Another Nanny myth has just been turned on its head.
This time it transpires, according to research published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, millions
of Britons classed as overweight actually have a lower risk of death
than those who are slimmer and deemed to be the most healthy.
In fact, the definition of"overweight" may need to change as the research has shown that the "healthiest" size has increased by 3.3 BMI points since the 1970's.
Loyal readers of course know what I think of the BMI as means of determining if someone is "overweight" or not. Time and time again it has been proven to be absolute bollocks. A far better means is simply to measure your waist, and compare that to the rest of your body.
Anyhoo, currently people who have a BMI of 27 are classed as "overweight" yet they now have the lowest risk of dying from any condition. Wise owls of course will be aware that we all die one day!
Thus, as ever, apply some common sense and abandon the concept of one size fits all. Additionally, ignore all the advice that Nanny gives you!
How ironic and gemusing, that at the same time we learn that eating fat is good for you it also transpires that salt is also good for you.
Who would have thought that a life staple (remember you die without salt) could in fact be good for you?
A study of 130,000 people found that those
who cut back their salt intake to half the recommended amount per day
may be more at risk of having a heart attack or stroke. Eating less than three grams of salt a day could lead to serious health problems in the future, the study found that there were
more heart attacks, strokes and deaths among those whose intake was
lower than the average amount.
Professor Andrew Mente, an
epidemiologist at McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario is quoted by the Telegraph:
our data highlights the importance of reducing high salt intake in
people with hypertension, it does not support reducing salt intake to
The key question is not whether blood pressure is lower with very low salt intake, instead it is whether it improves health.”
As loyal readers know, and have discussed many time on this site, healthy people who drink a sensible amount of water and are active will sweat/urinate out any "excess" salt that they may have ingested.
Thus the single issue obsessives from CASH etc may care to re-evaluate their lives, and go and do something more useful instead of sticking their noses in where they are not wanted.
I am hugely gemused to see that after decades of being told by Nanny to cut down on fat, one of Nanny's chums (the National Obesity Forum - NOF) has come out and said that urging people to adopt low-fat diets and to lower their cholesterol is having “disastrous health consequences”.
Dr Aseem Malhotra of NOF is quoted by the Telegraph:
“Eating fat does not make you fat. Promoting low-fat foods is perhaps the biggest mistake in modern medical history."
The report says the low-fat and
low-cholesterol message, which has been official policy in the UK since
1983, was based on “flawed science” and had resulted in an increased
consumption of junk food and carbohydrates.
The solution is a return to “whole foods” such as meat, fish and dairy, as well as high-fat healthy foods like avocados; in other words, eat the foods that we used to eat before Nanny got half the country eating low fat shit packed with sugar and chemicals.
The report also argues that
saturated fat does not cause heart disease while full fat dairy products
such as milk, yoghurt and cheese, can actually protect the heart.
"Eat fat to get slim.
Don’t fear fat;
fat is your friend."
Unsurprisingly Nanny really hates this, and is doing her level best to rubbish it.
The fact is Nanny's advice on all issues over the years has ended up contradicting itself, it is best to ignore it and use common sense.
Oh dear, as a result of some alleged occasional injuries, students at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have been urged not to throw their mortar boards into the air when they have their graduation photos taken.
Instead they have been asked to mime the throwing action instead, and have hats added digitally to the photo after. Oddly enough, it will cost an extra £8 to have a digital mortar board added to a photo!
The BBC reports that a university spokeswoman said injuries caused by falling mortarboards posed an "unacceptable risk".
Unacceptable to whom?
The students are the ones doing the throwing, and are in the line of fire. Let them determine if they want to take the "risk".
The spokesman went on to say:
"We want to ensure no student's graduation day is ruined by the potential for avoidable injury.
This has been agreed by our academic dress suppliers who often receive back damaged mortarboards, and our photographers."
The university said it had not introduced a specific
policy banning the throwing of mortarboards, but instead had "asked our
photography supplier not to encourage it during large group sessions".
university spokeswoman said: "The university accepts some people may
still throw their hats. This is their choice and nothing will happen if
So the university agrees with what I just said about letting students make the decision!
Just to remind you of a key point here, third and fourth-year students had been
sent instructions from a photography company telling them hats could be
added to the photo digitally for £8.
The Health and Safety Executive said the chance of being injured by a flying mortar board is "incredibly small".
"When the concern is actually about the hats being returned in good condition, it's time to stop blaming health and safety."
Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women’s hospital have conducted research, published in the British Medical Journal, that has concluded that eating potatoes may lead to an increase in the risk of high blood pressure. Note an increase in risk is not the same as increase in cases!
However, in what I deem to be a fatal flaw in their research, they did not distinguish between the cooking methods used (eg baked, mashed, fried etc). That being said they also concluded that there was no association between eating crisps and high blood pressure.
However, the authors acknowledged that, as with any observational study,
no firm conclusions could be drawn about cause and effect.
In other words this research is of bugger all use to man and beast!
Well done Brighton Council, for once again winning my prestigious "Prats of The Week" Award.
The council won it because it banned a rubbish truck emblazoned with the Union Flag from rubbish duty.
The council, having been proded by the GMB Union, deemed that the truck supported #Brexit.
Aside from the obvious point that the Union Flag has been around a lot longer than #Brexit, there is of course another point that the council has missed.
Chris Wood, Truck UK owner, is quoted by the Telegraph:
"I have never had a complaint before.
it looked nice, it never even crossed my mind that it could support
Since we have had trucks on the road we have always used the
Union Jack as our logo.
I only found out had been taken out of service on Friday. I think
it's political correctness gone mad. If the council are not happy with
it then I have to respect that, they are my customer.
If it causes this much grief then we will have to change it, but
we've used it since 2004 and never had any problems before. No other
councils have had a problem with it. It has been on the side of trucks
for 12 years."
Brighton Council, well deserving Prats of The Week!