They base their assumptions on modelling, not direct scientific study.
Then it isn’t science and it isn’t a proper study, it’s just an assumption and can be treated as such. This is junk science, not the real thing.
Sure, eating apples is no bad thing. I like the odd Granny Smiths from time to time, but not necessarily daily – and I wouldn’t change my habits based upon this kind of wibble.
More than two-thirds of adults do not eat the recommended five portions of fruit and veg a day, population surveys suggest.
This cockwaffle also has no scientific basis. It was pulled out of someone’s arse. Different countries have different “recommended portions”. They can’t all be right – likely as not they are all wrong. What is good for one person may not be for another as we are all individuals. What is bad for us is the forced diet of junk science and surveys based upon guesswork, assumption and policy based evidence gathering.
XX More than two-thirds of adults do not eat the recommended five portions of fruit and veg a day, population surveys suggest.XX
Bollox! Just look at a Mc dogs burger, FULL of plant matter, so it is. Tomatoe, Onion, Lettuce, wheat (to make the bread bun), My pizzas? ALWAYS with tomatoe mushrooms, pinaple, onion, garlic, and wheat… Deep fried spinach pasties… VEG! Toffee apples? Chocolate bananas? Dundee cake? Pecan pie?
See?
EASILY “five thingies” per day!
Raspberry ripple ice cream?
I always tell the self-appointed food police that at age 64, my body needs all the preservative it can get.
“”getting people to comply could be challenging”” is a bit of a chilling line.
This article is just one more reason not to give money to the BHF
It is rather chilling, isn’t it? illuminating as well.
I agree with Bucko. The notion of ‘compliance’ seems to be bandied around as a matter or course by these organisations. It really is quite chilling with its associations with compulsion, force, sanctions and threats. They really do give themselves away by using such language. It’s quite clear who they think they are and what they think of us. I hate these people.
Oh for… seriously? People with actual bloody university degrees and the like are using computer modelling to support a theory?
I’ve got some very bad news for them:
A painting of a ghost does not prove the existence of ghosts. Disney’s “Fantasia” does not prove the existence of dancing mushrooms or anthropomorphic animals. A LEGO model of a Star Wars spaceship does not prove the existence of said spaceship. A replica of Charles Babbage’s Difference Engine does not prove the existence of the original.
“Pac-Man” is an abstract computer model of a very hungry drug addict suffering from some very strange hallucinations.
A computer model is an interactive *illustration*. A painting. Nothing more. Nothing less. It does not constitute evidence of anything. It supports no hypothesis. It can neither proves nor disprove any theory. Computer models are only ever as good as their programming, the rules they use, and the data they apply those rules to.
Get even one of those elements ever so slightly wrong and the result will be completely useless, even though it might give the illusion of accuracy. I’ve been programming computers on and off since the early ’80s; if programming were so easy, we wouldn’t have endless patches and updates to fix our software, nor would we have to agree to those ridiculous End User License Agreements (“EULAs”) whenever we install any such software.
If people who make a damned *living* out of programming software cannot guarantee their programs are 100% bug-free, what makes these arrogant ivory-towered imbeciles think they can do any better?
*
Anyone who claims that computer models prove anything at all is either ignorant, incompetent, or lying, and can therefore be safely ignored. It really is that simple.
Airfix make better models.
Another survey (which seems to have conveniently slipped down the back of the Govt’s sofa) proves that if you DO actually eat your 5 fruits a day like a good little drone, you go pear shaped. Yes the Sucrose in the fruit goes straight to the midriff and hips, so instead of looking fit, you look fat. You’re probably in line for type 2 Diabetes too.