Here is the complete article, you can find the link here


By LINDA WILLIAMSON -- Toronto Sun

Step away from the bagel. Dump the sugary soft drink and fries. There, I've just saved the feds about $15 million.

And most people I know could do the same - because just about everyone I know has been on some sort of diet or another. Our heads (if not our bellies) are stuffed with the latest nutritional wisdom on what makes us fat.

Why, we wonder, should the feds blow another $15 million on studying the blatantly obvious? It's the food, stupid.

Yes, the federal funding announced last week is earmarked to tackle a very serious health problem - obesity. It's no laughing matter. Too many Canadians are overweight, our kids tragically so. We're now seeing very young children developing diseases that were once only found in adults, like Type 2 diabetes, heart attacks and hardening of the arteries.

So news that someone in Ottawa is finally waking up to this deadly problem is welcome. Trouble is, like all government initiatives, this one should be taken with more than a few grains of blood-pressure-elevating salt.

WE ALREADY KNOW

After all, what are the feds going to find out for their $15 million that we - and the multi-billion-dollar diet and fitness industry - don't already know? We're a culture raised on junk food. We don't eat enough healthy foods; we barely even cook anymore. We snack endlessly and we don't exercise.

If the feds are serious about pursuing this issue, let them at least start from there. We have a good idea why we're fat - the question is, what are we going to do about it?

Here's another free hint: the old thinking - i.e., fat is bad - is passe. Just ask a nation of followers of Suzanne Somers, Michel Montignac, The Zone, Protein Power Plan, Sugar Busters and, the guy who started it all, Dr. Robert Atkins.

More and more researchers - along with those of us who have done our own, shall we say, in-home testing - are finding that it's not so much fat, but processed carbohydrates that make us fat. As journalist Gary Taubes stressed in a stunning New York Times Magazine piece this past summer ("What if it's all been a big fat lie?" July 7), obesity and cholesterol levels across North American have skyrocketed since fat was identified as Public Enemy No. 1 two decades ago. Told to curb our fat intake, we have gorged on sugary soft drinks, pasta, etc., and we're now fatter than ever.

Check out Web sites for any of the above regimes (some of which, I'd warn, are more sensible than others) and you'll find thousands of testimonials to the new wisdom. Sugar is evil. Processed food sucks. Protein rules. Fat is our friend.

Today's nutritional science increasingly points to the link between high-glycemic foods (that is, those that spike blood-sugar levels, such as sugar or white bread) and body fat. And while debate still rages over some theories of Atkins et al. (his view that butter and red meat are actually good for you is still a bit extreme for many), there's more scientific consensus on this than, say, the Kyoto accord.

Yet official Ottawa still offers us the old standby, Canada's Food Guide, with its recommendation of 5-12 servings of grains per day, and just 2-3 of meat/protein - a ratio that more than one low-carb Internet site describes as identical to the formula farmers use to fatten up livestock.

Now, I'm not discounting the Food Guide, which does stress we should choose "whole grains, more often." But it does little to warn against, say, too much sugar. It needs a serious update.

'LIGHTER' CHOICES

And, as anyone who's tried to do it knows, even choosing whole grains isn't as simple as it sounds. Take, just as an example, the "Whole Wheat Chicken McGrill," part of the new "Lighter Choices" menu at McDonald's. As the company's Web site shows, the "whole wheat" bun isn't actually made from whole wheat flour, but rather: "Enriched flour (wheat flour, malted barley flour, thiamine mononitrate, riboflavin, niacin, folic acid, reduced iron), water, wheat bran, sugar, yeast, canola oil, dough conditioner (calcium sulfate, calcium peroxide, sodium stearoyl lactylate), wheat gluten, salt, calcium propionate, caramel colour, corn meal." Better than a white bun, maybe, and all pretty standard ingredients, but hardly what I'd call health food. (Plus, even the chicken contains sugar.)

It doesn't take a food scientist - or $15 million - to see how our eating habits could be healthier. Less processed junk; more fresh fruit and vegetables, true whole grains and high-quality protein. Stay away from high-sugar, high-carb, high-fat and deep-fried everything (except for rare treats).

As for the $15 million, it could be put to better use. Like, maybe, a tax-incentive fund for companies willing to develop good, convenient, affordable food that's not laced with sugar, starch, fat and an additive list as long as your arm.