Mocked for suggesting that a portion of chips should only be six.
A Harvard professor said it would be “nice” if an order of fries only contained six – to which people have reacted with outrage and disbelief.
Despite being one of the most delicious foods, French fries are understandably frowned upon by doctors and nutritionists – who are keen to make people aware of the health risks associated with consuming sliced, fried potatoes.
And in a recent New York Times article, Professor Eric Rimm, a nutrition professor in Harvard University’s School of Public Health, who described potatoes as “starch bombs,” suggested it would be better if people ate them in six-fry increments – as higher consumption is associated with an increased riskof cardiovascular disease, obesity, and diabetes.
Whatever. We are well aware that chips (this is the UK, I don’t use the word “fries”) aren’t healthy. But they taste nice and in moderation cause no harm. That being said, how many we consume is a personal matter and no one else’s business, so it’s good to see a backlash against such nannying.
Apart from heart disease, obesity and diabetes, the study referenced by the New York Times also found people who ate fries didn’t live as long as people who didn’t indulge.
So what? It’s a personal choice. People may well prefer to enjoy a shorter life while indulging in pleasures than to endure a longer one full of abstinence. Or maybe it just seems longer…
According to Dr Rimm, portion control could help.
“There aren’t a lot of people who are sending back three-quarters of an order of French fries,” he said in the article, which describes the country’s voracious appetite for potatoes, especially fried ones, and the health risks associated. “I think it would be nice if your meal came with a side salad and six French fries.”
Yet another prodnose who thinks that his personal opinion should be enforced on others by the state. There is no justification whatever for portion control because what we eat and how much we eat is a personal matter and no one else’s business, least of all that of Dr Rimm.
…but on social media, Dr Rimm’s suggestion was jokingly ridiculed.
Because that is precisely what he deserves.
I think it’s a bit rich coming from an American, whose country has contributed to the worst sort of fast food in the world!
Where would we be without Macdonalds, Burger King, Krispy Cremes etc?
My old chippy behind Woolworths in Hastings made the best chips ever, and the poor US imitations do not come anywhere near what he used to produce.
My personal chioce is not to be living in a smelly chair in a nursing home, saying how nice it is to live to a hundred by not eating chips, but enjoying a healthy lifestyle…
Likewise American beer such as Budweiser. No flavour at all but people drink it because their telly tells them to.
You’re staggeringly ignorant of the craft beer industry there.
I am aware that there is a beer called Budweiser that is actually brewed there but you know full well that it isn’t the one that I mean.
Bud’s OK I suppose, and yes, there may be some craft beers which are close to the UK specials, but as for chips, we’re way ahead over here!
We had some ‘thrice cooked’ chips recently, and couldn’t actually understand how they managed to make a lovely fried potato so bland!
Every time we have chips away from home, we tick off a few hours in that smelly chair, staring at some sort of daytime crappy TV show!
Some of us move about a lot. I’m a type 2 diabetic and so I do have to be careful about my intake of carbohydrates but I need a certain amount to fuel my exercise sessions. I therefore have no problem eating chips from time to time. Anyway, since it has been uncovered that fat isn’t quite the problem that the Dr. Rimms of this world have been claiming it to be, carb wise baked potatoes are worse. Weren’t baked potatoes supposed to be the healthy option?
How will anyone stop me buying six portions of chips? Do these idiots ever think about dominos? Its like buying painkillers. You cant have more than two packets from one shop. But Superdrug is next to Tesco Metro is next to the pharmacy. Mildly inconvenient but I have six packets
or you could do what I do which is put two packets on the conveyor followed by a (whatever those things that separate your purchases from others) then another two packets. I get a look but so far nobody has ever said anything.
Lots of meals in Australia come with an unwanted side salad, and the plate often goes back to the kitchen with the side salad intact. I don’t usually eat all the chips, I pick out the crispiest ones, the ones full of tasty acrylamides.
When I was young, a portion of chips/fries did only contain six.
In the days of £ s d, the usual fish n’ chip supper comprised fish and six. Six being six penneth (2,5p) of chips. Fish was eleven pence but then went up to one shilling (5p).
I recall paying less than 6d for a bag of chips – and cooked in beef dripping, too. I also used to get a cone of lovely batter bits for just one penny (1d). Shame they’re not around any more – these cretins would vanish in a fit of apoplexy.
In my neck of the woods those batter bits are called scraps and the chippies let you have them for nothing.
Yes, four penneth of chips was an option and ‘scrapings’ for 1d. And yes, cooked in beef dripping. All frying at home done in beef dripping too. Amazing how we made it out of childhood.
Traditional British chips are about 1.2 cm hight and depth, some thicker, few smaller.
Yank fast food French Fries are way thinner because they cook faster and also absorb more of the oil they’re cooked in.
So they’re way heavier in calories and fat than our ones. With ours the oil is only on the outer layer of the potato.
Add salt to either and the surface area of the Yank ones is greater.
Sure the Yank professor can point out that some potion sizes of their type is enough to bring on a heart attack, but his critics are correct, 6 of his French Fries is indeed a joke.
So let’s compare like with like. By volume our chips are lower in calories and not impregnated with cooking oil.
I’m not suggesting for one second that either type of fries is a healthy option, but 200 gr of chips is less work for your gut than the Yank stuff. And anyway it’s our choice.
By the by, a few chef’s here par boil their chips before frying. Those only need a fraction of the time to cook in oil and remain wonderfully light in the middle.
But, as you can guess, this method’s time consuming, needs more space and ain’t going to catch on with the fast food chains.
The man has obviously never read of the exploits and achievements of Alf Tupper, “the tough of the track”, whose athletic exploits include winning the Tour de France (on a butcher’s bike no less), on a regular diet of fish and chips. Recommended reading for all budding athletes. I’m sure that would change his mind.
What was the one with the big ears called.
Dumbo
😛
Rimm by name, rim by nature?
Bulldust pontification = Rimming.
Feel free to use on all appropriate occassions.