June 2014

Permalink leave a comment comment

Last week the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition announced their draft findings on their carbohydrate review which they have been working on for several years.  As expected they continue to believe that science supports the EATWELL plate with the small adjustment that we reduce sugar consumption by 5% which sounds great but of course is actually nonsense.

Even though I clearly support less sugar the whole point is that if you take sugar out and continue to believe that starch is fine you have made no difference at all because notwithstanding protestations to the contrary by dieticians, starch is simply sugar that doesn’t rot your teeth.  Even a mere lawyer can work that out.

But putting aside my strong views on starch the approach taken by SACN to sugar is still remarkable.  Over 10 years ago when I first read about human biochemistry I did not need a degree in dietetics or nutrition to know that sugar is pretty lethal and it also didn’t take a degree to work out that fruit juice is sugar mixed with water. As a mere lawyer I did not have any difficulty working out that vegetables ( like broccoli and cabbage) are very different  from grapes or apples or oranges. It really didn’t take a great deal of concentration to understand the for vitamins and minerals you are best eating protein fats and vegetables rather than fruit .  So why should we , the British public continue to be told what to eat by people like Susan Jebb who in the guardian  said , just last week

“Fruit juice isn’t the same as intact fruit and it has as much sugar as many classical sugar drinks,”

Well, ,oh my lord Susan. Brain of Britain. This woman is a so called expert in nutrition and dietetics and it has taken her the past 15 years of wittering on about 5 a day to work out that fruit juice is not fruit. When do you think she will then work out that most fruit is actually just sugar as the fibre content is so low it is meaningless for people struggling to lose fat?

If Susan was a lawyer and she gave this quality of advice I can honestly say she would have been sued for negligence a thousand times.  The fact that the following organisations actually listen to this woman is deeply worrying.



Diabetes UK

British Heart Foundation UK

Until we have the same level of responsibly and liability associated with dietary advice as we do have in the real professions we will continue to have an obese and diabetic nation listening to this type of nonsense.


30 June 2014

natural ketosis

Visit the main natural ketosis site to see how the real food diet programme really works, learn about the natural ketosis story and read our great success stories.