Forum menu
Real margarine is nasty stuff.<br /><br />
You’re right, it is. It’s what my mum used to buy when I was a nipper. Disgusting stuff, I only use butter on sarnies or for cooking.
I do buy Tesco’s Extra Mature Cheddar, which has 30% less fat, so I’m being careful…
A particularly flavourful cheese, too. Plus I get Tesco Club points, what’s not to like? 😁
A smear of L'Escoure butter - on bread - is very splendid.
I dont really eat butter or marg, mainly because I hardly ever buy a loaf of bread. Closest thing is a pizza about once a month.
If I do buy bread, its for a sandwich on ham/cheese and i prefer to use a cheese spread in place of the butter/marg'.
existing on a diet of crisps, cake and leaded coke whilst sitting on your arse all day on the other hand
Have you been spying on me again?
As good a reason as any to give this another listen
Have the butter - drop sugar.
Butter being from milk and therefore natural....well, yes I kind of get it.
But once you've not done it for a while so that normality by repetition thing is broken, it's kind of weird. Suckling on the teat of a lactating ruminant.... actually, alter that.....juicing a lactating ruminant, warming it up then cooling it down slowly so it goes a bit funky and splits and churning up the thick bits. That's a bit messed up. I guess it's not as weird as cheese.
Still, if you don't have much affinity with cows, you could always consume the congealed lactate of an animal you know better - your dog, your cat? Your wife maybe? Any less weird? No?
Again, maybe it's with the eyes of someone who has broken the habit, but just because humans have been getting their freak on for thousands of years doesn't make it any less 'unnatural' to me.
Butter. It’s full of beneficial nutrition.
They said “ingredients that you don’t recognise.” Things don’t suddenly become more unhealthy because you don’t understand them.
Well they sort of do. You can have a meal made of just vegetables, meat/fish and some spices or you can have a heavily processed meal that may also include high fructose corn syrup, invert sugar, modified starches, hydrogenated oils, as well as de-foaming, bulking, and bleaching agents.
Are these two meals equal to you and if not it is easy to just apply a blank "if it is not likely to be in my kitchen then it doesn't need to be added" approach. I don't have high fructose corn syrup in my kitchen and it is not good for you. This approach just makes it very simple to spot UPF foods, IF you are trying to avoid them.
the more ingredients that you don’t recognise then the less healthy it is.
Abject nonsense.
Is there a point at which two wildly subjective generalisations cancel each other out?
I think you can probably say that using very refined ingredients that you'd not immediately use at home - extracted seed oils, whey proteins, sugars, emulsifiers, flavours and colourings to make very low cost, low nutritional food has less value than using the more expensive ingredients that those products have been manufactured to replace; animal or vegetable fats, spices and other raw ingredients, along with the associated proven health problems (diabetes, CVD etc etc) that food that has too much salt and sugar in it that can be consumed at quantity can give its consumers
But it doesn't roll of the tongue quite as easily, fo'shure.
That’s not what they said. They said “ingredients that you don’t recognise.” Things don’t suddenly become more unhealthy because you don’t understand them.
it’s clearly not a literal rule, but a rule of thumb. Think about it, if a product contains lots of ingredients you couldn’t ordinarily and individually buy in the supermarket, then in general, the product is generally less healthy than one which has fewer and more recognisable ingredients. Those products tend to be higher in sugar, higher in refined carbs and higher in saturated fats, and generally not great for you. It doesn’t apply to EVERY product, and clearly some people (e.g. food tech scientist) would recognise every ingredient in every unhealthy product, even pop-tarts. But as a general rule of thumb, it works.
But you knew this already before spoiling for the fight.
But once you’ve not done it for a while so that normality by repetition thing is broken, it’s kind of weird.
I'll preface this with I do eat meat occasionally, but am generally dairy free. I can't put my finger on why but, yeah, to me dairy now just feels... weird somehow.
I love a good sandwich
Butter not marg obvs
If I want it to be healthier there's the option to eat half a sandwich, or no sandwich
For a vegan option, stick some extra virgin olive oil in the freezer. You need to take it out to soften a bit in the fridge before use, so there is some extra faffing involved. You can add salt if you desire (I prefer to just sprinkle a little salt on the bread after spreading rather than mixing it with the oil). Of course you could just drizzle some straight from the bottle rather than messing about with freezing and thawing, although I tend to find that results in more being used. In terms of healthiness we're probably talking marginal gains here - far better to really limit spread use as much as possible.
For a vegan option, stick some extra virgin olive oil in the freezer. You need to take it out to soften a bit in the fridge before use, so there is some extra faffing involved. You can add salt if you desire (I prefer to just sprinkle a little salt on the bread after spreading rather than mixing it with the oil). Of course you could just drizzle some straight from the bottle rather than messing about with freezing and thawing, although I tend to find that results in more being used. In terms of healthiness we’re probably talking marginal gains here – far better to really limit spread use as much as possible.
Yes, I find the bottle of olive oil I've got in the van becomes nicely solid for 5 months a year then miraculously returns to its runny form in april. A tub of oil popped in the porch of the house would probably stay in a soft lard like state for half the year too.
Well. I’m told I should not direct insults towards individuals, but to be perfectly frank Luke if your marmite needs to be increased because you prefer a lube to thin it’s intensity I put it to you that your marmite is best consumed whilst wearing red trousers. You cockwomble. What say you to that?
Will short trousers do? I have red short trousers only, my long ones are all blue.
Anyway, butter improves everything. EVERYTHING.
Butter being from milk and therefore natural….well, yes I kind of get it.
But once you’ve not done it for a while so that normality by repetition thing is broken, it’s kind of weird.
Indeed. But extending that, food generally is weird. Aww, look at the cute little baa-lamb, I think I'll murder it and chuck it on a fire. Hack up some grass, mix it with the blood for a nice sauce. Fry up some unfertilised chicken ovulations, maybe drag some plants out of the ground and boil them for a bit and hey look, balanced meal! Squeezing a cow's tits and drinking what comes out is positively normal by comparison.
I think most people just swerve thinking about this stuff. It troubles me to the point of being an eating disorder. But you're absolutely right; if we sold human breast milk in Tesco there would be fury erupting at the Daily Express. We're conditioned how to think by our parents, carry it for life and pass it to our children.
Are these two meals equal to you and if not it is easy to just apply a blank “if it is not likely to be in my kitchen then it doesn’t need to be added” approach.
Your hypothesis is sound but your conclusion isn't. Are these apples the same as these oranges? Of course they aren't. Therefore, oranges are bad?
Some of those things we know aren't great. HFCS as you mention is unpleasant stuff, though it's almost wholly a North American affliction which I don't think I've ever seen in the UK. Regardless, we cannot just handwave it all whilst bandying about words like "natural" or "processed." HFCS is as "natural" as olive oil. Setting fire to animals is a "process." The entire planet is "chemicals."
This approach just makes it very simple
No, it just appears to do so. Which is my entire point. As is often the case, simple questions have complex answers.
Your hypothesis is sound but your conclusion isn’t. Are these apples the same as these oranges? Of course they aren’t. Therefore, oranges are bad?
Apples and Oranges are likely to be in a kitchen, high fructose corn syrup is not
There is a clear difference between processed (i.e. chopping something up and putting in a tin) to Ultra Process (i.e. adding all sorts of shit that is not required and is harmful alone and when combined even worse)
As is often the case, simple questions have complex answers.
To you maybe, to me the answer is simple enough.
I think you can probably say that... very low cost, low nutritional food has less value
Well, yes, this is a tautology.
What makes something inherently better because you might find it in your kitchen?
Sodium chloride in excess is particularly bad for you but I'd challenge anyone to find a kitchen which didn't contain some. Many diners add extra to their food before even taking a first bite. It's a "flavour enhancer," and an effective "preservative" in use long before domestic refrigeration was commonplace. And it's entirely natural.
Simple, hey.
Apples and Oranges are likely to be in a kitchen, high fructose corn syrup is not
Go to the US. Report back what you find.
I don't think HFCS even exists in the UK, does it?
There is a clear difference between processed (i.e. chopping something up and putting in a tin) to Ultra Process (i.e. adding all sorts of shit that is not required and is harmful alone and when combined even worse)
There is a difference sure. But a clear one?
How do we define "shit that is not required"? That's a broad church. Rosemary in a stew is shit that's not required (and hey, it's also an E number). What are you eating, WW2 ration packs and gruel?
Think about it, if a product contains lots of ingredients you couldn’t ordinarily and individually buy in the supermarket, then in general, the product is generally less healthy than one which has fewer and more recognisable ingredients.
Is it? Why?
How does your "recognition" change anything? Once of a time, no-one in the UK had seen an orange or a banana.
Those products tend to be higher in sugar, higher in refined carbs and higher in saturated fats, and generally not great for you.
There we go. Tons of sugar is bad, we know this. Refined carbs, eh, maybe. Saturated fats, this thread is literally "should I eat more butter?" and the Aye Vote has plenty of advocates. Do we have a STW consensus on the OP's question? What if the same question had been posed 10, 20, 100 years ago?
But you knew this already before spoiling for the fight.
😁 I'm not spoiling for a fight, I'm asking "are you sure about that?" If you're using words like "clearly..." or "obviously..." then maybe stop and question your own assumptions. It's very easy to generalise - gods know, I've done it often enough myself - but in this instance I think it's bogus. The experts you mention can't agree. So what hope do we have?
Once of a time, no-one in the UK had seen an orange or a banana.
Without processing; cotton seed oil is toxic to humans ( contains glosypol, as a natural insect repellent) To remove it the seed (inedible otherwise) is ground, bleached and refined, it still stinks though, so it's deodorised by spinning at very high speed with ferrite chloride. All of that, and it's still useful as a butter replacement as it has a higher temperature at which it burns, and of course, it's a by product as opposed to an added value product that it replaces and even after all that processing; cheaper.
Whether that's "bad" or something you're OK with eating is induvial choice, and entirely should be, BUT it should be made clear to everyone what's going on in their food. Without that people can't make informed choices.
How do we define “shit that is not required”?
And back to the "if it is not likely to be in my kitchen then it doesn’t need to be added”
I don't need to add modified this and that, emulsifiers, artificial flavourings, colouring, sweeteners, preservatives and so on.
Some may be worse than others and the added impact of combinations, levels and regular consumption may differ but again, the very simple rule above works for me.
What are you eating, WW2 ration packs and gruel?
Nope, I am eating very nice food but I prepare it all myself as pretty anything ready prepared has UPFs by default so I avoid it.
We have the capacity to create food ingredients from things that otherwise wouldn't be. Cotton seed being the first one that came into my head. Without industrialisation, we can't do these things, there's the difference between these foods and "setting fire to carcasses" as a process.
Margarine = vaseline + marketing
Butter = godlike
Flora is palm oil, which is reason enough to eat butter.
You might need to go and fact check yourself.
I am corrected. When I worked in that factory it was indeed palm oil, they have finally changed that.
Unilever do still lots of palm oil in other products, not all sustainable, and publicly justify it.
Whether that’s “bad” or something you’re OK with eating is induvial choice, and entirely should be, BUT it should be made clear to everyone what’s going on in their food. Without that people can’t make informed choices.
Bingo.
I don’t need to add modified this and that, emulsifiers, artificial flavourings, colouring, sweeteners, preservatives and so on.
Again, apples and oranges. If you made, say, home-made mayonnaise from scratch (for some mad reason) it'd have to last maybe for an evening; if you bought a jar it'd need to be capable of sitting in the fridge for a year without turning back into its constituent parts.
I am eating very nice food but I prepare it all myself
Do you own a farm?
Refined carbs, eh, maybe
numerous, credible studies show a link between high GI foods (refined carbs making up the bulk of these) and weight gain (leading to other issues) and diabetes. Refined carbs tend to have much lower or often zero fibre content too.
Saturated fats
Again, numerous, credible studies and the scientific consensus (despite suggestions otherwise) show a direct link between excess saturated fats and heart disease, which by the way is still the biggest killer in the UK by a factor or two (source, BHF.)
But… bringing it back to the topic, I still eat butter over Marge/or spread or whatever it’s called now. You still need some saturated fats for good health and I moderate my intake across my diet. Butter also tastes infinitely better too!
This is the “chemicals” argument and it’s woolly-headed. If we don’t recognise what we’re eating and we care sufficiently to be concerned then why not go look it up rather than promoting ignorance as a badge of honour.
@Cougar, with respect that's very condescending. Most people on here I hope, are bright enough to understand that everything is made of chemicals and not all chemicals are bad. We know what sodium chloride is. We know what 'Aqua' (or 'dihydrogen monoxide' is) and that many 'natural' ingredients also have E numbers.
We are talking about a useful rule of thumb to help identify less healthy food. I don't know about you, but when I'm shopping I don't have time to Google every emulsifier, stabiliser, bulking/caking agent or whatever, listed on a product.
If the list of these is a dozen or more, I'm making a leap to imagine that they were put there for the manufacturer's convenience, not for my nutritional benefit. That's time management and pragmatism not ignorance.
A rule of thumb, that is generally useful, but may not stand up to forensic dissection on every single occasion.
rather than promoting ignorance as a badge of honour.
But you know this is exactly the position that the food industry promotes to us, and would themselves be happy to obfuscate. If there was a label on every product that said "This product was made using ingredients extracted from substances that are themselves, not food" what effect would that have on sales I wonder?
So..... are we saying that flora pro active is worse for me than butter? Bear in mind i have both high blood pressure and high cholesterol. Both currently being taken care of by tablets.
I'd love to go back to butter if i can,
Do you own a farm?
They said "prepare".
Again, apples and oranges. If you made, say, home-made mayonnaise from scratch (for some mad reason) it’d have to last maybe for an evening; if you bought a jar it’d need to be capable of sitting in the fridge for a year without turning back into its constituent parts.
No it is not apples and oranges. I have a fridge where a lot of things keep quite well thanks and I even have mayo in the fridge but that mayo doesn't have any 'extras' in it that are not required or yet again "are something I wouldn't have in my kitchen"
For example the mayo I use is as follows;
Olive Oil (80%), Pasteurised British Free Range Egg Yolk (9%), Apple Cider Vinegar, Pink Himalayan Salt.
I have all of that in the kitchen. Note there is not an emulsifier, preservative, thickener etc,. in sight. Easy isn't it - well it is if you want it to be and not just argue the toss about it.
So….. are we saying that flora pro active is worse for me than butter?
I'd suggest you talk to your doctor or cardiologist rather than a bunch of folks on the internet with some "individual" views about healthy diets.
@convert what you describe is more like the process of cheese making than butter. There is nothing added to curdle the milk and certainly no heating to make butter. In fact you could make butter yourself very easily. Just leave full fat milk in a shallow dish in the fridge. Use a flat sppon to lift off the cream and put it in a jam jar. When you have an inch of cream in the jar stick the lid on and start shaling it. It will take a while but eventually the cream will turn to butter. You can use 2 lumps of wood to pat the butter to get any excess water out and add salt to taste. But that is essentially it.
I just hope that anyone who worries about what chemicals are in the food they eat are also thinking about the chemicals used to produce their food. I can gaurantee that a lamb produced here on organic grassland will have a far far lower chemical & carbon footprint than any "non organic and non locally" produced vegetable, fruit or cereal based product sold in a supermarket.
and certainly no heating to make butter.
From the UK dairy council.....
To make butter, milk is first heated to 50°C and then piped into a centrifuge -
I just hope that anyone who worries about what chemicals are in the food they eat are also thinking about the chemicals used to produce their food. I can gaurantee that a lamb produced here on organic grassland will have a far far lower chemical & carbon footprint than any “non organic and non locally” produced vegetable, fruit or cereal based product sold in a supermarket.
Even as a vegan, I applaud farmer like you that raise your livestock with high welfare standards and in a way that is healthy to consume. Naturally, I'd rather you didn't and we didn't exploit other species but that's another story.
Where to me your narrative falls down (I live next door to a beef farmer and he says similar about his grass fed cattle) is that the number of people that only eat other foodstuffs aside from your lamb or his beef of the same integrity must be vanishingly small. They eat your lamb on a Sunday and are at Maccy D's on a Monday - or eating a pie of unknown source, or a sausage at the workplace etc. And even when they eat your lamb....is everything else on their plate similarly sourced? Iain (next door neighbour) likes to post memes taking the piss out of ignorant vegans and the air miles on their plate in comparison to his beef. Then the next minute he's posting images of a roast dinner of his beef with some highly contentiously sourced veggie accompaniments.
Will short trousers do? I have red short trousers only, my long ones are all blue
All your trousers are short! 🤣
Bike forum - Surprising number of unhealthy tubbies in the members list 😕