h a l f b a k e r y
On the one hand, true. On the other hand, bollocks.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
or get an account
The 'NPKS' system is familiar to everybody who has seen a bag of fertilizer: it's an assay of the amount of nitrogen, phosphorous, potassium and (in Australia) sulphur in the product.
Foodstuffs, in stores and restaurants, should also be thusly labelled, according to the percentages of:
- addictive substances.
This would allow chefs to tweak their recipes towards their clients, gourmands to shop for new items within their own gustatory comfort zone, and provide a new tool for dieticians.
NHS info on UK food labelling
[pocmloc, Nov 18 2011]
||Thanks poc, we have that here too. I'm was after a bit more tongue-in-cheek labelling of junkfoodstuffs in the same way they do fertilizer.
||They do *tongue-in-cheek* labelling with fertilizer?
||I thought the traffic lights system (described further down that NHS link) _was_ tongue in cheek. It certainly looks it!
||I've also given some (less tongue in cheek) thought to the nutritional equivalent of NPK. The nutritional Big 3 could be carbohydrate, protein, and fat. Some would consider P, Ca, K, and (possibly) Na to be the important elemental macro-nutrients.
||We will stick with the Pratchett Diet, which refers to "the four food groups: sugar, starch, grease and burnt crunchy bits."