Re: Eating for Health

Some other "great" Heinz baby food range products

For Babies 4-6 months

Creamy Oat Porridge - 7-8 teaspoons of sugar per 100g (1.5 teaspoons per serving)

Apple & Mango Puree - 3 teaspoons sugar per 100g - that 100g is considered 1 serving !

For Babies 7-10 months

6 Cereals Breakfast Biscotti - 6 teaspoons sugar per 100g - 1 teaspoon per biscotti

Apple, Banana & Apricot Fruit Pot - 4 teaspoons sugar per 100g - 100g is 1 serving


It goes on and on through the increasing range of baby food products. It is sick.

This is not happenstance. This is purposeful addiction of humans to what is effectively a Class A drug. This is just a part of the war on humanity which is killing us slowly and purposefully, damaging our health in the name of money and greed.

We need to wake up and kick these corrupt companies into touch.

Re: Eating for Health

susie, l can understand you being upset at being told you were obese!
Last week, when my doctor told me l was classed as obese, at least he said it nicely! My profile pic was taken last Thursday and l think l could be classed as chubby but l don't think l'm obese...well not my interpretation of obese!
I went to Slimming World tonight for the first time and l have to say what l am allowed to eat, isn't too bad!

Re: Eating for Health

Thank you Artangel, to me you look lovely, nice figure. I am only 5'3" and weight just under the 10st, so yes I do need to lose a bit, but as I said before it's only my tummy I need to lose fat on. But this Nurse was really horrible and a Gentleman who I would say was in his 70s went in after me and he also came out and I heard him say to his wife, that Nurse has just told me i'm Obese, and to me he looked thin.

Re: Eating for Health

But that's not added sugar, it's the natural sugar that is part of the tomato !
All food contain natural sugars !

Re: Eating for Health

I am not making excuses---I try and eat healthily all the time. I buy no ready meals, rarely eat meat, no butter, very little bread, as little sugar as possible. But it is still difficult for me to lose weight.

I am not sure if this is an age thing--if it becomes more difficult as you get older. I keep as active as I can--I have no car--so anywhere I need to go--I have to walk !!

Re: Eating for Health

To my thinking the problem is that healthy food takes much more money and time for preparing (and consuming) than fastfood

Re: Eating for Health

It is quantity not quality that is making you fat....the sooner you realise that and cut down, the sooner you will begin to loose weight.
Fat and obesity come from somewhere, and that somewhere is food !

Re: Eating for Health

Then your thinking is faulty !

Re: Eating for Health

The lady at Slimmers World, last night, said there was a woman who attended who was not losing weight. Her diary showed that she was eating according to the diet and should have lost weight. It was only when they questioned her more in depth, that it was found, the water she was drinking, was Elderflower flavoured water that has a lot of added sugar.

Re: Eating for Health

Sugar is Sugar Malcolm no matter where it resides. The chemical formula is the same so the concept of "Natural Sugar" is a bit of an urban myth. There's another post that explains all this here:

http://www.over50sforum.com/showthre...ructose&page=5

The basic "simple sugars" are as follows (with their chemical formulae):

Glucose - a Monosaccharide - C6H12O6
Fructose - a Monosaccharide - C6H12O6
Galactose - a Monosaccharide - C6H12O6

The formula means they have 6 Carbon atoms, 12 Hydrogen atoms and 6 Oxygen atoms). They differ only in the specific arrangement of those atoms.

Then we also have:

Lactose - a Disaccharide - C12H22O11
Sucrose - a Disaccharide - C12H22O11
Maltose - a Disaccharide - C12H22O11

Disaccharide basically means these molecules have 2 sugars in them which is why the chemical formula is double that of the simple sugars. They break down as follows:

Lactose = glucose + galactose
Sucrose = glucose + fructose
Maltose = glucose + glucose


All of which is largely academic. What actually matters when we are talking about eating sugars, is HOW we eat them or rather WHAT we eat them with.

If we eat sugars on their own, then the body converts them to energy really quickly (which gives us the buzz and blood sugar rush), but since the body has no use for that energy supply at that time, it then stores it as fat.

If on the other hand we eat sugars in combination with a lot of fibre, then the body takes a long time to convert that sugar to energy and that means the energy is generally used up for the body's continual needs like pumping your heart, breathing, walking etc etc.

So, food products that are all sugar and little or no fibre are very bad for us and will quickly make us fat. Obvious candidates are sweets, cakes, pastries etc. All fat and sugar and no fibre.

But there are a plethora of less obvious foods too.

Basic fruit juices like "Freshly Squeezed Orange Juice" (which is anything but by the way - likely at least a year old) are basically all the sugars from the fruit with most of the natural fibre taken out. So a bad thing.

A single large apple has 4-5 teaspoonfuls of sugar in it. But because the flesh and skin all have lots of fibre, when you eat it, you are eating sugar and fibre combined so all is well.

A typical large 500g pot of low fat natural yoghurt has approx. 9 teaspoonfuls of sugar in it. At the same time it has no fibre. So what most people think of as a great healthy food to have on a diet, is actually loading them with sugars with no fibre ! No wonder many people struggle to lose weight. They are being duped at every level by large food manufacturers who are creating products that have high sugar content (natural or otherwise) and which have no corresponding fibre.

Anyways, plenty to research in all this.