Tuesday, February 27, 2007

Ready Steady Go


This whole traffic light discussion for food really annoys me. This is eating, lite. When did we get to the point that we needed little colours on food to tell us what we should be eating? The human race has survived for thousands of years, do we really need guidance now? Of course, it really indicates how disconnected we have become from our food (as well as a nanny culture). How many people really understand how food is produced or even, in many cases, how to cook it? What is needed isn't traffic lights, but to educate people properly. Get people onto farms, let them see what goes into producing food, get them to understand that it doesn't have to come in tins or plastic wrapping.

There are few foods that are inherently bad. It is the quantities that are the problem. We need a balanced diet. Traffic light systems do not tell us that. In fact they imply that food is bad, even dangerous (after all that is what red is used for as a signal). We don't normally use red like this. Does a red traffic light (a real one) mean it is less wise to proceed? No, it means stop or there is a high possibility you will be killed. Does "Red Alert" mean it's just a good idea not to nod off at the moment? And this inappropriate labelling (what is the difference between a red labelled food and a red labelled poison) leads to further dumbing down and even less understanding about food.

No comments: