It was a different kind of Today programme on Radio 4 this morning, in which contributors spoke Truth about the Abuse of Power

It was good to hear a different kind of Today programme on Radio 4 this morning, with much of its content selected and commissioned by PJ Harvey MBE, of whom I am ashamed to say I had never previously heard. I would very inadequately summarise it as an account of harm done by the lies, misinformation, and other abuses of power by many governments and rulers in the world, notably including our own. We learned, for instance, something of the way our arms industry, with the compliance of our Government and the assistance of members of the Royal Family(!), supplies weapons to dictators and the like, enabling them to subdue civil unrest. We heard of the legal word games that permit states, including our own, to torture people legally, by giving the torture a different name. 

We heard the media itself indicted in the global conspiracy of the powerful against the powerless masses of the poor. (Noam Chomsky and John Pilger and others have told us about this many times before.) We heard much about "War and the Pity of War". We heard from individuals who are suffering from the physical and psychological trauma and indignities inflicted on them as a result of Wars. We heard of the overwhelming greed associated with power.

I wasn't taking notes, and I missed much of the programme, so I do not know whether it included the malign power of the Drug Companies, the ghastly cruelty of much of the Farming Industry, the Food Industry's assaults on our health, and the corruption that put profits before truth in so much of what purports to be Science.

Were I to become a guest editor on the Today programme, I would seek to draw attention the word games devised for the NHS to abuse its power/unaccountability in order carry out profitable state torture and murder of many elderly and other vulnerable patients. - You remember, don't you, the so-called Liverpool Care Pathway? - I believe they are intending to continue using the LCP under a new name...

I would seek to draw attention to the prevalence of pharmaceutical drugs which deplete the body's vitamins and minerals, food processing which adulterates and transforms healthy fats to unhealthy fats (see also http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/17/health/a-lifelong-fight-against-trans-fat.html?_r=5&), adds chemical toxins and minimises nutrients to produce processed pretendfood/crap/junk, instead of good, nourishing food; food processing that kills off good bacteria, distorts our body's mineral and fat metabolisms, interferes with our hormones and with our gut activity, and thus makes us chronically ill, as well as ill-informed. 

The programme would seek to explain how so much of the human race, and the animals and crops that feed us, are now become grotesque distortions of their healthier ancestors. - And who knows what horrors still await us when Genetically Modified Organisms have had longer in which to wreak their havoc?

I've been watching BBC2's The Men Who Made Us Fat

I watched Part 1 of The Men Who Made Us Fat on BBC2 last week. I must say it's a refreshing change to have some evidence-supported information about important causes of the dramatic rise in the incidence and severity of obesity and obesity-related ill-health instead of the usual incorrect propaganda.

In Part 1 it was explained how sugar is a major contributor to obesity and how since the second world war the USA's food industry has been ladling sugar, sugar and more sugar, into its processed junk food products, be they sweet or savoury. And another even more-dangerously obesogenic sugar, high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is also added to their food junk and their ghastly soft drinks. This corn product use is massively profitable for America's corn farmers and massively damaging to the health and weight of American citizens. - Especially when it is coupled with the ill-conceived (blame Ancel Keys) misinformation that low-fat food is a good way to lose weight (it isn't and it doesn't work) and that low fat intake is good for our health (it isn't).

So those of us who were paying attention learned that although America purports to be a democracy and proclaims, "Government of the people, by the people, for the people," these days it's more like, "Government of the people, by the farm industry's political stooges, for the farm industry's profits, and to Hell with the well-being of the 'American people'".

On Thursday night I watched Part 2, in which it was explained that not content with changing America's food to obesogenic mass-manufactured highly-addictive crap, Big Business perverted civilised eating to a fast feeding process, with fast food outlets serving food fast to customers, who ate it fast (it didn't take too much chewing), sloshing it down with over-sweetened soft drinks, having queued for 'counter-service', so much speedier than table service. And furthermore, they increased portion sizes to ludicrous levels. - I found the gargantuan size of the drinks especially horrifying! 

Well America's citizens are now mostly pretty huge - well huge, certainly, but not so pretty... And they are so big that they almost look like another species. - And what does the food industry suggest as a remedy for this gross obesity problem caused in large part by the food industry itself? - Well, blame it on the victims of course! Like rapists used to do. - The victims need to eat less fat and take more exercise! (NOT)

But it is not lack of exercise that causes obesity, so taking more exercise does not and will not reduce obesity. Obesity causes inactivity, not the other way round, as I explain in my Mensa article. And as Professor Terry Wilkin of the Peninsula College of Medicine & Dentistry. explained in Thursday's programme. 

Professor Wilkin led a pioneering study into childhood weight gain and found that children do not gain weight because of inactivity and do not lose weight by taking exercise. The study had been commissioned by the government of the time, but the findings were unwelcome, so they were buried and funding stopped, and successive governments, few among them scientists, chose to heed the falsehoods of the food industry, i.e. cut down on fat, especially saturated fat, and take more exercise! - Oh dear! - Do you think it's too much like America's plight? - Government of the people, by Big Business interests, for the profits of the Food Industry and its mates? - What do you reckon? - We've got the Dept of Health being advised about how to tackle obesity by the food and drinks businesses who promote obesity. - Looks like we're gonna be getting more and more obese with all this crap food and crap advice, doesn't it?

And when are they going to get on to SALT? and anti-depressants? and other prescription drugs that cause weight gain?

Should sugar be taxed to reduce health problems like obesity, high blood pressure and diabetes?

Should sugar be taxed to reduce health problems like obesity, high blood pressure and diabetes? BBC News reports today that "Sugar is as damaging and addictive as alcohol or tobacco and should be regulated, claim US health experts. According to a University of California team, new policies such as taxes are needed to control soaring consumption of sugar and sweeteners. Prof Robert Lustig argues in the journal Nature for major shifts in public policy." And this is countered by the Industry body the Food and Drink Federation saying that "demonising" any particular foods is unhelpful. - Well that's true inasmuch as it's unhelpful to the Food and Drink Federation and its profits!

The Food and Drink Federation like to sell addictive food and drink to their customers. Addicts return to buy again the products to which they are addicted - to buy them over and over and over again. - I heard the subject of whether sugar should be taxed - because its heavy consumption is causing widespread damage to people's health - being discussed in the last minutes of Radio 4's PM programme today. I think the interviewer was Eddie Mair.

There was Prof Robert Lustig on the phone from America, supplying the voice of reason, and suggesting a heavy tax on sugar stuffs in order to produce a really significant reduction in consumption. And there was a guy from the Food and Drink Federation spouting his ritual rhetoric about sugar not being the baddie - many factors are associated with non-infectious diseases, not just sugar. Think of insufficient exercise, sedentary life-styles, etc. - We need a balanced diet, more exercise, etc etc. - There's no evidence that sugar causes disease... Burble Burble. Burble Burble.

Actually I wondered whether this robotic guy was deaf? - Prof Lustig (Eddie Mair kept calling him Dr Lustig) was explaining that there is actually a great deal of evidence that sugar is definitely being consumed in too high quantities, that it is addictive, that it is actually toxic in that it causes serious metabolic changes to the body - fatty liver, metabolic syndrome, insulin resistance, diabetes, obesity, etc. - Prof Lustig knows his sugary science (listen to his lecture The Bitter Truth) and he knows his sugary statistics, but his unheeding interlocutor continued burbling about no evidence to support the taxation of sugar, and repeating that it's a matter of a balanced diet, no new evidence, burble, burble, burble. - I think I can hazard his idea of a balanced diet - the sort of balanced diet the Food Industry might find profitable to supply the products for: a Sugar-crammed, intensely sweet cereal breakfast with additive-laden fruit drink, balanced by a salt-laden sandwich for lunch and an over-salted processed ready meal for tea, with snacks throughout the day of biscuits (high in sugar and salt), crisps and maybe a token apple (high in pesticides) added to impress the 'healthy food' brigade.

Artificial transfats damage our sewers as well as our health!

Artificial transfats damage our sewers as well as our health! Read this excellent Guardian blog article.

Artificial transfats are such an insidious poison. They shouldn't be there in food, of course. They are not necessary for our bodies; they are damaging, of course, and the cumulative damage results in degenerative disease. This degeneration causes personal suffering and public expense in dealing with the avoidable illnesses that result. It's interesting to read in this article how as well as clogging up our blood vessels, these toxins also clog up our sewers and cause nuisance and expense there too.

Are you wondering why poisons are added to food products like biscuits, cakes, fast foods, processed meals, takeaways, etc? It's because transfats increase the shelf life of these products, and thereby add to the profits of the Food Industry. And the government (and, indeed previous administrations too) favours food company profits over public health. - It's the same with salt added to manufactured food, but that's another shameful story.

Reducing salt intake is a global health priority say epidemiologists

The UN must make reducing salt intake a global health priority, say researchers, as reported here by BBC News. "Writing in the British Medical Journal they say a 15% cut in consumption could save 8.5 million lives around the world over the next decade. The report says practical steps to reduce consumption should be drawn up without delay. If voluntary measures do not work, the food industry should be compelled to cut salt levels, it says." (my emphasis)

Well you know, that's actually cheery, as I see it. - The message of these epidemiologists is clear, stark and honest; they're not temporising. They're not pretending that the food industry are doing any meaningful voluntary reducing of salt levels. - And if you look at that BMJ article itself I think you will be even more impressed by the unequivocal tone of their call to action.

And I'm impressed by the fact that they see the UN as the agency to address on this matter of the urgent need to reduce salt intake. Normally you'd assume that in a matter like this the World Health Organisation would be the agency approached. - Maybe these researchers have as low opinion of the WHO as I have, particularly when you cast your mind back to the scandalous shenanigans over the Swine Flu. See HERE, HERE, and HERE if you need reminders that health advisers we should be able to trust are far too often in the pockets of the pharmaceuticals industry. Bribery is the name of that game - or the euphemistic 'conflict of interest.'

As you must realise, I have for years been advising readers of my posts to eat less salt and salty food, and my advice is as clear and uncompromising and honest as the message of these researchers, so I welcome this report. And remember, when Morton Satin, a vice president at the industry body, the Salt Institute, rejects the report out of hand and says, "The salt reduction agenda has become an urban myth - far more based upon populist ideology than objective science," his words are dictated by his position as a spokesman/apologist for the Salt Industry.

The Food Programme Radio 4: Transfats are poisonous. Why is the Food Industry still allowed to put them into our food?

The transfats to which I refer are the artificial transfats that are added to food products, mainly in order to increase their shelf-life. In other words, they increase the profits of the food manufacturers. Artificial transfats are not a natural constituent of any food whatsoever. The body does not have a natural way to metabolise them. It cannot use them as food, because they are not food. They are toxic to the body. Toxic is a synonym for poisonous. For most consumers it is next door to impossible to know whether some of the foods they buy contain any of these poisons or not, and if they do contain any of these poisons, how much? and how much harm will they do? They damage your body and your brain. They contribute to your risk of stroke, heart disease, memory problems, dementia and more.

On the Food Programme on Radio 4 this week "Sheila Dillon investigates the issue of trans-fats in our food, and asks whether a voluntary agreement by the food industry to eliminate them by the end of the year is enough to prevent the kind of health problems associated with a diet heavy in industrial cooking fats." - I can tell you the answer to that question right now: it isn't...)o: - No way! No! It is not!

If you listen to this programme on iPlayer you will hear Sheila Dillon ask pertinent questions and you will hear slithering responses just as oily and toxic as the transfat content the apologists seek to defend. And do not be fooled by the talk of small quantities and of small percentages of calories from these transfats. They are very harmful even in very small quantities. And the damage they do is cumulative. - Remember the old adage: poison comes in small packages!

If you eat shop-bought biscuits, cakes, bread, pizzas, margarine, vegetable shortening, ice-cream, puddings & pudding mixes, ready-made pies, some confectionery - this list is not exhaustive - then you will almost certainly have eaten artificial transfats. Some groups of people are more reliant on processed foods than others are, and some groups of people, e.g. people whose health is already compromised by degenerative disease, are more vulnerable to the harm that artificial transfats cause in the body.

Unfortunately, the groups most at risk from these transfats are of minor importance to UK legislators. Otherwise there would be a BAN on adding these poisons to our food. Adding these poisons to our food swells the profits of the Food Industry, i.e. big business. Food Manufacturers are the groups whose welfare is important to our legislators. Their welfare is paramount.

That processed foods so often contain artificial transfats is yet another reason why, as far as you can, you would do well to avoid processed food, and eat fresh food that you eat raw, or that you cook yourself.

It is a truth universally acknowledged that the voluntary pledges of industry

It is a truth universally acknowledged that the voluntary pledges of industry, big business and multinationals, are unlikely to improve Public Health by the tiniest fraction of the smallest scrap of the littlest bit of an iota, and are negotiated by Governments, Health Ministers and Departments of Health, as the cynical tribute hypocrisy pays to virtue. Who but shysters would appoint the Food and Drinks Industry as advisers to the Department of Health with the aim of tackling the growing health problem of child obesity?

BBC News reports that England is 'healthier than the US'

BBC News reports that England is 'healthier than the US' and my subjectively selective quote...(o: from the article is: "The researchers say: "Why health status differs so dramatically in these two countries, which share much in terms of history and culture, is an unresolved puzzle."

Well, Stone me! as Tony Hancock might have said if he were still alive. - It's not a puzzle! - It's a no-brainer! - The US takes more junk medication than as yet the Brits do, and the US Food Industry and the US Agribusiness and GM/BioTech bullyboys ensure that Americans largely eat toxic, adulterated, additive-drenched, over-salted, HFCS-loaded, nutrition-lite crap instead of real food. How can the US possibly be healthy when most people's bodies and brains are having to contend with that poisonous combo continually assaulting them?

Seriously, why are we even considering more junk additives in processed food, instead of simply banning the salt?

Seriously, why is anyone even considering more junk additives in processed food, instead of simply banning the salt? See today's Sunday Telegraph article. - Do you really fancy a bit of dental plaque(!) mixed in with your ready-meal? your cornflakes? your slice of toast? - Of course you don't!

The Food Standards Agency should stop playing about, and so should the Dept of Health and Andrew Lansley. They should all get it made illegal to add salt to processed food and thereby do what they are purportedly paid for, i.e. protect the health of UK citizens against the self-serving interests of the Food Industry. - And while they're about it, ban the addition of transfats too! - Come on, Mr Lansley! - Show us what you're made of! - Prove that you are not influenced against such a ban because of a conflict of interest that favours food manufacturers.

Eat less salt and lower your risk of high blood pressure, stroke, heart attacks, kidney disease and many more health problems

Reduce your salt consumption and lower your risk of high blood pressure, stroke, heart attacks, kidney disease and many more health problems.

"The American Heart Association today issued a call to action for the public, health professionals, the food industry and the government to intensify efforts to reduce the amount of sodium (salt) Americans consume daily." See physorg.com article.

"Recently, the American Heart Association lowered their recommendation to no more than 1500 mg of sodium daily for the general public, after a report from the Centers for Disease Control found that a majority of the American population either have high blood pressure or are at high risk for developing it."

See Sodium in Foods

See Groups Vulnerable to Salt.

See Obesity and the Salt Connection.

Did you know that taking prescription drugs is a major cause of salt sensitivity? - Read about Amitriptyline and other antidepressants. And read about Prescribed Steroids, HRT and other Drugs.

Too much salt in ready-made Sunday lunches

See BBC News report. This is another instance of Consensus Action on Salt and Health (CASH) homing in on a particular example of salty food and highlighting the worst excesses of the Food Industy's responsibility for that high salt content.

These groups of people are vulnerable to salt. They need to minimise their salt intake.

The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse

I reckon The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse have increased in number. I see them now as:

The Pharmaceutical Industry (Big Pharma)
The Food Industry and Agribusiness
Oil and Petrochemicals Industry
Corporate and International Lawyers
Arms Dealers
Corrupt Bankers
The Diet Industry

plus their stable-boys: - The EU, the Health Industry, corrupt politicians, the Press, the media...

Who would you add to that list?

Food Inc.

If you eat food - and I guess you do - Food Inc. is one film you really should see. I've just been watching it and I reckon I'll watch it again 'cos there's a lot in it - a lot of stuff you won' t know if you've not seen it, 'cos the food industry likes to keep a lot of facts secret in case those facts put you off buying their products.

I can't remotely do justice to this brave film. Here is how Wikipedia's entry about it begins: "Food, Inc. is a 2008 American documentary film directed by Emmy Award-winning filmmaker Robert Kenner.^[2] The film examines corporate farming in the United States, concluding that agribusiness produces food that is unhealthy in a way that is abusive of animals and environmentally harmful."

Please watch this film! Please do what you can to avert the harm that the food industry is perpetrating on the health and happiness of consumers, workers, animals and the environment.

My grandfather lived into his nineties

My grandfather lived into his nineties, when he died in bed of pneumonia. He never went to a doctor or dentist in his life and he still had all his teeth when he died. Good food was his physician: three meals a day. He grew some vegetables and had a few raspberry and gooseberry bushes in the back garden, and he ate plenty of animal fat: none of this foolish modern practice of cutting off all visible fat from the meat on one's plate. My grandparents reached and passed their diamond wedding anniversary. Over 60 happy years together.

I believe that two of the major causes of ill-health today in the developed world are 1) the adverse side-effects of pharmaceutical drugs, which are wantonly over-prescribed, often in high dose, by a medical profession too influenced by drugs reps, too ill-informed about drug side-effects, and too little interested in the therapeutic possibilities of improved nutrition, and 2) the dire effects of processed foods, produced by a food industry intent on profits and to hell with the damage done to the physical, mental and emotional well-being of their customers.

Lindsey Davies, new president of the UK Faculty of Public Health, is calling for urgent action to reduce salt and transfat content in food

See Denis Campbell's article in the Guardian. It's good that Lindsey Davies is speaking so unambiguously. "The food industry should be about producing food, and food is a basic requirement of a healthy, productive life and wellbeing. Adding things to food that reduce health and wellbeing, such as transfats or too much salt, strikes me as profoundly irresponsible," is clear. The powers that be should have been saying this long ago. The dangers of high sodium intake have long been known but not acted upon.

Both Labour and Tory administrations allowed the food companies free rein to ladle more and more salt into their products, thus damaging irrevocably the health of innocent salt-sensitive purchasers. Let's look at what successive governments with their successive Department of Health personnel have done about recommendations made in regard to salt, high consumption of which is the cause of a huge proportion of the ill-health and disability of the nation:

The Department of Health's Committee on Medical Aspects of Food and Nutrition Policy (COMA) was disbanded in March 2000.

The following information was taken on July 11th 2006 from http://www.actiononsalt.org.uk/recommendations.htm but since then appears to have been removed from the internet. I find it surprising that such interesting information has been removed. It's a good job I copied and pasted it when I did. The website itself http://www.actiononsalt.org.uk/ is still on the internet.

Recommendations made about salt

"COMA

1 Nutritional Aspects of Cardiovascular Disease 1994 This COMA report considered the evidence for a causal relationship between the consumption of sodium and both the level of blood pressure and the rise in blood pressure with age. A statement in the report said it recommended: "A reduction in the average intake of common salt (sodium chloride) by the adult population from the current level of about 9g/day to about 6g/day. There needs to be a gradual reduction in the amount of sodium from salt added to processed food and food manufacturers, caterers, and individuals should explore and grasp the opportunity for reducing the sodium content of foods and meals." The Chief Medical Officer at that time, accepted all the recommendations in this COMA report except for the recommendation to reduce salt. The reason for this is not clear but is believed to be pressure from industry. Department of Health (1994), "Nutritional Aspects of Cardiovascular Disease", HMSO, London.

2 Dietary Reference Values 1991 This COMA report considered that: "Current sodium intakes are needlessly high and we caution against any trend towards increased intakes". It set its recommended intake for salt, as with all the other recommended intakes for nutrients, on the basis of the balance of risks and benefits, which might practically be expected to occur. The RNI for a particular population group is defined as the amount of the nutrient that is enough or more than enough for about 97% of the people in this group. The Reference Nutrient Intake (RNI) for sodium for adults was set at 1600 mg/day. This is equivalent to approximately 4g of salt, if all the sodium was present in the diet as sodium chloride. This is considerably less than the present intake of 9-12g. Department of Health (1991), "Dietary Reference values for food, energy and nutrients for the United Kingdom", HMSO, London."

I wonder why The Chief Medical Officer in the early '90s apparently did nothing to implement the recommendation of a maximum of 4g of salt a day, and apparently gave greater consideration to the desires of the food industry than to the health of the nation, and I wonder how many deaths and how much terrible suffering he was, therefore, personally responsible for? And I wonder why his successors in the post were so tardy in taking effective steps to give warnings about salt consumption? - Political considerations? - What though, could be more important in this matter than the health of the members of public - the electorate - the tax-payers, in fact?

I consider the failure to put pressure on food manufacturers and caterers to reduce the sodium content of foods and meals until recent times to be a dereliction of duty of successive political administrations and health departments. - I remember buying McCance and Widdowson's 'Composition of Foods' in the late '90s, at considerable cost, in order to discover how much sodium there was in food. There was no way consumers could get this information from the pack. - The people of this country have been very ill-served in this matter.

See sodium in food.

Obesity and the Salt Connection.

Groups vulnerable to salt.

Andrew Lansley is in the wrong job. He is putting the profits of the Food Industry above the health of UK citizens.

See this Daily Mail article in which you will read that although trans fats are believed to cause 7,000 premature deaths a year, Andrew Lansley, the Health Secretary, opposes a ban on their use as an additive in biscuits, etc - an additive that prolongs the shelf life of the product, but endangers the life of the person who eats it. And this, even though NICE recommends banning trans fats.

This is a Health Secretary who has gone over to the Dark Side. Let's have him out of the Government PDQ. And let's have that ban on trans fats ASAP. Read more about trans fats here: www.tfx.org.uk.

eu seems a misnomer to me.

eu- (Greek: good, well, normal; happy, pleasing; used as a prefix)

I loathe and despise just about everything that emanates from the EU, starting with the fact that it is a kleptocracy, rather than merely a bureaucracy. Continuing with the fact that its rules/laws are made to benefit nefarious multinationals (including the pharmaceutical industry, the processed food industry, the healthcare industry, the arms trade, the petrochemicals industry) rather than the EU taxpayers, whom the EU ostensibly serves. And among many other huge flaws, the EU is a non-elected, self-perpetuating, parasitical, unaccountable, corrupt, amoral monster. - IMHO/DYOR, of course.

UK Faculty of Public Health wants ban on trans-fats in UK food

UK Faculty of Public Health wants ban on trans-fats in UK food. So do I! Read BBC News article, where you will see that "an editorial in the British Medical Journal said 7,000 deaths a year could be prevented by a 1% reduction in consumption" of trans-fats.

Trans-fats - solid fats found in margarines, biscuits, pastries, cakes and fast food - have no nutritional value and are banned in some countries. You'd think that the Food Standards Agency would be in favour of banning trans-fats, wouldn't you? But you'd be wrong.

Trans-fats are used to extend shelf life of products and so are useful to the food industry, and the FSA pays far too much heed to the voice of the food industry, and so is unconcerned about those thousands of deaths that could be prevented and the even greater numbers of people suffering avoidable ill-health for want of a ban on trans-fats in food.

Do yourself and your family's health a big favour by avoiding fast food and using butter rather than margarine.

Would targeting depression early prove helpful? - Not in my opinion.

BBC News reports that Ministers are saying that targeting depression early is the key to prevention. I can't say that I agree that that will prove successful. In my opinion continually talking about depression and referring to it as though it is a real disease, and as though there is agreement about what it constitutes, tends to lead vulnerable people to focus on the idea that that may be what their problem is. But depression is only a putative disease.

My personal opinion is that the best measures to take to reduce 'Depression', whatever anybody means by that slippery word, is to curb the use of the word in a medical context and concentrate instead on enabling people to eat good nutritious meals.

Dieting or fasting or so-called 'detoxing' or any other form of inadequate nutrition is a major cause of depression, tiredness, sad thoughts and all that syndrome of negativity. Unfortunately, the increasing incidence of obesity is accompanied by more and more pressure on overweight people to "eat less and exercise more". If this advice is taken by overweight people, especially if they are young and sensitive, then they will not lose weight. They will more likely gain weight because inadequate intake of food/calories/nutrients leads to increased fluid retention, which is actually the cause of excess weight gain and obesity. Then being more and more overweight makes most people feel more and more depressed and frustrated.

The government would be well advised to get the food industry drastically to lower the amount of salt/sodium it adds to its products: to do this not by exhortation and by slow increments, but to use the full power of the law. It is added salt that is the main cause of child obesity and is the means by which older fat people who are sensitive to salt usually keep gaining weight. The food industry has harmed the health of the nation for long enough. Their leaders should be taken to court and punished if they do not desist from what is effectively, poisoning, however slowly, the majority of their customers.

The other HUGE problem is the ever-growing numbers of drugs being prescribed. Many drugs, including cortico-steroids and HRT, anti-psychotics, NSAIDS, and, ironically, anti-depressants CAUSE salt sensitivity/weight gain/obesity/depression and a host of other health problems and this proliferation of reckless, inappropriate prescribing should be curbed, again, BY LAW.

Good nutrition is the best and safest medicine.

Lose weight, reduce your risk of most cancers, high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes, heart disease, heart attack, vascular dementia, stroke, osteopenia, osteoporosis, hypercholesterolaemia, depression, liver and kidney problems, boost your lung function and improve your health in many other ways without drugs, hunger or expense by eating less salt! - Try it!

See my website www.wildeaboutsteroids.co.uk
The site does not sell anything and has no banners or sponsors or adverts - just helpful information.

Read my Mensa article on Obesity and the Salt Connection

Sodium in foods

http://www.wildeaboutsteroids.co.uk/story.html - my 'political' page

http://www.wildeaboutsteroids.co.uk/socio.html - social and economic considerations

amitriptyline

prescribed steroids and HRT

See advice for pregnant mothers

Children and Obesity

Associated health conditions

and FAT RETENTION

Higher levels of salt in 'free from' food products than in standard lines.

BBC News reports that "People choosing wheat or dairy-free products could be risking their heart health because many are loaded with salt."

Consensus Action on Salt and Health has been surveying 71 own-label "free from" products from five leading supermarkets in the UK and found that over half contained more salt than the retailer's standard version of the product. Some had six times as much.

An example is "Sainsbury's Free From Jaffa Cakes have 0.67g of salt per 100g, compared with 0.1g of salt per 100g in standard Sainsbury's Jaffa Cakes.

This is more than six times the salt level of the standard version."

This really is shameful. All of the supermarkets know that salt content needs to be lowered in order to reduce the great harm that salty food is doing to most of the population. Actually to raise the salt content for people already suffering ill-health and seeking safe food is disgraceful.

The Food Standards Agency sadly is mostly words and little action. They should be enforcing less harmful salt levels on food manufacturers not waiting for the food producers to move at the speed of a snail on tranquillisers to reduce salt content. - And certainly not countenancing manufacturers who actually increase the salt content!

I heard Professor Jack Winkler, Professor of Nutrition Policy, London Metropolitan University, on the radio early this morning. - Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe he was complacently envisaging a twenty year wait for the food industry to lower the salt content to less dangerously high levels! - What is this? - Nutrition professor content to have yet another generation of fat, unfit consumers, plagued by chronic illnesses like heart disease, type 2 diabetes, depression, cancer and all the rest of the obesity co-morbidities, just for want of telling the truth about salt and insisting to the food industry that their profits cannot be deemed to be more important than the nation's health.

I fear there are too many vested interests involved in this destruction of the health of the nation (and other nations). Big Pharma's malign influence inflates the already reckless tendency of medics to prescribe more and more drugs, too many of which drugs cause salt sensitivity (i.e. fluid retention/weight gain). The salt sensitivity coupled with the food industry having ladled salt into their products for many years now and produced many customers 'addicted' to salty food, will literally be the death of millions of innocent consumers, who very sadly will have endured years of ill-health, unhappiness and insults before that release.

Lose weight, reduce your risk of most cancers, high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes, heart disease, heart attack, vascular dementia, stroke, osteopenia, osteoporosis, hypercholesterolaemia, depression, liver damage and kidney problems, and improve your health in many other ways without drugs, hunger or expense by eating less salt! - Try it! - You will feel so much better! See my website www.wildeaboutsteroids.co.uk

The site does not sell anything and has no banners or sponsors or adverts - just helpful information.

Read my Mensa article on Obesity and the Salt Connection

Vulnerable groups

Sodium in foods

See also FAT RETENTION

advice for pregnant mothers

http://www.wildeaboutsteroids.co.uk/story.html - my 'political' page

amitriptyline

prescribed steroids and HRT

Associated health conditions

http://www.wildeaboutsteroids.co.uk/socio.html - social and economic considerations

I can be contacted from my website if you need my further help. My help is free.