We used to have something similar but that's all stopped now. So we get "value" loaves that appear to have been made out of the woodflour from an MDF sawmill

People were not incredibly unhealthy in the years before a widening gym culture. They walked more – and of course, there were fewer sedentary jobs. But in terms of exercise, those are the main differences.



What I'm trying to get across is that people don't 'need' a gym culture to be healthy – or to diet. And to reiterate, that is not a 'go' at you or at gyms per se.



One of the biggest problems with bone density in this country is dieting, because most women who diet cut things like dairy produce, which provide calcium. Research has shown that dieting women have lower bone density.



I'd agree – and I think they're sold that idea very successfully. But I'd also suggest that the culture of 'the body beautiful' and our obsession with 'beauty' and slimness – and the general derision of anyone who doesn't fit some pretty tight ideas of those – does not help either. There is an impact on men – and boys are being increasingly targeted by big business as a growth market – but the impact on women, with research showing that children as young as nine are worrying about their bodies – is massive, and can catch women into a vicious circle when they're often too young and lacking in the knowledge and confidence to be able to make better decisions.



Indeed.



I had a phase where I ate WW stuff – not the sweets (generally, I don't have a particularly sweet tooth). But the ready meals. Yuk. And in retrospect, I realise the amount of junk contained in them. It touches on what I mentioned earlier about food being so bland to start with that you need to use all sorts of things to give it some flavour.



No. My point is that rising gym membership – and rising participation in other forms of exercise – have not stopped rising obesity. So I'd say that they're neither at the heart of the problem or the solution.

Much of which is tasteless. Indeed, they now market things such as tomatoes with labels like 'flavoursome' at higher prices. An admission, if ever there was, that most of the rest lack flavour.

It's hard to feel enthused about something that lacks any flavour. Cucumber is a perfect example (celery another). Most cucumbers that you buy have no taste or aroma. When you get one that has, it can be a shock the first time. There's even a point to cucumber sandwiches when you have good cucumber. And celery soup ...



There's an extreme example of what you're mentioning here in Joanna Blythman's Shopped: The shocking power of Britain's supermarkets. Sainsbury's, IIRC, marketed an apple that was pre-sliced, then dipped in a vitamin solution and packed in a nitrogen-filled pillow to keep it from going brown. This was apparently a 'convenience food' – because apples aren't convenient to start with and take massive of preparation before you can eat them.

It's like all those bags of prepped veg: how long does it really take to peel and chop a carrot? Well, I can do two large ones in 90 seconds – and I'm light years from having fast knife work. But while you're paying more for these things, you're getting less, since the veg will have lost at least some of their nutrients.

This is what I mean when I've talked about a con previously. Who really cannot spare 90 seconds to prep a couple of carrots?

I really think this is hugely true – as in in my previous post.



I've read (it might have been in a link that you provided) that Chorleywood may be the reason that there has been such a growth in various intolerances.

But on taste alone you're spot on. It only really struck me this summer that, while I eat very little bread here, I eat far more when we're away on the Continent.



I can see positives and negatives. I think that one of the biggest problems is the extent to which many people lack basic cookery skills. I don't mean complex stuff – I really do mean simple things. I know it's been mentioned before, but we've had young people on this board asking for help on how to do things like cook frozen burgers and make mashed potato.

If that's a starting point, then what chance is there, unless something makes them choose to make the effort to learn some skills?



Eating good food is one of life's greatest pleasures.

Part of the problem, I'd suggest, is that too many people have not really experienced that and thus fall into a camp of considering food primarily as fuel – and/or in finding pleasure in those things that are created to provide very rapid hits of it (junk/fast food with loads of salt and sugar).

One thing that really didn't help was feeding a generation (or more) of school children with effing turkey twizzlers. How did that help to educate their palates?

On your calcium point minty, my wife never has cows milk, and on rare occasions has goats and sheep cheese in the house, there are plenty of foods that contain calcium, nuts, broccoli etc in fact too much milk can have the reverse effect and cause Osteoporosis but the government or whoever is responsible for the milk moustache advert always seem to neglect that fact.

I wasn't just meaning milk, but all dairy produce, Horatio Yed.

Meant to say, as part of a response to Stand Offish's points, that you don't need what might be perceived as a foodie's larder to make good food.

Just take a can of decent tomatoes (preferably the ones in their own juice and nowt else) and simmer away with a bit of dried chili. Serve over pasta.

That's not fancy food, it won't take long, it doesn't require lots of skills, it ain't expensive and it'll be quite healthy as well as tasty.

You're right that traditional skills have been left to wither on the vine.
Even though schools do promote skills in this area and there is wealth of information and TV programmes to help nurture and encourage cooking skills.
Will the trend be reversed?
I doubt it, which is a shame.

You and Coddy are of a certain age (no disrespect ) and I think the art of cooking is important to you and furthermore you can see how people are settling for inferior diets. But for younger folk it's a minority sport now.
It's dying Minty, there is nothing you can do about, apart from at a personal level.

You often say that people view food as fuel, which implies that they shovel it in because it's what keeps them alive.
I don't think that's true. I think that irrespective of cooking knowledge and skills, people still love to eat for the taste experience, it's just that they are limited to what they can cook and what someone else can provide.
They will still appreciate something Minty has cooked just as much as you will.
They might eat a burger for the lovely 'fat' taste just as much as you might eat something of your own creation for the lovely 'fat' taste. It's just that their choices might be limited.
Self-imposed limitations granted, but I still think they love food just as much as you do.
They just can't be bothered to explore.

How about the taxpayers? After all, we are the ones footing their bills when the inevitable poor health and the diseases that go with it kick in. To illustrate; never listen to an overweight person banging on about illegal immigration (or legal ones for that matter either), in 2007 obesity cost the NHS £4.2 BILLION - this is set to rise to £6.2 billion per year by the end of 2013.

Do your bit for the economy and country, lose weight!

The continuing number of cookery shows on TV suggests otherwise. As does for example the WH Smith book charts where in hardbacks there are 4 cookery books in the current Top 20 with Jamie's Great Britain at no. 3 and "Home Cooking Made Easy" at no. 9.

Particularly the latter, since neither Coddy, Minty or any oldies would, I suggest, be remotely likely to buy that title, except as a present.