Danish city makes pork mandatory in public institutions

[Terxpahseyton]

Given its taste that is surprising.

 

[FriendlyFire]

The only government involvement in food that I support is making sure the food being sold to the public isn't full of deadly diseases and parasites. Beyond that, they have no business telling me what to eat or how much of it I am allowed to eat.

You mean safe for human consumption ?
Because diseases and parasites dont cover stuff like chemical contamination, toxins, then there is adding in addictive chemicals, and mislabeling, horse meet sold as beef.

I'd imagine in the future clone human flesh will be available to eat.

 

[Zkribbler]

You do know that Fish and Chips was introduced by refugees. It is not British food.

Both the battered fish the chips were both invented in England, so you're wrong twice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fish_and_chips

 

[FriendlyFire]

Both the battered fish the chips were both invented in England, so you're wrong twice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fish_and_chips

Objectional !

Fish is fried in many parts of the world, and fried fish is an important food in many cuisines. For many cultures, fried fish is historically derived from pescado frito, and the traditional fish and chips dish of England which it inspired. The latter remains a staple take-out dish of the UK and its former and present colonies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fried_fish

The Portuguese gave us fried fish, the Belgians invented chips but 150 years ago an East End boy united them to create The World's Greatest Double Act

But just as tea originates in India or China, fish and chips is partly Portuguese and partly Belgian.

The British can take credit for uniting these two Continental imports and creating a coupling that is loved the world over.

One hundred and fifty years ago, in 1860, on the streets of the East End of London, 13-year-old Jewish boy called Joseph Malin had the bright idea of combining fried fish with chips.

Battered fried fish had first arrived in London 200 years earlier with Jewish refugees from Portugal and Spain.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ed-create-The-Worlds-Greatest-Double-Act.html

It seems the Jews brought it with them from Spain and then combined Fish with chips
So Jewish invention ????

 

[bhavv]

Double objection:

Battered fish used in fish and chips is not exactly the same as the Spanish-Portuguese dish pescado frito, which is fish dipped into flour, battered fish is first coated in flour then dipped into a batter consisting of flour mixed with liquid,

I've not had fish and chips for a while now since chicken dinners are currently reduced to £2 each at my nearest supermarket. Once the offer ends I might have to resume eating fish and chips weekly.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

School lunch standards are very highly regulated in the US. Fluid milk needs to be served at every school lunch as does servings of no less than one half once of meat or meat substitute.

That's for nutrition. You seriously can't tell me with a straight face that's the reason for the initiative that's the topic of this thread.

 

[Takhisis]

Danish culture? This explains why Frans Bengtsson wrote about Vikings finding it strange that a ‘Jute’ didn't want to work on Saturdays and refused to eat pork.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Double objection:

Objectional on your Objectional !

The exotic history of British fish and chips

The Book of Jewish Food, the ultimate authority, says battered fried fish “was a legacy of the Portuguese Marranos (crypto-Jews) who came to England in the 16th century

There is a wealth of references to back this up, including Manuel Brudo writing in 1544 “that the favourite diet of Marrano refugees” [from the Inquisition] was fried fish, sprinkled with flour, dipped in egg and breadcrumbs; Hannah Glasse writing in 1781; Lady Montefiore, who anonymously wrote the first Jewish cookery book in English (in 1846) and recommended frying fish in “Florence oil” – olive oil; Eliza Acton in 1845;

Fried fish and chipped (or sometimes jacket) potatoes were for a long time sold separately. Joseph Malin, an Ashkenazi Jewish immigrant, who opened a shop in Bow in 1860, gets the honours for being first to vend them together.

Eating cold fried fish required a superior batter to protect the fish from spoiling and the fat from penetrating the fish, plus good quality oil (or dripping) with no “off” flavours. The not terribly rational Jewish dietary laws excluded fish without scales or fins, and meant that if fish was to be eaten with dairy products, it had to be fried in oil, not dripping.

With its clear ethnic origins and its continued production by immigrants, why is fish and chips our iconic dish? Just as, in 1928, The New York Times declared: “England’s hot dog is 'fish and chips’”, the food historian Bruce Kraig once said that “the sausage in a bun was the typical American national dish”. For a member of a minority, eating it was a way of marking your assimilation to the majority. Eating and liking hotdogs made you American.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/11140147/The-exotic-history-of-British-fish-and-chips.html

 

[bhavv]

I cant believe you. Everyone including the Portugese know that fish and chips was invented in England.

 

[Hygro]

I don't deny it. But specially for kids, unless it is very carefully planned and followed by a professional, it's also a bad idea. And veganism for kids is just immoral.

Why, because a French couple botched it two years ago?

 

[luiz]

Why, because a French couple botched it two years ago?

I don't even know about this French couple you're talking about. But I had a colleague in elementary school whose parents were hippie weirdos, and he was forced to be a vegetarian. He was weak, extremely thin and a had a permanently yellowish complexion. I call that child abuse.

I also come from a family of doctors, quite reputed doctors (the building of the Medicine School in the Federal University of Rio is named after a great-uncle of mine), and they all say a balanced diet should ideally include meat, specially for kids. Naturally, most Westerners eat too much red meat (Brazilians above all), but some red meat is good for you. And white meat even more so.

It is possible to be a healthy vegetarian, but it demands planning and follow-up. No good doctor would recommend it for kids, and the state certainly shouldn't be incentivizing or enabling such decision.

 

[Lillefix]

I have a cousin who ended up in hospital a few months ago(and it was very serious). The advice from the doctors was that she had to eat meat. I can't remember if she was Vegan or Vegetarian or if she had a medical condition she wasn't aware of, but it didn't end up well.

But I think you can subsitute meat for fish and be much better off health wise. Not that it's an option for me. I hate fish.

 

[bhavv]

I bought no less than 6 chicken dinners and 2 x 2 packs of fishcakes today, plus lots of cakes!

A weeks of meats and cakes for £25. I actually feel noticeably better now that I've been eating meat 5-6 days a week. High biological value protein ftw, gives me plenty of L Tryptophan and L Tyrosine for happy neurotransmitters.

Oh yes, and the most glorious roast chicken joint stuffed with pork sage and onion stuffing and wrapped in bacon. Its the single best meal one can have.

I wanted fish and chips too, but they werent open in the mornings so I had subways. Meat meat glorious meat.

 

[bhavv]

GLORIOUS

 

[FriendlyFire]

You call that chicken dinner ?
Its a rolled and stuffed chicken breast.

 

[bhavv]

And how is that not a chicken dinner? The rest are 2 breast with marinade and sauce, and two chicken curries, and 4 fishcakes.

 

[Angst]

Why? So what if we eat more meat than we "need"? People should be free to eat whatever they want without some regulatory authority trying to limit or encourage one type of diet or another.

The only government involvement in food that I support is making sure the food being sold to the public isn't full of deadly diseases and parasites. Beyond that, they have no business telling me what to eat or how much of it I am allowed to eat.

With that said, I think it should be pretty obvious that I find the law in the OP to be extremely stupid and an unnecessary infringement on personal freedom.

In public institutions, government has its place in making sure that the served food is healthy. It's not just about making sure there aren't diseases and parasites in food. (EDIT: There are other things that are problematic. The kind of meat often served in institutions is conventionally produced, because that's the cheapest available for those institutions, which all need money. Conventionally produced meat has a lot of traces of industrial medicine which is really not good for you. But other than that...)

It is perfectly fine for the government to make sure that its institutions balance nutrients in the food in such a way that the servings are overall healthy. Eating more meat than you need may have the effect of the diet not being properly balanced. As such it would be perfectly fine to restrict the meat servings somewhat, and push servings towards more fruits and vegetables. In addition to serving a more balanced diet, it's cheaper too, allowing the institutions to get more room to buy stuff that isn't food. And it's better for the environment as well...

The point is, serving meat with every meal rather than more rarely is not healthier, and may actually be more unhealthy. It's more expensive, becoming an opportunity cost for the institution in question. And it has a higher carbon footprint.

The pros is that many people like meat. I get that. But people like candy too, and there's a reason you don't serve candy to kids with every meal. I understand that there's a difference between candy and meat healthwise but the point is that it's not problem free for an institution to serve meat always, and not problem free for the society in question to have a huge meat consumption.

EDIT: I looked over some of the above posts. I'm actually not arguing for a vegetarian diet. I'm saying that there is such a thing as unnecessary amounts of meat servings, and there's such a thing as problematic amounts of meat servings. I hope you understand the difference.

EDIT: Oh and about the milk. Daily servings of milk have been found to be somewhat unhealthy in modern studies. It is part of Danish health policy to serve kids milk for every institutionalized meal because we used to think it was healthy, and now it's commonplace for parents to think it's healthy, so they get it for their kids. But it isn't. Not for every day at least. But due to the culture, I'd imagine that if you remove it from the diet, parents would be uncomfortable even if aware of the detriments, because milk is commonly believed to be that much a supernutrient.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

<snip>

Don't use other people's threads as your personal blogs.

 

[Angst]

I think it's OK, I think it was just light-hearted banter.

 

[bhavv]

Don't use other people's threads as your personal blogs.

Don't tell me what to do.

RE milk - its healthy and essential for children. Its unhealthy and unnecessary for adults. As we age, our ability to digest milk diminishes, and as our bones are no longer growing, the nutrition provided from it is no longer needed.