Jamie Oliver's Sugar Rush

The only skinny celebrity chef was Gary Rhodes and he eventually admitted to having an eating disorder and living on breakfast cereal!

I agree with Teetime that Jamie is certainly not cynical. I think both he and James Martin are deadly serious about their campaigns and manage to get results when others have failed.

Space before the 't' Anya!

But I agree, he does seem to have something of a problem controlling his weight - it seems to fluctuate quite a bit.

What happened there

He needs to watch his weight - looking a bit -- tubby-- chunky.

I didn't say poor people were incapable of cooking healthy meals. I said some of his cheap meal recipes weren't that cheap.

Why is he the last person I can call cynical, Teetime?

He runs a very prominent campaign, gets lots of free airtime/advertising then links his next book to it.

Of course he is going to write a book that ties in with his campaigning - why not? It's his job.

His Ministry of Food recipes are excellent, and make use of good value ingredients.

Many of his recipes are free, available on line.

Jamie is the last person you can call cynical!

Cynical or not ( and it maybe not) any celebrity has the high profile to get people to look at issues.If it was A nutritionist somewhere telling people about the dangers of too much sugar they wouldn't be listened to or even noticed. so it can't ever be a bad thing IMO.

I take your point VQ but there are books like that already on the market such as Delia's ' Frugal' and Sainsbury's cards 'Feed the Family for a Fiver'.

'Poor people' are perfectly capable of getting recipes and cooking healthy, low cost meals. When we were struggling on low wages I did just that. Is it not rather patronising to suggest those on low incomes are incapable?

It's expensive if you use the free range meat he recommends.

I have no problem with him be a campaigner or writing books. It's the cynical way he links them.

As to chances, no everyone as the opportunity or is in the position to make the most of those chances. He was supposed to be giving healthy cheap meals for those who had little money. Instead he produced recipes that were still above the price range of some and included foods that they would find difficult to get or wouldn't buy in case they didn't like them.

If he really wants to help poor people eat more healthily he should be showing meals like shepherd's pie and casseroles using cheaper slow cook meats that are readily available. But there's no money in that as why pay for recipes that most of us all know.

It's not always about having the chances though is it Nellie it's about taking advantage of the chances on offer.

Well whether or not someone "finds something expensive" or not depends on your your income and savings. In general terms, having had good enough chances in life to be able to earn a good salary.

DD does the hit and run tray bake chicken every week and doesn't find it expensive at all. It also has the advantage that both the children love it!

I don't think you can blame him for writing books. When he does a TV programme his website is flooded with people wanting the recipes that they've seen so he's hardly shoving it down peoples throats - the demand is there.

He took the school meals idea and ran with it as his own when in fact it was already in operation in Hull.

He also brings out a book to go with every campaign he runs.

His eat cheaply but healthily meals were far too expensive. For example his Hit and Run Tray Bake Chicken works out at between £3 and £4 a head and that's before you add his suggested green salad, rice, polenta or crusty bread. I aim to spend £1 to £1.50 a head or less on most meals and that includes veg/salad. A more expensive meal such as braising steak costs just over £2 a head.

Maybe my meals aren't as fancy as Jamie's but they're tasty, healthy and cheaper.

Thanks for the graphic, granoffour. The multi-nationals have tentacles everywhere and who actually knows where and by which company many of the 'own brands' are manufactured?

I am a Jamie fan. I don't think he does tell people how to live their lives. He's pointing to the structural and other issues that mean living a healthy life is more difficult for people. In the school dinners campaign, he showed how cost cutting and poor knowledge made it impossible for some schools to offer a healthy meal. And he addressed those issues.

With sugar, he shows how the food and the restaurant industries could make a positive effort to enable people to reduce sugar in their diet.

I loved the programme even though I was shocked and a bit tearful for the poor little mite having his teeth out under general anaesthetic due to tooth decay! If it takes Jamie to bring this issue to the fore I wish him well and shall continue to watch the programmes. I have bought his new book and Yes he is a bit zealous about his new found knowledge after doing a Nutrition Diploma but I like his approach which isn't a bit 'nannyish' its enthusiastic and caring and the government doesn't seem to be doing much about it.

Yes, getting a bit fed up of Jamie telling us all how to live our lives, adding to the nanny state we try to function in!

Or is he a cynical businessman who gets publicity for a cause then sells yet another expensive book on the back of his 'cause'.

I have to admit I'm biased. Hull had free, healthy school meals in primary schools long before Jamie Oliver jumped on the bandwagon. In fact his researchers visited the city and saw the work being done. Did he give Hull any credit for 'his idea'?

I don't buy sweets or fizzy drink, and mostly I eat Tesco own brand, so the only item I could find on that graphic that I eat is Flora. I liked the program though, if Mexico got some benefit from a sugar tax then I hope Oliver has some success with his campaign. He seems like a bloke with his heart in the right place.