Damn Fools and Idiots.

Moves to cut salt levels in bacon and ham risk increasing potentially fatal cases of the paralysing food bug botulism, the Food Standards Agency has been warned.

Ham processors are particularly concerned at moves to reduce salt content to 2.13g per 100g by 2010 and to 1.75g by 2012. They said their concern was not because of a resistance to change, but was related to the health risks.

Lesse, both ham and bacon are a method of (amongst other things) using salt to preserve a meat. Thus using too little salt will fail to preserve the meat. Yes, I think we can all see that, can\’t we?

Malcolm Kane, an independent food technology consultant who advises the campaign group Consensus Action of Salt in Health, suggested that the objections from industry were because companies feared the shelf-life of products may have to be reduced below the current average of ten-day “use by” dates: “I’m disappointed. It is just a feeble excuse for doing nothing about salt levels. They don’t want to lower salt levels because they are nervous about consumer reaction and people not liking the taste with less salt.”

And along comes some fuckwit who says it\’s all about capitalism. How about the thought that they don\’t want to poison their customers, dimbo?

How about those people who don\’t want to eat lots of salt not eat bacon and ham then? Or would that reduce your opportunities to tell everyone else how they should live and die?

And what in buggery is wrong with people liking the taste of salt anyway?

9 thoughts on “Damn Fools and Idiots.”

  1. “Consensus Action of Salt in Health”: it’s like Global Warmmongering, innit? They use the word “consensus” to bully you when there’s a lack of decent evidence.

  2. “They don’t want to lower salt levels because they are nervous about consumer reaction and people not liking the taste with less salt.”

    Translation: ‘Sod you consumers, you’ll eat what we tell you to, or else’

  3. Does anyone remember when bacon used to keep for weeks? Without refrigeration. And taste like bacon? And not glue itself to the pan when you fried it?

  4. I am fortunate enough to be able to buy the Guardian at the 30p discount price, so I probably read the paper copy more often than others here. One reason for buying instead of reading online is the occasionally great centre spread photo. And last month they had a cracker, showing a store full of parma hams strung up for curing. I actually drooled on the page.

    The caption for the photo told us that some of the hams would be strung for a year. The caption missed the point that those hams would be shipped to a distributor, sliced and packed in plastic with a ridiculous *28 day* use by date.

  5. “How about the thought that they don’t want to poison their customers?”

    As long as they can replace the ones they lose, who cares? Otherwise the tobacco industry would have gone long ago.

    Besides, until they were rumbled, the producers used to inject water into chicken fillets to the point where you could have used them to clean your car like wet chamois leathers; and they also injected more chemicals to help keep the water in the meat. Not everything can be left to the market.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *