Crunchy Nut Cornflakes are rubbish these days. So are Sugar Puffs (now renamed to avoid the word 'sugar'). Even though I've mostly lost my sweet tooth, they are bland when I bought some as a nostalgic treat rather than overly sickly as I feared.
I'm not sure about Frosties.
If I want properly sugary cereal I'm best off buying some muesli.
-
Bliss.Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
You talk about cornflakes. We were so poor, we had to make do watching our neighbours eat rocks.Leave a comment:
-
Pah, you lot talk about luxury. At least you HAD some cornflakes. We were so poor we had to make do with watching our neighbours eat theirs.Leave a comment:
-
Crunchy Nut Cornflakes and Coco Pops are not healthy
On what planet are Crunchy Nut Cornflakes and Coco Pops healthy?
https://news.sky.com/story/kelloggs-...reals-12645666
Kellogg's has lost a legal challenge against the government over new food regulations that would stop some of its cereals being prominently displayed in shops.
The maker of Coco Pops and All-Bran took legal action against the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) over the rules, which come into force this October.
Under the plans, there will be restrictions on where certain types of foods can be displayed in supermarkets or on their websites.
Another part of the regulations taking effect next year will ban multi-buy promotions of foods deemed high in fat, sugar or salt.
Shops will not be allowed to promote these types of foods in high-profile locations such as checkouts, shop entrances and aisle ends.
Kellogg's argued the regulations are unlawful because the nutritional value of breakfast cereals will be determined by their dry weight as sold, as opposed to how they are eaten - usually with milk.
Speaking in the High Court, the manufacturer's barrister Tom Hickman QC said: "It is self-evident that breakfast cereals are not eaten dry.
"They are not designed to be eaten in that way, they are not marketed to be eaten in that way and they are not in practice eaten that way."
More than half of Kellogg's cereals 'to be classed as less healthy'
Mr Justice Linden dismissed the claim in a judgment on Monday, concluding that the issue of how cereals are consumed and should be measured had been considered and resolved in consultations.
"In my judgment, the true position is that the fact that, in their detailed responses, none of the breakfast cereal manufacturers raised the issue during the consultation period of more than a year tends to support the view that the 'as sold versus as consumed' issue had long since been resolved, was well understood and was accepted in the sector," he ruled.
He said there is "no dispute" that breakfast cereals can be part of a healthy diet.
He continued: "But the argument that there are nutritional benefits to the consumption of a given breakfast cereal does not affect the point that if it contains excess fat, sugar or salt, that feature of the product is adverse to a child's health.
"Still less is it an argument against seeking to encourage, for health-related reasons, the promotion and consumption of breakfast cereals which contain less fat, sugar or salt.
"Nor does mixing a breakfast cereal which is high in, for example, sugar, with milk alter the fact that it is high in sugar."
Mr Justice Linden said 54.7% of Kellogg's current cereals will be categorised as less healthy under the new regulations.
He added that 30% of Kellogg's products that are high in fat, sugar or salt are sold through location promotions - deals with retailers to put products in high-profile places, as well as online promotions.
Kellogg's previously estimated that restrictions on these location promotions would cost the company £5 million in annual profits, the judge said.
Leave a comment: