They are what you feed them

I’ve spent a large part of my weekend reading They Are What You Feed Them by Dr Alex Richardson. It’s good to read some science behind some of the things I’ve been groping towards in this blog for the last few years. Even if a lot of research still needs to be done, it’s interesting to know that really tiny biochemical differences in food (such as the difference between A1 and A2 milk, or omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids) might have a very big impact on health.

Whether or not you think the science is controversial, I still think this is not the main problem. Most adults in the UK could probably tell you what a healthy diet is. If asked, most people would mention 5 portions of fruit and veg a day, no junk/fast food, and not too many cakes, sweets, biscuits and fizzy drinks. This much, at least, is uncontroversial, regardless of the finer points.

The problem is we just don’t follow this diet, even thought we know we should. Why? Because it’s easier, (possibly) cheaper and more enjoyable (in the short term) to carry on as we are. If telling people what they should be eating doesn’t work, what does? Restricting access to the worst foods? Junk food taxes? Compulsory cooking lessons in schools? Free fruit and vegetables? Free orange juice and cod liver oil?

Posted in Food | Leave a comment

Staring, staring eyes

We were clearing out a desk drawer yesterday and we came across a postcard that had been sent to my father-in-law by a friend of his, a fellow academic. On the front was a portrait of Pablo Picasso standing in front of a signed canvas, and on the back the following note:

Dear Miles, 

I’ve written this haunting song about Picasso. It goes: 

Pablo, with your mad staring eyes 
And your cubist paintings,
This world was never meant
For one as beautiful as you.

I think it might be a big hit. I’ve also written this American Lit exam paper, which probably won’t be such a big hit. Perhaps you might like to suggest some changes to the lyrics? 

Love from Dave

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Supermarkets’ Defence

I like Guy Watson’s latest rant that came with my veg box today: Carbon Labelling: Help or Hindrance?  Though I care more about nutrients than carbon footprints, I think what he says about carbon labelling is equally applicable to nutritional values. The supermarkets’ defence is that, as long as people keep buying it, they are obliged to supply it: [the supermarkets] ”continue with business as normal while hiding behind the ‘we just provide what they say they want’”.

The problem is that people do want it – it’s cheap and it tastes good, even if it’s killing you. Supermarkets and food manufacturers have been investing for years (if not decades) to get to this point: whole supply chains and business models built around the products it is most profitable to sell (hint: it’s not fresh fruit and vegetables). It’s just not in their interests for us to stop buying this stuff.

How do you start to turn this tide? How do you construct a coherent, evidence-based argument for an alternative way of doing things that doesn’t make you sound like a shouty flake?

So, there’s a challenge.

Posted in Food, Thoughts | Leave a comment

Microskills: imitation

Complex cognitive processes (like reading, writing and playing music) can be broken down into a series of much smaller microskills. Most of us were so young when we learned them that we don’t remember each tiny step, and the distinction between each microskill becomes blurred. Microskills appear to be discrete, which accounts for the spiky profiles you see in many dyslexics, who struggle with one or more of them.

I have formulated this (as yet untested) hypothesis from my own experience. I have a problem with one specific mircoskill, which I have called ‘imitation’. I am not very good at reproducing vocally something I have heard. Whatever it is that Meryl Streep has, I have the opposite. I am a kind of anti-Meryl Streep. For example, I failed my audition for the school choir because I couldn’t sing back a tune played on the piano. I was told I was tone deaf and I believed this for twenty-five years. Now I am learning to play the piano, I’ve realised I am not tone deaf because I can easily pick out the wrong note in a familiar tune. But I still struggle to sing in tune.

I was also bad at spoken French (but my French comprehension was OK) and I’ve always been really bad at doing accents of any kind. The part of my brain that connects what I hear to what my voice is able to produce just doesn’t work very well. It is only recently that I’ve made this connection between three things I wasn’t good at as a child.

And here are the two interesting things. First, if this is a congenital difficultly, it doesn’t have to be deterministic. Now I have spent lots of time in France, and practised speaking French, my French accent is much better than it was when I was fifteen. I can also sing much better than I could, though frankly it’s still a bit shaky.

Second, it highlights the enormous role that confidence plays in learning. Because I was told I was bad at these things (and people laughed when I sang or spoke) I just stopped trying. I wasn’t a ‘natural’, so I was needlessly turned off both music and foreign languages for twenty-odd years.

Will we be able, in the future, to map these microskills to neural pathways and / or specific gene expressions? Will we be able to identify difficulties with microskills through brain scanning and DNA analysis? If we can develop a more granular understanding of learning difficulties, can we develop better ways of teaching people?

Posted in Learning, Thoughts | Leave a comment

Feed your brain

Not exactly news, but I was digging around for evidence of the impact of diet on children’s development and came across Michele Belot and Jonathan James’s evaluation of Jamie Oliver’s School Dinners campaign: Healthy School Meals and Educational Achievements (Jan 2009).

So, we know that healthy eating is important to prevent obesity and other illnesses. But we’re also seeing evidence that a diet rich in micronutrients (vitamins C and B, iron and zinc, essential fatty acids) helps you to concentrate, think, learn and control yourself. Micronutrients are most likely to be destroyed in highly-processed foods; therefore, you are malnourished even if you are getting (more than) enough calories.

Is there such a thing as dietary abuse? If a child was being physically abused, at school or home, we rightly expect that someone would notice and take action. But if the only foods a child has access to are crisps, sweets, chocolate, chips, kebabs, fried chicken, burgers and the like, whose responsibility is that?

 

Posted in Food, Learning, Thoughts | Comments Off

Spoons make you fat

An article published yesterday on BMJ Open – Baby Knows Best? – picked up today by the BBC under the title Spoon Feeding ‘Makes Babies Fatter’ – got me thinking. I’m glad someone is starting to research this area, but I’m not sure about the methodology.

The study relied on parents filling in questionnaires about their children’s eating habits. For a start, the youngest baby in the study was 20 months old, whereas most babies start eating solids between 4 and 6 months. I can’t remember what (or how) my daughter ate last week, and I’m sure that in 12 months time I’ll have even less idea. Then, it asked parents how fussy their child was, and whether they showed preferences for particular types of foods. As far as I can see, most children go through fussy phases, so it depends whether you ask during a ‘phase’ or not. (I haven’t seen the raw data, and perhaps the researchers anticipated these problems when they designed the questionnaire).

Also, I’d question exactly how you define baby-led weaning. It is what’s on the spoon, or who has control of the spoon, that counts? I don’t feed my daughter  sweetened purees, but I do spoon (and fork, and chopstick) things into her, often. She has a bite of my cake or biscuit sometimes – it that good, because she feeds herself, or bad, because it’s full of sugar? So far, we have made a point of letting her taste everything we eat, so she has had venison sausages, smoked duck, chicken liver, hare ragu, herrings, prawns, mushrooms, Jerusalem artichokes and even squirrel (to my mother’s horror). Does this mean she isn’t fussy? What if she becomes fussy at eighteen months? Would that be because she had a range of tastes from the start, or despite that, or nothing to do with it whatsoever?

Who knows? Like most parents, you muddle along and do a bit of everything. More research please.

Posted in Food, Thoughts | Comments Off

Cheapest among equals

I was talking to a friend yesterday who mentioned that her mother had joined a local campaign to stop a new Tesco being built in her town. She said that one of the planks of their campaign was that Tesco wasn’t even that cheap when compared across a range of products, not just the loss leaders.

It started me thinking about cheap food (again). Cheap food does have many benefits, especially for those on low incomes. But I think it is important that, in the pursuit of cheapness, you do not lose the essential quality of the thing.

Imagine you need to buy a car because you need to drive to work and back. You could choose between an Aston Martin, a Volvo, a BMW, a Ford Focus, a Nissan Micra – in fact, any of the dozens of cars available depending on your budget and your preferences on looks, safety, reliability etc. But all the cars have one thing in common – they will  get you to work and back.

If someone came up and offered you an Aston Martin for just £1000, you might be tempted. But when you discover this is a scale model of an Aston Martin made from plasticine, you wouldn’t buy it even if it did look quite realistic (from a distance) because it’s not going to do the basic job: get you to work and back.

Is this a good analogy for cheap food? It looks quite realistic from a distance, and it’s much cheaper than the genuine article. But it’s full of fat and sugar and ingredients synthesized in a laboratory that, nutritionally speaking, bear no relation to the real thing. You might think you’ve got a bargain but you’ve actually been sold a pup.

Posted in Food, Thoughts | Comments Off

Toblogganing

To celebrate her first sight of snow, we took our daughter tobogganing in Holland Park this morning. She fell asleep on the sledge on the way up there, and we had to explain to passers by that although she looked dead, we weren’t actually dragging the corpse of our child through the streets.

Posted in Thoughts | Comments Off

French Children Don’t Get Fat (or do they?)

A few years ago I was walking through the airport and I saw a book called French Women Don’t Get Fat by Mireille Guiliano. Intrigued by anything to do with France and food, I bought it and hoped to discover the secret. 260 pages later I was a little disappointed to get the answer – they eat less and move more. When I told my husband this, he was astonished at my disappointment. “What on earth did you think it was going to be?”

Totally unrelated, but borrowing the very successful title formula, Pamela Druckerman has just published French Children Don’t Throw Food: Parenting secrets from Paris. I read it in one evening and it has lots of interesting observations and charm, but I was slightly left with the same feeling: of course, it’s obvious what they do. They have clear rules which they enforce consistently; they aim to strike a balance between the needs of the child and the needs of everyone else; the children are listened to and respected, but are expected to listen and show respect in their turn. Even allowing for gross national stereotypes, it’s valid stuff.

My interest, naturally, zoomed in on the food-related bits. Druckerman explains how lunch is served at her child’s state-run creche, with four courses every day including cheese and fruit. She visits the Commission Menus, where the menu for all the creches in Paris is decided (they debate the merits of foie gras versus duck mousse at Christmas). She describes how vegetables play a much bigger part in the children’s diet right from weaning, how French children don’t have snacks, are expected to taste (if not finish) everything, and go four hours between meals without having a nervous breakdown. And, yes, by taking part in family meals, they get to practise behaving around a table, so that when they go to a restaurant there is some chance they will behave there too.

With all this good stuff going on, you’d expect French children to be the best-nourished and most healthy children in Europe. Yet childhood obesity rates seems to be about the same in France as they are here in the UK, and McDonald’s is at least as popular. What’s going on? You mean that, despite all those vegetables and carefully planned menus, children are still obese?

Druckerman admits that her research focuses exclusively on well-heeled Parisian families who are most likely to eat well anyway. It’s probable that poor and immigrant families, who are more likely to be obese, do not have the time, money or inclination to eat like this. But what I think is interesting is what the French (in Druckerman’s estimation) teach us to expect from children. Children can eat vegetables, sit around a table and take a discerning and informed interest in food from the start. It doesn’t all have to be melamine forks, plain pasta and baked potatoes decorated to look like mice.

At least that’s what I’m hoping.

Posted in Food, Writing | Comments Off

Ladies Lavatory at the London Library

My new design obsession is the Ladies Lavatory on the second floor of the London Library. It can’t have been redecorated for at least 50 years – think subway tiles with grey grout, pull-chain cisterns, white painted panelling, beehive handles, brass catches, mahogany fingerplates and a thicket of pipes that must be Victorian.

I was trying to photograph it discreetly yesterday with my iPhone, when someone else came in and I realised the camera-clicks coming from inside my cubicle must sound a little unsavoury. So I have emailed the Library to ask permission to photograph it properly – fingers crossed.

Posted in Design | Comments Off