I know that I don't post here often, mainly because I don't get time to read the papers or watch much television these days (if I could "drop" enough on the lottery to pay the mortgage, I'd probably be able to study full time and still read the papers/watch telly - sorry, a digression into fantasy land there).

The point of this post, is that I've just seen an advert for a "new" type of bread. Part of the "Kingsmill" range maybe??? I don't recall. What I do remember is that it's apparently white bread with "all the goodness of brown bread" so "the kids love it". Called "50/50" I think.

What a load of fucking rubbish. If you want bread with even basic nutritional value too feed to your kids, then you should probably be feeding them brown bread of some sort, probably a brown bread that's been produced by a "local" baker. Not some "pappy" white shit that's had any possible "goodness" processed out of it (apart from the carbohydrates of course) in one of the big manufacturers factories.

If you want to try a bit harder, then it would probably be a brown bread with various seeds as part of the mix i.e. often referred to as "multi-grain". The brown flour element of that bread being some sort of "wholemeal" flour.

Whats wrong with the product I alluded too above? Well why are they having to re-add the fibre element back into whats really the same pappy white steamed shit I mentioned earlier ? The advertising hook being "that the kids love it" ?

Food isn't something that nature really teaches us about - OK, not quite true. The basics of sweet, sour, salt and bitter are nature. The actual foods that we eat are "nurture" i.e. we learn to like them.

This then produces the paradox of how we learn what we like to eat ? It's my understanding that babies take the queue from their mothers facial expressions - with the taste i.e. the salt, sweet, sour and bitter bit from nature.

So what am I driving at ? To get the kids eating what you want them to eat i.e. to give them a balanced diet, as any sensibly minded parent would want, then you need to give them the balanced stuff, but with a nice smiley face (and maybe even the yum yum noises) whether you like it or not.

Then when they are onto the solids, they eat what they're given. Reserve the sweet, shitty, tooth rotting, fat making, sugary rubbish as a treat. Not because they won't eat anything else. If they're hungry enough, they'll eat it. They'll get used to it and eventually it will become a normal part of their diet.

Sure, it can be flavoured in many ways i.e. herbs, spices, etc etc, just not sugar or other "energy dense" products. Theres nothing wrong with introducing some of the alleged "bad" things later, though that balance is quite important of course.

Look at our European neighbours ? The nearest is France isn't it. Sure they have the reputation for cooking everything in butter (oh, bad, bad butter). The difference is, that it's also known to be quite well balanced - I also notice that it would appear that theres been a lot about the size of portions i.e. theirs tend to be between 25 and 30 % smaller. Which might have something to do with why they have less obesity and heart related problems than we do in the UK.

It seems to me, that we in the UK, suffer from a similar problem to "those", who are currently accused of causing the "terrorism" from the islamic world. That being, "they" would rather believe a muslim who is telling them lies, than a "westerner" who is telling them the truth about something. While we seem to rather believe fucking adverts and influences from the US, and any other shit put out by the "vested interests", than we would from a properly qualified and accredited nutritionist or other similar "food professional". The result, fat little cunt kids that bleed the ears of their parents about what they do and don't like, who are unfit, overweight and suffering from diabetes (no slur on "proper" diabetics - as that can occur as a natural (genetic???) health problem - my "best friend" from my school days is "type A" diabetic, his mother was diabetic - and consequently feed both him and his sister a good balanced diet - which still didn't stop his sister being diagnosed as insulin dependant in her mid teens either - hence my "genetic???" comment).

As for the parents? Proper food i.e. not processed dog shit, usually works out cheaper, though it may take a bit longer to prepare than the two minutes it takes to "do" a high sugar/salt/fat etc, processed "ready meal". And all you will have succeeded in doing is adding to another "coffin nail" into your childs' diet, and helped some middle/upper class, tory fat cat fucker, get richer through the shares that they own in the big boys/vested interests of the world of food manufacturing.

And no, I'm not any kind of food professional, but just an ordinary person who wants to take care of what I eat. I'm interested, so I try to read and understand as much as possible. I'm no angel, but about 95% of what I eat can be described as decent food. I still eat too much of it and could loose a stone or two, but I try to keep "shit" to a minimum!

It ain't rocket science, most of the information is "out there" and theres enough of it freely available, for you to give your kids a balanced, "shit free" diet instead of abusing them into type B diabetes, heart and other circulation related health problems, just so satisfy your own fucking laziness!

ttfn.