Parents outraged as school bans sausage rolls, pork pies, fruit squash and even biscuits from children’s lunch boxes in healthy eating drive

by Guest Wed Sep 27, 2017 6:08 pm

First topic message reminder :

[*]Shirley Manor Primary Academy imposed policy to promote healthy eating

[*]It wants to ensure children eat well and to work with parents to achieve this

[*]Headteacher placed ban on pork pies and sausage rolls, sweets and fizzy drinks

[*]Parent claims policy led to sausage roll being taken from his son's packed lunch

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4924734/School-bans-sausage-rolls-pork-pies-fruit-squash.html#ixzz4ttrctxCR
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

by Guest Fri Sep 29, 2017 11:43 am

Thorin wrote:
Vicar of Dibley (vod) wrote:

Look at the reds on my posts tommy and nicko posts

I would say they were justified in giving a red to such a daft post, as are cakes and biscuits forbidden in Islam?

The policy, led by Government guidelines, says pupils are encouraged to show their packed lunches to a member of staff before and after they have eaten, especially in Foundation Stage and Key Stage 1 and states: 'Pork pies, sausage rolls, pepperoni sticks are high in salt and saturated fat. 'These items should not be included in a pupils packed lunchbox. If found a parent will be called.

'Desserts, cakes, biscuits and crisps: these foods are high in saturated fat, sugar and salt - too much of these foods can be harmful to health. If a pupil has more than one of these items in their lunchbox they will be removed by staff and returned to the child at the end of the day.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4924734/School-bans-sausage-rolls-pork-pies-fruit-squash.html#ixzz4u3LCmceY
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

you would think so Razz

by Guest Fri Sep 29, 2017 11:46 am

Vicar of Dibley (vod) wrote:
Thorin wrote:

I would say they were justified in giving a red to such a daft post, as are cakes and biscuits forbidden in Islam?

you would think so

Really at a loss to what you think is funny here?

by Guest Fri Sep 29, 2017 4:17 pm

Thorin wrote:
Vicar of Dibley (vod) wrote:

you would think so

Really at a loss to what you think is funny here?

giving a red for perfectly good posts - take a look at some of the reds i have received just because someone doesn't like me - its pathetic really because if you make a good post i give a green i don't give you reds because I'm not that childish if i disagree i will tell you - but its just pathetic the amount of reds given simply because a person isn't liked - its not the post they giving a red to its the poster and that is personal in my opinion .

by Guest Fri Sep 29, 2017 4:19 pm

Vicar of Dibley (vod) wrote:
Thorin wrote:

Really at a loss to what you think is funny here?

giving a red for perfectly good posts - take a look at some of the reds i have received just because someone doesn't like me - its pathetic really because if you make a good post i give a green i don't give you reds because I'm not that childish if i disagree i will tell you - but its just pathetic the amount of reds given simply because a person isn't liked - its not the post they giving a red to its the poster and that is personal in my opinion .

Who really gives a toss about reds?

Seriously?

I would agree if someone gives you a red, simple as they do not like you, then that would be wrong.

Have you not done the same yourself?

Honestly?

It should be based on the view made, which I made clear to sexy earlier on another thread.

Not simple from disliking a poster

by Guest Fri Sep 29, 2017 4:53 pm

Thorin wrote:
Vicar of Dibley (vod) wrote:

giving a red for perfectly good posts - take a look at some of the reds i have received just because someone doesn't like me - its pathetic really because if you make a good post i give a green i don't give you reds because I'm not that childish if i disagree i will tell you - but its just pathetic the amount of reds given simply because a person isn't liked - its not the post they giving a red to its the poster and that is personal in my opinion .

Who really gives a toss about reds?

Seriously?

I would agree if someone gives you a red, simple as they do not like you, then that would be wrong.

Have you not done the same yourself?

Honestly?

It should be based on the view made, which I made clear to sexy earlier on another thread.

Not simple from disliking a poster

I don't but some obviously do just look at my post above Razz

I like the colour red - but pink is my favourite - wonder if Ben would change the colour to pink instead of red ? lol!

by Guest Fri Sep 29, 2017 4:56 pm

Vicar of Dibley (vod) wrote:
Thorin wrote:

Who really gives a toss about reds?

Seriously?

I would agree if someone gives you a red, simple as they do not like you, then that would be wrong.

Have you not done the same yourself?

Honestly?

It should be based on the view made, which I made clear to sexy earlier on another thread.

Not simple from disliking a poster

I don't but some obviously do just look at my post above
I like the colour red - but pink is my favourite - wonder if Ben would change the colour to pink instead of red ?

Just be who you are Dibs

Good choice on changing to pink, ha ha

I think less people would use.

by Guest Fri Sep 29, 2017 4:59 pm

Thorin wrote:
Vicar of Dibley (vod) wrote:

I don't but some obviously do just look at my post above
I like the colour red - but pink is my favourite - wonder if Ben would change the colour to pink instead of red ?

Just be who you are Dibs

Good choice on changing to pink, ha ha

I think less people would use.

I try - but i believe I changed for the better when my dad passed - something did change i don't take things so seriously now - you know what i mean having lost loved ones .

by Tommy Monk Fri Sep 29, 2017 6:12 pm

eddie wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:and even the '5 a day' is low

in Australia it is 7 a day

and some are now pushing 10 a day (but that seems like a lot of total food volume)

According to Tommy we are in danger of poisoning the children with fruit and vegetables !

I said too much fruit/fruit juice is bad for children... causes liver disease...

Fructose tied to advanced liver disease in children and teens - Reuters
https://www.reuters.com/.../us-health-fructose-fattyliver-kids-idUSKBN1602AG‎
21 Feb 2017 ... NAFLD is the most common liver disease in western children, the ... but this type of sugar also occurs naturally in fruits, fruit juices and honey.

But this school seems to think a kid will be killed from eating a single pork pie or sausage roll...!!!

lol!

by Guest Fri Sep 29, 2017 6:13 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
eddie wrote:

According to Tommy we are in danger of poisoning the children with fruit and vegetables !

I said too much fruit/fruit juice is bad for children... causes liver disease...

Fructose tied to advanced liver disease in children and teens - Reuters
https://www.reuters.com/.../us-health-fructose-fattyliver-kids-idUSKBN1602AG‎
21 Feb 2017 ... NAFLD is the most common liver disease in western children, the ... but this type of sugar also occurs naturally in fruits, fruit juices and honey.

But this school seems to think a kid will be killed from eating a single pork pie or sausage roll...!!!

Our apologies, the content you requested cannot be located.
Please double-check the URL for proper spelling, browse our site index, or search Reuters.com using the Search box above.

Is that your link Tommy>?

by Tommy Monk Fri Sep 29, 2017 6:24 pm

gelico wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:Giving fruit to all the kids is only helping the ones who didn't normally get enough fruit... those who did would now be getting too much which is bad for them... and the others who already got too much would be getting even more which would be even worse for them...!
Tommy Monk wrote:

It's the same as making all kids wear an extra jumper because a couple of kids are a bit cold and could do with a jumper... now the cold kids are nicely warm... but the kids who were already nicely warm are too hot... and the kids who were too hot are now dangerously overheating/dehydrating because of that extra layer of well intended smothering...!!!

Would you also put all kids on a diet just cos a few were a bit fat and needed to slim down a bit...?

Just to be 'fair and equal' to all... and to be seen as treating them all 'the same'... all in the name of 'diversity'...!?

But that makes the average kids into skinny kids... and the skinny kids into anorexics with serious potential health consequences...!!!

Would you then force feed all the kids to try to help the skinny and anorexic ones back to normal sizes...?

But then end up with the newly assisted fat to normal kids back into fatties again...!?

How can anyone try to judge what might be a balanced diet or not for anyone else when they are only seeing one small part of the overall daily intake, and that being only 5 days out of 7...!?

I bet many parents are giving their kids a tasty snack filled packed lunch for a number of reasons...

1) Cos they know that kid likes it and will actually eat it instead of throwing it away etc...

2) The kid normally eats much more healthier stuff the majority of time so is bit of treat to help make them enjoy the idea of going to school a bit more than hating it... plus overall still constitutes balanced diet...

3) Is still much better than the muck they serve as school dinners!!! And cheaper!!!

no because the parents who put in an apple or banana or whatever in their kids lunch will know that wont they. if they also know that they are going to get at least some fruit also at school then they can balance that.

5 a day remember (fruit and vet). even if they kid then goes home and has carrots and cabbage with his meal, that's still only 4. it would not be too much at all.

i think there should be much education for kids - videos, stories involving bad diets and good diets and the differences it can make.

behaviour
moods, emotions
concentration, focus
that's apart from the biological aspect of the human body needing a good balance to function properly.

we need kids to be asking their parents for healthy foods - not relying on the schools to provide it

food is the body's fuel -

garbage in garbage out, as they say

A balanced diet is one that includes meat, salt and fat, as well as fruit and veg...

by Ben Reilly Fri Sep 29, 2017 6:30 pm

The part Tommy omitted from his quote reads in full:

Foods high in fructose include anything with high fructose corn syrup, like sweetened drinks, candy and many processed foods, but this type of sugar also occurs naturally in fruits, fruit juices and honey.

He's also glossing over important differences, such as -- a banana contains about 14 grams of sugar, while a standard-sized Snickers bar contains 27 grams.

by Tommy Monk Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:00 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:The part Tommy omitted from his quote reads in full:

Foods high in fructose include anything with high fructose corn syrup, like sweetened drinks, candy and many processed foods, but this type of sugar also occurs naturally in fruits, fruit juices and honey.

He's also glossing over important differences, such as -- a banana contains about 14 grams of sugar, while a standard-sized Snickers bar contains 27 grams.

https://paleoleap.com/10-reasons-why-fructose-is-bad/

Too much fruit is bad for you... and causes liver damage/disease in children... as well as other problems...

We need meats, salt and natural oils/fats as part of a healthy balanced diet...!!!

An occasional pork pie or sausage roll as part of a balanced diet never killed anyone from its nutritional contents...!!!

Laughing

by Tommy Monk Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:04 pm

10 reasons to limit fructose consumption

Fructose can only be metabolized by the liver and can’t be used for energy by your body’s cells.

It’s therefore not only completely useless for the body, but is also a toxin in high enough amount because the job of the liver is to get rid of it, mainly by transforming it into fat and sending that fat to our fat cells.

Excess fructose damages the liver and leads to insulin resistance in the liver as well as fatty liver disease. In fact, fructose has the same effects on the liver as alcohol (ethanol), which is already well known as a liver toxin.

Fructose reacts with proteins and polyunsaturated fats in our bodies 7 times more than glucose. This reaction creates AGEs (advanced glycation end-products), which are compounds that create oxidative damage in our cells and ultimately lead or contribute to inflammation and a host of chronic diseases.

Fructose increases uric acid production, which, in excess, can cause gout, kidney stones and precipitate or aggravate hypertension.

While most of your body’s cells can’t use fructose as a source of energy, the bacteria in your gut can and excess fructose can create gut flora imbalances, promote bacterial overgrowth and promote the growth of pathogenic bacteria.

In part because of the damage done to the liver, chronic excess fructose causes dyslipidemia, which means that your blood lipid markers tend to shift towards numbers that indicate a risk for heart disease.

Fructose rapidly causes leptin resistance. Leptin is a hormone that controls appetite and metabolism to maintain a normal weight. Leptin resistant people tend to gain fat and become obese really easily.

Excess fructose alone can cause all the problems associated with the metabolic syndrome (diabetes, obesity, heart disease).

Cancer cells thrive and proliferate very well with fructose as their energy source.

Edit for Didge - Already gave the link for this in my post above, in reply to Ben... but here it is again anyway...

https://paleoleap.com/10-reasons-why-fructose-is-bad/

by Guest Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:15 pm

lol where is the link Tommy, you evaded posting?

I have just seen it by researching.

Is it a site that promotes selling its alternatives by any chance?

by Tommy Monk Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:24 pm

https://www.paleohacks.com/fructose/what-vegetables-are-high-in-fructose-13975

https://www.food-intolerance-network.com/food-intolerances/fructose-malabsorption-intolerance/fructose-table-in-alphabetical-order.html

http://familywellnesshq.com/fructose-in-fruits-veggies-nuts-seeds-legumes-grains/

by Guest Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:25 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:https://www.paleohacks.com/fructose/what-vegetables-are-high-in-fructose-13975

https://www.food-intolerance-network.com/food-intolerances/fructose-malabsorption-intolerance/fructose-table-in-alphabetical-order.html

http://familywellnesshq.com/fructose-in-fruits-veggies-nuts-seeds-legumes-grains/

Hilarious

So nothing from something like the NHS then?

by Tommy Monk Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:46 pm

Thorin wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:https://www.paleohacks.com/fructose/what-vegetables-are-high-in-fructose-13975

https://www.food-intolerance-network.com/food-intolerances/fructose-malabsorption-intolerance/fructose-table-in-alphabetical-order.html

http://familywellnesshq.com/fructose-in-fruits-veggies-nuts-seeds-legumes-grains/

Hilarious

So nothing from something like the NHS then?

These tables were made using information provided by the USDA through their National Nutrient Database.

http://familywellnesshq.com/fructose-in-fruits-veggies-nuts-seeds-legumes-grains/

by Guest Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:48 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
Thorin wrote:

Hilarious

So nothing from something like the NHS then?

These tables were made using information provided by the USDA through their National Nutrient Database.

http://familywellnesshq.com/fructose-in-fruits-veggies-nuts-seeds-legumes-grains/

So you could not find anything on the NHS

Hilarious

Cool

by Tommy Monk Fri Sep 29, 2017 8:03 pm

Didn't look for anything from the NHS...

What is wrong with the USDA figures of fructose, as quoted in link above...?

And are you trying to say that fructose isn't bad for children...!?

by Guest Fri Sep 29, 2017 8:10 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

Didn't look for anything from the NHS...

What is wrong with the USDA figures of fructose, as quoted in link above...?

And are you trying to say that fructose isn't bad for children...!?

Find me something on the NHS Tommy?

I know for a fact you cannot

So are you going to go by the USDA which is not medical and more political or the NHS?

by Guest Fri Sep 29, 2017 8:26 pm

So I guess Tommy is stumped

Laughing

Night everyone

by Tommy Monk Fri Sep 29, 2017 8:27 pm

Thorin wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

Didn't look for anything from the NHS...

What is wrong with the USDA figures of fructose, as quoted in link above...?

And are you trying to say that fructose isn't bad for children...!?

Find me something on the NHS Tommy?

I know for a fact you cannot

So are you going to go by the USDA which is not medical and more political or the NHS?

Yawn...!

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) - NHS Choices
www.nhs.uk/conditions/fatty-liver-disease/Pages/Introduction.aspx‎
Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is the term for a range of ... diet high in fruits, vegetables, protein and carbohydrates, but low in fat, sugar and salt.

Researchers show excess fructose in diet linked to severe liver ...
www.uhs.nhs.uk/.../Researchers-show-excess-fructose-in-diet-linked-to-severe-liver-disease-in-children.aspx‎
28 Mar 2017 ... Researchers show excess fructose in diet linked to severe liver disease in children.

Doh...!!!

lol!

by Guest Fri Sep 29, 2017 8:34 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
Thorin wrote:

Find me something on the NHS Tommy?

I know for a fact you cannot

So are you going to go by the USDA which is not medical and more political or the NHS?

Yawn...!

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) - NHS Choices
www.nhs.uk/conditions/fatty-liver-disease/Pages/Introduction.aspx‎
Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is the term for a range of ... diet high in fruits, vegetables, protein and carbohydrates, but low in fat, sugar and salt.

Researchers show excess fructose in diet linked to severe liver ...
www.uhs.nhs.uk/.../Researchers-show-excess-fructose-in-diet-linked-to-severe-liver-disease-in-children.aspx‎
28 Mar 2017 ... Researchers show excess fructose in diet linked to severe liver disease in children.

Doh...!!!

PMSL

Did you actually read the links Tommy?

I know you have not

Laughing

I mean the second one comes up as an error.
The first one comes up as not found

Priceless

by Guest Fri Sep 29, 2017 8:39 pm

Do you know why I know Tommy has not read the links and is an idiot?

As they go off drinks and sugar in regards to fructose.

So does it mean actual fruit?

Hence why Tommy is a simpleton

Laughing

by Guest Fri Sep 29, 2017 8:42 pm

Night everyone

This really has been fun

Laughing

by Guest Fri Sep 29, 2017 8:44 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:The part Tommy omitted from his quote reads in full:

Foods high in fructose include anything with high fructose corn syrup, like sweetened drinks, candy and many processed foods, but this type of sugar also occurs naturally in fruits, fruit juices and honey.

He's also glossing over important differences, such as -- a banana contains about 14 grams of sugar, while a standard-sized Snickers bar contains 27 grams.[/quote

Ben your profile picture is cutting off the first part of your post can't read it lol

by Tommy Monk Fri Sep 29, 2017 8:53 pm

Worked for me...

http://www.uhs.nhs.uk/AboutTheTrust/Newsandpublications/Latestnews/2017/March-2017/Researchers-show-excess-fructose-in-diet-linked-to-severe-liver-disease-in-children.aspx

I have provided enough substantive information on this... try looking yourself if you want more... I have better things to do...

by Tommy Monk Fri Sep 29, 2017 8:56 pm

www.nhs.uk/conditions/fatty-liver-disease/Pages/Introduction.aspx

First link again...

by Guest Fri Sep 29, 2017 8:59 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:www.nhs.uk/conditions/fatty-liver-disease/Pages/Introduction.aspx

First link again...

Parents outraged as school bans sausage rolls, pork pies, fruit squash and even biscuits from children’s lunch boxes in healthy eating drive - Page 2 3489511464

So that is now a different link on liver desease

Not your original balls up claim, which says nothing on fruit

One moment

Parents outraged as school bans sausage rolls, pork pies, fruit squash and even biscuits from children’s lunch boxes in healthy eating drive - Page 2 3489511464

Sorry, can you again tell me about Fructose? Laughing

by Tommy Monk Fri Sep 29, 2017 10:42 pm

Same links dodge... just minus the _ at the end of them...!

Am I at risk of NAFLD?
You're at an increased risk of NAFLD if you:
are obese or overweight – particularly if you have a lot of fat around your waist (an "apple-like" body shape)
have type 2 diabetes
have high blood pressure
have high cholesterol
are over the age of 50
smoke
However, NAFLD has been diagnosed in people without any of these risk factors, including young children.

Too much fruit/fruit juice is bad for children as it can cause liver damage, rot teeth, and other problems...!

Come on dodge... instead of trying to pick holes in this statement of fact with your stupid waffle... just show me one credible link/article that shows otherwise...!!!???

I bet you can't!!!

Laughing

by Raggamuffin Sat Sep 30, 2017 12:16 am

I don't think it matters what people eat, as long as they don't become too fat. I'm sure that there was none of this nonsense about "balanced diets" before there were dieticians - people ate what they could find in order to live.

by eddie Sat Sep 30, 2017 12:38 am

I am at a complete and utter loss as to why certain peopke would be against children eating healthily.
Are you fucking brain dead?

Tommy your point is utter wank. Nobody ever died from eating too much fruit and do you know what? If a child doesn't want to eat the fruit because they feel "so poisoned" by it, then they don't have to. Because guess what? Teachers don't force feed the kids!

I have no clue why you are potentially saying that it's okay for lazy-arse parents to feed their children shit food. That's what you're saying, isn't it?

"I don't care about how healthy children are. I don't care that poor children may not get fruit at home. I don't care that some children need a good balanced diet"

That's what you're saying.

And Vod? The pork pie / sausage roll thing is sweet fuck all to do with Muslims.
Stop reading the Daily Mail.

by Guest Sat Sep 30, 2017 12:46 am

eddie wrote:I am at a complete and utter loss as to why certain peopke would be against children eating healthily.
Are you fucking brain dead?

baffled on this one as to why anyone would object to their kids getting a bit of goodness in them. even if i was 100% sure that my kids would eat the apple/banana i had packed, i wouldn't mind them getting a bit extra. i wouldnt mind if the teacher took away their chocolate if they deemed it necessary, they can still have it at home if they choose.

i still think that educating the kids at a very young age as to the huge benefits of healthy eating and the huge disadvantages of an unhealthy diet. we need kids to be positive about healthy eating and to be actively asking their parents for healthy options.

that way the state is less likely to have to get involved and we will have happier healthier more focused and active kids

well that's my view anyhow

by eddie Sat Sep 30, 2017 1:02 am

Spot on Gelico.

Why is Tommy acting like kids are dropping down dead of pineapple-poisoning and apple-induced-attacks?

I don't know if I'm missing some vital information here scratch

by Tommy Monk Sat Sep 30, 2017 1:34 am

Too much fruit is bad for you... and causes liver damage/disease in children... as well as other problems...

We need meats, salt and natural oils/fats as part of a healthy balanced diet...!!!

An occasional pork pie/sausage roll never killed anyone!!!

But school says all pork pies/sausage rolls will be removed and parent called if found... because of high fat and salt content...

'...Pork pies, sausage rolls, pepperoni sticks are high in salt and saturated fat. 'These items should not be included in a pupils packed lunchbox. If found a parent will be called...'

But kids are allowed to have other high fat/salt and sugar content items as long as they only have one of them in there, and it isn't pork...

'Desserts, cakes, biscuits and crisps: these foods are high in saturated fat, sugar and salt - too much of these foods can be harmful to health. If a pupil has more than one of these items in their lunchbox they will be removed by staff and returned to the child at the end of the day.'

No parent called, and given back to them at the end of the day, to probably be eaten on the way home...!

But that's ok as long as it's not a killer pork pie or sausage roll...

And no mention of kids being banned from bringing in salted peanuts... although not only high in salt and fat... but could really be a killer of some other child with a peanut allergy...!!!

But that's ok cos they don't contain any deadly pork!!!

by eddie Sat Sep 30, 2017 1:44 am

Oh Tommy. I'm going to put your mind at rest:

Children aren't going to die of eating too much fruit.
You are crazy.

by Tommy Monk Sat Sep 30, 2017 1:53 am

When have you ever heard of a kid dying from having a sausage roll...?

by Guest Sat Sep 30, 2017 2:02 am

Tommy Monk wrote:

When have you ever heard of a kid dying from having a sausage roll...?

When they die young as an adult, from heart desease.

by Tommy Monk Sat Sep 30, 2017 2:12 am

But kids are allowed to have other high fat/salt and sugar content items as long as they only have one of them in there, and it isn't pork...

'Desserts, cakes, biscuits and crisps: these foods are high in saturated fat, sugar and salt - too much of these foods can be harmful to health. If a pupil has more than one of these items in their lunchbox they will be removed by staff and returned to the child at the end of the day.'

by Guest Sat Sep 30, 2017 2:14 am

Tommy Monk wrote:But kids are allowed to have other high fat/salt and sugar content items as long as they only have one of them in there, and it isn't pork...

'Desserts, cakes, biscuits and crisps: these foods are high in saturated fat, sugar and salt - too much of these foods can be harmful to health. If a pupil has more than one of these items in their lunchbox they will be removed by staff and returned to the child at the end of the day.'

What do pork pies and sausage rolls have, that make them high in fat?

Take your time

by Tommy Monk Sat Sep 30, 2017 2:31 am

Thorin wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:But kids are allowed to have other high fat/salt and sugar content items as long as they only have one of them in there, and it isn't pork...

'Desserts, cakes, biscuits and crisps: these foods are high in saturated fat, sugar and salt - too much of these foods can be harmful to health. If a pupil has more than one of these items in their lunchbox they will be removed by staff and returned to the child at the end of the day.'

What do pork pies and sausage rolls have, that make them high in fat?

Take your time

There are plenty of other foods allowed with equally high or even higher fat/salt content, but not subject to restriction...

So you have no argument!!!

by Guest Sat Sep 30, 2017 2:32 am

Tommy Monk wrote:
Thorin wrote:

What do pork pies and sausage rolls have, that make them high in fat?

Take your time

There are plenty of other foods allowed with equally high or even higher fat/salt content, but not subject to restriction...

So you have no argument!!!

Really, what other foods high in fat and salt?

by Eilzel Sat Sep 30, 2017 2:40 am

Tommy Monk wrote:

When have you ever heard of a kid dying from having a sausage roll...?

If a kid has a sausage roll everyday that wouldn't be so healthy. It might also lead to bad eating habits where high fat food is the norm.

No one is going to suffer from eating 5-7 pieces of fruit a day. For it to bad, as you ludicrously claim, I image we'd be talking ridiculous quantities of like 10-20 apples a day or some such nonsense, which no one is suggesting anyway.

Your and Dibs aggression toward is clearly rooted in it being pork products that made the headline and your silly suspicions of ulterior motive.

by 'Wolfie Sat Sep 30, 2017 2:51 am

Thorin wrote:Do you know why I know Tommy has not read the links and is an idiot?

As they go off drinks and sugar in regards to fructose.

So does it mean actual fruit?

Hence why Tommy is a simpleton

Tommy and VoD are both total fruitloops...

Living proof that fuckwits like them, who obviously failed science at school and subsequently know less-than-zero about health and nutrition, shouldn't even be let near a keyboard during these discussions..

Already knew that VoD was a demented alternative health scamster and conspiracy nutter; but now Tommy's gibberish only goes to show that his nutritional understanding is on a par with his climate change nonsense.

********************************************

Idea

Re: 'Fructose'

I've written on here before about the bad science, populist nonsense and gutter press behind the "fructose scares" of the past couple of years..

Sugar company-sponsored research into the bad effects from factory-processed isomerised (high fructose) corn syrup crap going into so many soft drinks and processed items these days -- and then some unqualified American medico (i.e. not a nutritionist) than made the wrong-headed claim that fructose in general was bad, therefore people should eat less fruit and vegetables (!!!) -- and those idiotic claims then went viral on the internet, and at the same time being circulated by the populist press..

So now we have the idiotic and unqualified lies being peddled that naturally occuring fructose (as found in fruit, vegetables, honey..) should somehow be considered as somehow being as bad as the factory created high-fructose corn syrup being produced for the junk food industry...

Just to prove that "a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.." when it falls into the hands of a totally clueless nong like Tommy..

by Tommy Monk Sat Sep 30, 2017 2:52 am

Pork pie/sausage roll banned every day... not allowed even one day a year... but cheese pasty is ok, suet steak and kidney pudding is fine, any number of 'Greggs' pasties ok, any deep fried crap is ok...

Nothing saying kid can't eat a pack of butter with a tub of salt sprinkled on it...!!!

But watch out for the killer pork pies!!!

by Guest Sat Sep 30, 2017 2:55 am

Tommy Monk wrote:Pork pie/sausage roll banned every day... not allowed even one day a year... but cheese pasty is ok, suet steak and kidney pudding is fine, any number of 'Greggs' pasties ok, any deep fried crap is ok...

Nothing saying kid can't eat a pack of butter with a tub of salt sprinkled on it...!!!

But watch out for the killer pork pies!!!

Where does it say those you stated would also be allowed?

Yet again Tommy makes things up as he goes along

by Tommy Monk Sat Sep 30, 2017 3:03 am

I have already asked posters to show a list of suggested allowed healthy items...

But nobody has been able to provide any...

The article says high fat/salt/sugar items are allowed... just not pork based foods...

by Guest Sat Sep 30, 2017 3:06 am

Tommy Monk wrote:I have already asked posters to show a list of suggested allowed healthy items...

But nobody has been able to provide any...

The article says high fat/salt/sugar items are allowed... just not pork based foods...

Wrong, it does not ban all pork based food, that is a complete an utter lie

Where does it say high fat/salt/sugar items are allowed?

It never does, and like i say, you make up bullshit all the time

by Tommy Monk Sat Sep 30, 2017 3:16 am

Try reading posts and you would know...!!!

by Guest Sat Sep 30, 2017 3:17 am

Tommy Monk wrote:Try reading posts and you would know...!!!

I have and see nothing to validate your poor claims

by Sponsored content