Butter, Bacon, Eggs, And Jam Banned From London Ad As "junk Food"

[Mossy]

"We were told by TfL’s sales agent, Exterion, that these foods were not ‘high fat, sugar, and salt (HFSS) compliant’. "

Can you spot the junk food in this ad? TfL could. | Farmdrop Blog

Will the Peat diet eventually be illegal?

 

[TeaRex14]

Holy shizz man, calling eggs junk food is crazy. Same for the other three, but most people view eggs as a nutritional powerhouse. Anything that has enough nutrients to start a life shouldn't be considered junk food.

 

[Mossy]

Holy shizz man, calling eggs junk food is crazy. Same for the other three, but most people view eggs as a nutritional powerhouse. Anything that has enough nutrients to start a life shouldn't be considered junk food.

Agreed. The fact that these foods need any defending shows what a strange place the world is today. Sure, someone could argue against the abuse of such foods, but the context in which they're presented portrays nothing but a balanced and varied diet.

The "high sugar and salt compliant" part is the most anti-Peat part of these regulations. But beyond that, the freedom to choose, and choose wrong, especially when it comes to whole and non-artificial foods, seems so far out. Like ivory-towered elitism.

I don't mean to be obnoxious by posting this quote again so soon, but it is so fitting for these types of things--which are so prevalent today. Not to mention, it's fitting to refute an English issue with an "English" author:

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”

― C. S. Lewis

 

[Peater Piper]

Sounds like part of a delicious breakfast to me.

 

[TeaRex14]

Agreed. The fact that these foods need any defending shows what a strange place the world is today. Sure, someone could argue against the abuse of such foods, but the context in which they're presented portrays nothing but a balanced and varied diet.

The "high sugar and salt compliant" part is the most anti-Peat part of these regulations. But beyond that, the freedom to choose, and choose wrong, especially when it comes to whole and non-artificial foods, seems so far out. Like ivory-towered elitism.

I don't mean to be obnoxious by posting this quote again so soon, but it is so fitting for these types of things--which are so prevalent today. Not to mention, it's fitting to refute an English issue with an "English" author:

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”

― C. S. Lewis

Yeah I completely agree. Can't say I'm surprised much though, certain entities have always wanted to control our food supply, more so then they're already doing. PETA for example, wants to ban meat consumption and make us eat soy.

 

[jzeno]

The UK is lost. Say a prayer.

God bless the USA.

 

[Blossom]

People especially governments just need to STOP telling other people what to eat. Each individual knows what agrees with them and what doesn't. If you ask someone's opinion and willingly take their advice to heart that is completely different than government mandates on what is supposedly healthy. I'm fairly certain their guidelines are solely for the purpose of confusing people. I really don't believe they are well intentioned or designed to help people thrive. Even if there's a grain of truth to some of the recommendations you can't take them seriously.

 

[Mossy]

People especially governments just need to STOP telling other people what to eat. Each individual knows what agrees with them and what doesn't. If you ask someone's opinion and willingly take their advice to heart that is completely different than government mandates on what is supposedly healthy. I'm fairly certain their guidelines are solely for the purpose of confusing people. I really don't believe they are well intentioned or designed to help people thrive. Even if there's a grain of truth to some of the recommendations you can't take them seriously.

Yes—common sense. Which doesn’t seem to exist, or survive for long, within governments and regulating bodies. As you note, mandates are their thing, which is more concerned with power and control, than freedom to thrive; also as you say, there may be some grains of truth, but the regulations are so stifiling, and confusing, that you do have to question their intent—and sanity.

 

[Mossy]

Sounds like part of a delicious breakfast to me.

Indeed. Just add coffee.

 

[milkboi]

People especially governments just need to STOP telling other people what to eat. Each individual knows what agrees with them and what doesn't. If you ask someone's opinion and willingly take their advice to heart that is completely different than government mandates on what is supposedly healthy. I'm fairly certain their guidelines are solely for the purpose of confusing people. I really don't believe they are well intentioned or designed to help people thrive. Even if there's a grain of truth to some of the recommendations you can't take them seriously.

Agreed! IMO that applies to almost every area of life tough. Stateism is the antithesis to freedom and truth.

 

[Christopher R.]

Unfortunately the UK and Anglo countries generally are uniquely vulnerable to this kind of "it's for your own good" puritanism. Much more so than the other European countries.

The common people are usually against it, but they are always outmatched by a highly-organised, well-connected, middle class elite who impose their moralistic ideals on the rest of us through legal and social pressure.

Right now it manifests itself in health fascism, but previously it has been justified on the grounds of public decency or godliness. They seem to be people with naturally authoritarian personalities, who use the most plausible or fashionable excuse to tell other people what to do.

 

[BrianF]

The situation here in the UK is that we still live in the latter days of the 'spin over substance' political era. The current Mayor of London, a useless article who hides in his office while kids are being killed on the streets on an industrial scale, is firmly of this ilk. He neither knows or cares how to deal with day to day issues and is merely a self serving career politician who thought he could raise his profile by becoming Mayor on his way to one day being the UK's first Muslim PM. He figures as long as he doesn't do too much damage to his reputation in office, he will still be on track. Putting his name to nonsense like this, seems to be all it takes to get approval from much of the Metropolitan media bubble in which he operates. What he doesn't realise is that Britain, like Europe is fed up with this approach and have turned their backs on it.

 

[Journey]

The situation here in the UK is that we still live in the latter days of the 'spin over substance' political era. The current Mayor of London, a useless article who hides in his office while kids are being killed on the streets on an industrial scale, is firmly of this ilk. He neither knows or cares how to deal with day to day issues and is merely a self serving career politician who thought he could raise his profile by becoming Mayor on his way to one day being the UK's first Muslim PM. He figures as long as he doesn't do too much damage to his reputation in office, he will still be on track. Putting his name to nonsense like this, seems to be all it takes to get approval from much of the Metropolitan media bubble in which he operates. What he doesn't realise is that Britain, like Europe is fed up with this approach and have turned their backs on it.

Seconded!

As for, as the French call, the Anglophone peoples they do seem still to carry the Protestant purtitanical moralising culture quite different to the Catholic countries and again to the eastern Christian Orthodox - it amazes me how much our historic religious culture affect us today. Back in UK from a long stint in France I find the do-goodiness over here so annoying compared to the French no-guilt eating habits. Most of them make a point of really enjoying food and it’s surroundings, just in moderation. But then we get the new Anglo puritans who make egg white omelette and soya burgers, sugar replaced by synthetics - and worst of all, has anyone else noticed 90% of chocolate products in UK now contain vegetable oil?

 

[Mossy]

Unfortunately the UK and

Seconded!

As for, as the French call, the Anglophone peoples they do seem still to carry the Protestant purtitanical moralising culture quite different to the Catholic countries and again to the eastern Christian Orthodox - it amazes me how much our historic religious culture affect us today. Back in UK from a long stint in France I find the do-goodiness over here so annoying compared to the French no-guilt eating habits. Most of them make a point of really enjoying food and it’s surroundings, just in moderation. But then we get the new Anglo puritans who make egg white omelette and soya burgers, sugar replaced by synthetics - and worst of all, has anyone else noticed 90% of chocolate products in UK now contain vegetable oil?

Glad to get the UK input. Thanks to @Christopher R. and @BrianF as well—and whoever else commented from the UK. I’m from the US; we do have this rapidly growing new puritanical culture as well, but I’d say it’s far more made up of the irreligious or nonreligious where this hyper-morality is their religion, so-to-speak. I see those of Protestantism, in its purist form, as allowing the freedom to make “mistakes”, contrary to those in favor of these stringent dietary laws. I can attest to this in my own personal circle of friends: my most strict friends, who agree with these types of laws, are not involved in traditional religion or Christianity at all; or, they just carry fragmented pieces of it from childhood or an earlier time. Look at US politics—it’s the younger, hipper, greener, nonreligious—or those who want to be associated with them— who want to establish these type of laws as well. With regard to the historical religious culture (Christianity) of the UK, apart from the typical do-gooders and moral police, I think you have some of the greatest representatives—male and female—of the last 100 years, who align sound reason with their religion, in C.S. Lewis, G.K. Chesterton, and Dorothy Sayers.