Emeritus Professor of Public Health Nutrition; Former City Councillor, Internationalist, Socialist, Views my own. @CllrBazMargetts for most stuff these days
I Dmd you in a collegiate sense, it was most certainly not intimidation, as I recall you thanked me for the exchange. I think I will cease exchanging with you now as I do not believe you are engaging in good faith.
@BarrieMargetts @CllrBazMargetts @UniofReading You told me in a DM of your friendship and warned me that I should not speak to. I think intimidation is the right word.
@BarrieMargetts @CllrBazMargetts @UniofReading You told me in a DM of your friendship and warned me that I should not speak to. I think intimidation is the right word.
@ggkuhnle @CllrBazMargetts @UniofReading When have I said anything about links to @UniofReading leadership? Show me where? My questions about your involvement with Mars beyond their funding of your EPIC work was a simple question. When you attend this meeting do they pay your expenses and do you declare these?
The accusations by @CllrBazMargetts @BarrieMargetts are fascinating - and apart from telling me my research is limited and I should not comment publicly, he reminded me that he is very friendly with @UniofReading leadership.
Fortunately, my employer supports my research.
https://t.co/ExDVXFY0Ee·2%20g%20increase%20(p. And how do most people know they are ok or not? If average is 83g/day, this means nearly half population are consuming more than recommendation of 90g.
@BarrieMargetts Why do you focus so much on the precautionary principle when you don't seem to understand it (and it's limitations - why are you against risk management for example?)
The UK intake in processed meat is no cause for concern for most people when looking at the data.
My bias is toward putting the interests of public health ahead of private profit and exploitation. The evidence is always important, and must be interpreted in context of precautionary principles of doing no harm. Reducing processed meat consumption is prudent and sensible
@BarrieMargetts IARC 2015 says the same, citing some of my work. But it's much more complicated: fish fingers are associated with a reduced risk of cancer, and removing nitrites or replacing them with alternatives might be beneficial.
Your strong bias shows in science & politics.
I disagree. Preventing spoilage reduces food waste. Products such as fish fingers and sausages make better use of available resources, reduce waste and improve affordability.
None of these foods have an adverse effect on health.
His book is for the wider public, & of course it is easy to criticise specific points. But do you disagree with his wider point, that we( people and planet) would be better off if we ate fewer UPFs/less nutritious foods? What benefit is there to eating more of these UPFa foods?
In the 2020 leadership campaign Keir Starmer said ‘Disciplining people to be united, is going nowhere’. I agree. You don’t build a broad-based movement that can deliver for working class communities by vindictively sidelining dedicated party members and unions. @Keir_Starmer needs to stop breaking his promises. Solidarity with @fburegion3 for taking a stand.
This opens a wider discussion about the whole nutrition profession. When I last looked all profs (heads of groups) were male, whilst more junior staff largely female. Issue also of who decides on research priorities and who sits on funding bodies.
@MIALONMelissa Well done Melissa, grateful to you for saying it as it is & submitting it.
Equality will never be achieved if men assume all leadership roles. Plenty of women could have led these papers.
Men need to speak out for women, & step back, allowing women to assume these roles
This post has been updated with a letter from the authors of the background chapter to the committe, voicing their concerns about the lack of advice to reduce UPF. Interesting reading. Yet, "consensus among experts" has been the narrative...
https://t.co/3MYwL923Gg
@ggkuhnle The problem with being an 'expert' is thinking you know everything; in reality the more you know the less you know with certainty. Good scientists accept the limits of their knowledge, working with paradigms, because they know there is no truth.
@ggkuhnle clear that our children/grandchildren will not live longer than us. Compared to Dutch children UK children are now 7cm shorter, having been similar 10 years ago. UK is going backwards!
@ggkuhnle People are not pontificating ( a pejorative term for a scientist to use) they are presenting clear evidence of what UPFs( as an exposure) are and how they link to a wide range of poor health outcomes. See work of Monteiro
Proportion of UHP foods in the diet has dramatically increased over the last ten years; these foods are artificially cheap because of govt subsidy to raw ingredients. Poverty now linked to obesity and food insecurity- 1 in 5 children now food insecure in UK ( ie skip meals)
I think this is something everyone should remember when pontificating about processed foods.
They've been around for some time but didn't really make a dent in the trend.
Over the last ten years life expectancy has fallen in both men & women, for the first time since this was measured. This is crude long term measure, but worth reading Social determinants of Health work by Marmot. ~40% of all causes of death related to poor diet, linked to poverty
I think this is something everyone should remember when pontificating about processed foods.
They've been around for some time but didn't really make a dent in the trend.
The government's "anti-boycott" legislation would ban public bodies from making ethical decisions on how to invest their money. I do not support this bill. Add your name with mine in defiance of the "anti-boycott" bill. https://t.co/FS5yXCIlXd
its called perception bias, because he has ties with industry and we know those with ties are less critical 0f industry because they get benefits from that industry. we all have biases, the thing is to be open and declare so people can make informed judgments.
@ggkuhnle I never said you have a questionable reputation. My point is that when you attack people who hold the food industry accountable, yet have ties with that same industry, your statements lack credibility.