Wheat Belly, but not read it yet. Think the government would begin to label the 'bad' breads with the modern wheats and grains that make us fat and sick? I doubt it.
Just my two cents. Hope that's not too much 'anti-government gibberish' lol!
I have no stats or studies to quote on this, but I think real honest to goodness fats from animals or plants (plants that don't need major processing or factories to produce it) are going to be easier and better for your body to digest.
Not saying you should eat pounds of the stuff everyday, but quality fat is hands down always better for you than highly processed or fake fats. I'd say the same for grains, sugars, and just about any other food I can think of.
Thinking of the original thread here, I think it would be grand of the government had a way to label food that helped prevent health issues in both adults and children, but I just can't see it happening. Our government, bless 'em, can do lots of things (like the search and rescue example above) but sometimes they just make messes of things that they shouldn't be tampering with in the first place.
As someone mentioned above, what about eggs benedict? Healthy? Or on the 'bad' food list? I'd wager a meal of eggs benedict made from all the goodies on my farm would be far more nutrient dense and better for you that some crappy Kellogs cereal bar with a side of factory produced yogurt from confinement cows. But I'll bet the government would see it otherwise.
I've heard of the book Wheat Belly, but not read it yet. Think the government would begin to label the 'bad' breads with the modern wheats and grains that make us fat and sick? I doubt it.
Just my two cents. Hope that's not too much 'anti-government gibberish' lol!
2012 Nov 14
Zym, you're at least on the right lines there. There's no clear "this diet is good and this one is not" because it's all based upon your particular lifestyle. Athletes have an extremely high carb intake and are very careful about the amount of fat they consume. A non athlete would probably be fairly unhealthy on their diet.
However, my main point about Nutella was processed sugar. There isn't a single sensible diet plan you can show me that would consider processed sugars to be a positive and worthwhile element. Whatever your views on the bread (and I used figures for a single slice of white bread, so yer fancypants poseur bread will probably be a lot better in terms of lower sugar, lower salt and higher dietary fibre levels), the Nutella is a lot worse.
I don't much give a toss what other people choose to eat or how unhealthy they choose to get, but I do have an issue with people then trying to justify it by claiming that science now shows that half a pack of butter and a six pack of organic beer is actually really good for them.
However, my main point about Nutella was processed sugar. There isn't a single sensible diet plan you can show me that would consider processed sugars to be a positive and worthwhile element. Whatever your views on the bread (and I used figures for a single slice of white bread, so yer fancypants poseur bread will probably be a lot better in terms of lower sugar, lower salt and higher dietary fibre levels), the Nutella is a lot worse.
I don't much give a toss what other people choose to eat or how unhealthy they choose to get, but I do have an issue with people then trying to justify it by claiming that science now shows that half a pack of butter and a six pack of organic beer is actually really good for them.
2012 Nov 14
Yes, but it's how your body uses it. The starch in white flour is very different to the refined sugars used in all sorts of products. If you have high calorific requirement it really doesn't matter that much - with my training regime I'm currently burning around 3000 calories a day, so I really don't care what form they come in as my body doesn't get the chance to store the calories. Someone with half of that daily caloric requirement needs to be a little bit more careful how they get them, because if they don't get burned they'll get stored. That's why the bread is much better than the Nutella, the energy is released more slowly and hence the need to refuel doesn't arrive again so quickly. Of course, with an unrefined flour that's even more true.
2012 Nov 14
If y'all want to brain up on healthy food read:
Eat, Drink, and Be Healthy: The Harvard Medical School Guide to Healthy Eating
OG was right on....she used a the term nutritionally dense. Potatoes are nutritionally void, so is most bread we eat. In fact one of the key bits of criteria is how much processing our meal has undergone before it reaches our plate.
Considering I ate wings for dinner from my local pub I should not preach!
But after loosing 70+ pounds and hitting 8% BF I have lots to say on the subject. The more steps your meal has to go through, the worse it is for you. One cannot live on red meat alone although one could live on a vegetarian diet with plenty of lentils.
Am confident if you grew it, raised it, hunted it or fished it you would be far better off that the prepackaged food from Farm Boy.Fat is not bad, pick the right fats. An ideal meal has a balance between protein, carbs and fat. You need all 3 in a meal.
We all need vitamins and minerals for body chemistry but do you want the government mandating them in a loaf of bread or do you want to eat a nice home made Cajun meat pie loaded with celery, onions, sweet potato and pasture pork?
Makes me hungry thinking about it for dinner tomorrow.
Eat, Drink, and Be Healthy: The Harvard Medical School Guide to Healthy Eating
OG was right on....she used a the term nutritionally dense. Potatoes are nutritionally void, so is most bread we eat. In fact one of the key bits of criteria is how much processing our meal has undergone before it reaches our plate.
Considering I ate wings for dinner from my local pub I should not preach!
But after loosing 70+ pounds and hitting 8% BF I have lots to say on the subject. The more steps your meal has to go through, the worse it is for you. One cannot live on red meat alone although one could live on a vegetarian diet with plenty of lentils.
Am confident if you grew it, raised it, hunted it or fished it you would be far better off that the prepackaged food from Farm Boy.Fat is not bad, pick the right fats. An ideal meal has a balance between protein, carbs and fat. You need all 3 in a meal.
We all need vitamins and minerals for body chemistry but do you want the government mandating them in a loaf of bread or do you want to eat a nice home made Cajun meat pie loaded with celery, onions, sweet potato and pasture pork?
Makes me hungry thinking about it for dinner tomorrow.
2013 Mar 7
More on how the (snack or processed) food industry bamboozles it's customers .... with science.
From CBC News:
www.cbc.ca
and again with another take from CBC Radio ... The Current:
www.cbc.ca
(I think CBC is quite more-ish for me.)
also from www.democracynow.org:
www.democracynow.org
Michael Moss, investigative reporter with The New York Times and author of the new book, Salt Sugar Fat: How the Food Giants Hooked Us. His cover story, "The Extraordinary Science of Addictive Junk Food," led last weekend’s Times Sunday magazine.
Is all this just to sell Michael Moss' new book "Salt Sugar Fat: How the Food Giants Hooked Us" ???
From CBC News:
www.cbc.ca
and again with another take from CBC Radio ... The Current:
www.cbc.ca
(I think CBC is quite more-ish for me.)
also from www.democracynow.org:
www.democracynow.org
Michael Moss, investigative reporter with The New York Times and author of the new book, Salt Sugar Fat: How the Food Giants Hooked Us. His cover story, "The Extraordinary Science of Addictive Junk Food," led last weekend’s Times Sunday magazine.
Is all this just to sell Michael Moss' new book "Salt Sugar Fat: How the Food Giants Hooked Us" ???
FoodMonger
How do you feel about this?