Comments on: Challenging nutrition paradigms http://www.foodinfo.org.nz/challenging-nutrition-paradigms/ Food and nutrition blog Fri, 20 Jun 2014 04:05:08 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.6 By: Donnell Alexander http://www.foodinfo.org.nz/challenging-nutrition-paradigms/comment-page-1/#comment-141 Donnell Alexander Wed, 22 Sep 2010 22:15:56 +0000 http://www.foodinfo.org.nz/?p=179#comment-141 Thanks Chris. Apologies for the typo. Now fixed.
You’ve identified the nub of the problem, surely it will be impossible to get agreement on what defines a healthy food. By taxing “processed” foods and not “fresh” you then get into an arguement of defining what “processing” is. And do we really want to imply that fresh peas are healthier than frozen peas? The latter are “processed” but also far higher in nutrients unless you’re eating the fresh ones straight from the garden.
Other foods may be helpful for some but not others within the population. Some foods advised for frail elderly folk or athletes are usually quite different from foods we advise for those who are overweight and sedentary.
Cheers
Donnell

]]> By: Chris MacDonald http://www.foodinfo.org.nz/challenging-nutrition-paradigms/comment-page-1/#comment-132 Chris MacDonald Tue, 21 Sep 2010 05:03:12 +0000 http://www.foodinfo.org.nz/?p=179#comment-132 Hi:

Thanks for the mention — but there’s a typo above: my blog is at food-ethics.com (you left out the hyphen).

It’s hard to imagine enforcing price discounts — though the idea of removing taxes from ‘healthy’ foods may be more plausible. But then you’ll end up in a debate over which foods will qualify. I’d be curious to hear if anyone has any *simple* way — simple enough for any national tax bureaucracy — to identify which foods would or would not be taxed under such a scheme.

Cheers,
Chris.
http://food-ethics.com

]]>