Friday, June 13, 2008

Ohh, Those Silly Brits

I thought the following blog post was rather amusing and since it relates to margarine, I thought it was appropriate to post:

Britain's Queen Elizabeth has been accused of endorsing unhealthy food.
The Food Commission has said the monarch's use of the Royal Arms on sugar, chocolate, margarine and fizzy drinks packaging is "inappropriate".

Food magazine, published by the commission, says the queen should not be contradicting the government's message of healthy eating. It read: "Royal patronage can be a valuable marketing tool for those companies which are lucky enough to get it.

"Although foods and drinks with poor nutritional profiles are an inevitable part of our everyday diet, it is questionable whether the queen should be granting her warrant, and the status associated with royalty, to such products.

"This is especially relevant when her own government is actively seeking to reduce consumption of such foods." But a Buckingham Palace spokesman said Royal Warrants were awarded to companies and not individual products.

He said: "Royal Warrants are a mark of recognition that a trade organisation has supplied the Royal household to its satisfaction. It doesn't necessarily mean that that particular product [bearing the coat of arms] has been used by the queen."

My response: Ironic that the British government should try to censor royalty since it was the Emperor Napoleon that offered a prize for anyone who could develop a substitute for butter. Enter Frenchman, Hippolyte M├Ęge-Mouriez, who in 1830 who captured the prize with a creation made from natural vegetable oils. Because it had a rich pearl-like consistency, he named it after the Greek word for pearl, margarites. It came to be known as margarine. Today's healthful soft margarines -- less than 2 grams of saturated fat, 0 grams trans fat, no cholesterol and a great source of polyunsaturates and Vitamin are nothing like the margarine of 1830. But butter is still butter -- 7 grams of saturated fat and 30 milligrams of cholesterol. Makes you wonder, 'What was the British Food Commission thinking?'

No comments: