A Fishy Tale

As we all know Nanny has, over the years, bombarded us with "facts" and advice about what we should and shouldn't eat.

The trouble is, her advice keeps changing; for example:

• We used to be told to drink at least a pint of milk every day, for strong bones and healthy teeth; now we are told that milk contains unhealthy levels of fat.



• Butter and cheese were good sources of protein and vitamin D, now of course they fall under the fat embargo.



• Eggs, great a few years ago; then first comes Eggwina, and next cholesterol.



• Meat, once an excellent source of protein; now an evil source of fat.



• Smoking, this was (300 years ago) taught to children by the state as a means of purifying and cleaning the lungs. Now, well you know the story now!



• Booze, some doctors prescribe drinking in moderation, others council against it.



• Beef was once the meat of choice, then along comes a mad cow and all hell breaks loose.



• Carrots were meant to help you see in the dark, this of course was bollocks. The "seeing in the dark myth" was a piece of propaganda put out in the war designed to make the Germans think that our success at shooting down their bombers was due to better night vision, when in fact it was down to radar (which was classified secret at the time).

Confusing isn't it?

This brings us on to fish, oily fish to be precise. Once we were told by Nanny that oily fish, such as salmon, was good for our bodies and brains. Now it seems that advice may be bollocks.

Analysis of recent trials has found little evidence that eating fish, or taking fish oil capsules, cuts the risk of dying of heart disease, stroke or cancer.

The analysis indicates that it is difficult to show clear benefits. The better the quality of the trial, the lower the apparent benefit.

The findings are published in the British Medical Journal online by a team led by Lee Hooper, of the University of East Anglia.

Why do the findings differ from what was considered to be the perceived wisdom of eating oily fish?

A study by Dr Michal Burr, of the University of Cardiff, found that fish oil may have a short-term benefit, but a long-term disbenefit; because it contains traces of toxic methyl mercury as a contaminant.

The conclusion that we, the punters in the street, must draw from these results is that Nanny and her minions are prone to base their advice and edicts on heresay rather than on irrefutable scientific fact.

A very dangerous policy indeed.

As such the best course of action must be to ignore what Nanny tells you, and eat/drink/smoke in whatever way that makes you feel at ease with yourself.