Why do companies and farmers’ associations make themselves heard loudly only when Italian products rich in saturated fats are attacked? Instead when others product are attacked with anti-scientific calumnies they are silent. This little game runs the risk of turning against them.
Whether true or not, the news that UN and WHO want to punish saturated fats and therefore also the Parmigiano Reggiano confirms the hypocrisy throughout Italy, starting with a certain industrial world and some associations that should defend the interests of farmers. A comment – a bit demagogic – by ANSA is enough to unleash the uproar. Here are our heroes immediately rallying in defence of Italian excellence rich in saturated: from cheese to salami.
Yet the same ones have hurled themselves against any saturated fat as long as they are not Italian of origin, like palm oil. Against Canadian wheat because “contaminated” by glyphosate – even if it is under the limits of the law. Against Asian rice, for any concrete reason, but surely for protectionist spirit.
We support free choice. We reject any dangerous attempts by Governments or any international agency to impose diets and food criteria. We are worried about a tendency that humiliates our nature as individuals. Governments and agencies stand up to guardians of our diet even in situations that have no implications for the costs and management of healthcare spending.
Children are not obese because they eat sugary or saturated fats. They simply eat too much compared to the little physical activities they do. Why don’t they forbid the use of electronic devices in front of which they are enchanted for hours, then? If Governments, the EU, the UN and the WHO are so concerned about the interest of citizens, it is perhaps better that they invest in information and education – on a scientific basis.
We will defend the Grana and Parmigiano, as we like to eat pasta with Canadian wheat, taste Asian rice, and many biscuits with palm oil. We regret that many entrepreneurs blinded by marketing betray the principles of the market – with which they have achieved personal and professional success – to chase the new trend, or even to exploit them to their advantage, but disadvantage consumers and the environment.
For instance, Barilla in its sustainability report tells us – with scientific data and facts – that palm oil is the most sustainable ingredient, but then it prefers to buy foreign sunflower oil, explaining that the Asian oil is harmful to the environment. In the end, it forces us to eat inferior quality products compared to past formulas.
We have, on one side, the state and the UN that want to impose environmental formulations and taste. On the other side, businesses go after them, instead of defending their quality, and our right to eat good things.
Nevertheless, be careful, those that live by the sword, die by the sword
For Free Choice
For Free Choice aims to promote scientific information and method in public discourse. For Free Choice also defends consumers’ choice rights against the smear and demonizing campaigns which aim to confuse them and benefit specific interests.