Snack Food

Posted on 2002/11/02 15:16:28 (November 2002) by john.

It's just so badly done!

OK, so I'm constantly trying to improve my diet, and as part of that, more often nowadays I eat proper regular meals (even breakfast). I'm fortunate enough to be able to get home usually at lunchtime, so I can cook a proper meal for myself. It's a well observed opinion that it's better to eat a large meal at lunchtime, and something much lighter at dinner time, and I've been working towards this. More fresh fruit and vegetables, and less fat. I'm doing reasonably well. However, despite this, we all occasionally are in a situation where we're not at home, or ill prepared, or short on time, or whatever the excuse is, and have to resort to snack food. Well I'd like to register a complaint. It's crap. Or at least, it totally doesn't suit me at all.

If I wander into a newsagents, corner shop or garage, trying to find something to fill the gap inbetween a meal or whatever, I am almost always totally disappointed. Staring at the goods on offer, I usually have to instantly write off about a third of the things I'm looking at because of stupid ingredients. OK, so a Peperami is a Peperami. If you must eat meat, then clearly things like that have to be made of meat, and I can't really argue with that. What annoys me are the things that have absolutely no need whatsoever to contain some kind of animal derivative and do simply because the manufacturers are either too lazy to change it or perhaps too greedy. Gelatine is the first example that springs to mind, and is an absolute sod. Before turning vegetarian I loved things like Midget Gems, but was well aware even then that they were made out of cow's hooves and so on. So I was prepared to give them up. However, what surprises me constantly are the other products gelatine gets bunged in. Mints, ice creams, yoghurts and so on. Why is that necessary? Then there's things like crisps. OK this has definitely improved recently, Walker's for one have introduced really clear labelling which I though was a great move. However, it is a well observed fact, but still baffling, that Smokey Bacon flavour crisps are suitable for vegetarians whereas cheese and onion are not. Which brings us nicely onto the next pointless animal derivative - rennet. Vegetable substitutes have been around for ages, and can do everything the animal versions can, and are probably cheaper. Let's not forget rennet is not just cow's stomach lining, it has to come from calves, as of course cows don't actually drink milk, so lack that all important enzyme used to break milk down. I guess again this is partly down to laziness, or maybe with certain high quality traditional cheeses they are not very keen to change the process at all. I suppose this is understandable to an extent. However, why the hell are cheese and onion crisps using animal rennet? The cheese isn't named, it's just listed on back of the packet as "cheese powder" or something. If it was grated parmesan, then that would be one thing, but it's almost certainly just some cheap manky old cheddar - would it be so difficult to get a variety with vegetable rennet in? I was never a huge fan of cheese and onion crisps, so it's not a great concern I suppose, but still, it is a bit baffling.

OK, so all of the vegetarianism issues aside. So far we've already excluded a good third of my potential snack food supply. Next up, there's bloody Nestle. The publicity on this seems to have died down a bit, but according to my sister, who is very well informed on these things, they are still continuing the same terrible practices in third world countries, supplying bulk products with terrible safety records and poor (or non existent) instructions which results in deaths. I think this is just the start of it as well. I'm not nearly as clued up on these issues as my sister, but I have an impression the company as a whole cares very little for the safety of it's customers. To make matters worse, they seem to have gone round buying up just about everything else. Especially frustrating are companies like Rowntree's, who had previously made huge contributions to charity, are now under the Nestle umbrella and therefore tarred with the same brush. I've been making a real effort to avoid buying anything from Nestle, and the net result, given their domination of the confectionery industry, wipes out probably another third of potential snack food.

With the left over third of snacky type products, I suppose it basically boils down to health issues or it just being plain boring. Why is all snack food in thse sorts of shops basically either chocolate, sweets or crisps? Obviously there's an element of that's what people want to buy. Sure, I enjoy chocolate as much as the next man (or even woman), so now and again it's great. But where you're substituting this sort of stuff for a proper meal, and on a regular basis, obviously that's not much good. Is it really so difficult to have snack food that is healthy, ethical and, of course, tastes good?

Japan is a great example. Convenience stores there (conbini as they call them) have a great selection of really interesting food, the majority of it being actually healthy as well, and all of it reasonably priced. OK so the vegetarian selection is not so great, as they're not a particularly vegetarian country, but nonetheless, I always look forward to train journeys and the like in Japan, being able to stock up on inari sushi and onigiri (both kind of ricey things) before I go. Why can't we take a leaf out of their book?

I'm with you on this (partly for obvisouly veggie reasons). I travel a lot and often find myself needing to eat at odd times of the day - "grab a snack" rather than set meal time. It's rubbish. Sandwiches are too expensive for what you get. Christ, First Great Western Trains even say that £4.19 for a sarnie, a bag of crisps and a coke is a "Great Value Deal". Are you fucking kidding?

Posted by rowanboy at 2002/11/03 10:51:27.

I agree Tom, I've been annoyed by that exact same thing before - the poster advertising this "Great Value Deal" that I saw actually enfuriatingly put the word "only" before the price (which was the best part of five quid). Appalling! I didn't get around to sandwiches in my rant, but by and large they're the crappest thing since sliced bread. Hmmm confusing metaphor. But anyway, if I ever meet the famous Earl thereof, I'm going to have a few stiff words for him. Homemade sandwiches: yes; sanwiches freshly prepared in front of you in a deli: maybe; prepackaged shitty dull ingredients in tasteless mostly artificial triangular bread, lined up on shelves in depressingly uniform ranks that have probably been sitting around for days in that special sort of plastic that stops you being able to have children: no bloody thanks.

Posted by john at 2002/11/03 15:51:52.

This kind of thoughtlessness must stop. Big evil corporations are at it everywhere! Take clothing...

I have been trying to improve the state of my waderobe for months now. I began by finding out what sort of colours go with what (yes, this whole thing might go along the lines of me trying to find a new girlfriend). There are lots of high street shops, and most of them do fashoin for men. However, I am a red-head and thus not catered for by the fashion bloody industry. Most of the autumnal colours are 'out', you can forget Gap if you're ginger and thus I am left with smaller shops that sell clothes for 14 year old skaters. The reason they don't stock colours for red-heads is that there's no money in it or they would have to release another range. Until they do, I am stuck wearing the same poorly matching outfits I always have done.

All colour match issues aside. We've now removed about 78.2% of the high street. There is the money factor of fashion. If you want to fit in, you have to pay. I do not thing £50 is a reasonable price for a shirt unless I am going to wear it with a dinner jacket. Frustratingly, smaller shops are now being bought up by bigger chains and then hoik the prices up 'cos it is one big monopoly. So we can remove another 12% for being too pricey.

With the remainder, I think that fashion is generally uninteresting. Most of the clothes that *do* match and *are* within my price range are boring or will likely date too quickly. Is it really so difficult to have fashionable clothing that matches colour, is cheap and not boring.

I think Austria is a great example. Fashion over there is done extremely well. People know how to wear skin-tight dungarees and colours are made to suit all skin tones and hair colours. I look forward to my trips over there to stock up on Barbour jackets and cordorouy. Why can't we take a leaf out of their book?

Posted by Rob Lang at 2002/11/03 22:10:23.

P.S. I am a minority and I want society to cater for my every need.

Posted by Rob Lang at 2002/11/03 22:11:34.

Oooh this is turning into a goldmine of consumer rant fodder. Don't Gap use a lot of sweatshop labour? I stopped shopping there a while back just on the off chance. The trouble is, Gap isn't even particularly cheap, so it does make you wonder where all that dirty money they're saving by abusing workers in poorer countries is going. Possibly lining the khaki trouser pockets of the designers, managers and marketing consultants, who obviously deserve a better standard of living than the people who actually make the clothes, because they're talented, good looking and live in a rich Western country. Bastards.

Posted by John at 2002/11/04 12:02:15.

Snack food are designed round the fact we are predesposed, as a rule, to crave sweet or fat, or both. However, I am sure a part of the problem is that anything that is truely nutritious is also perishable, dilema. What doesn't get eaten quickly will be thrown away, therefore wasted. I personly hate waste.

Talking of waist, why is it so easy to get extra baggy jeans for my lardy chassis but so difficult to get trousers designed arround the same criterea.

John, could you do me a favour and invent an online spaell ckecker as mie speling is shit.

Posted by Karl at 2002/11/10 09:42:34.

I am only 12 and I can't believe that people could kill animals to make sweets and they used crushed insects to make red food colouring, when there is no necessity to make a meal look a bit nicer.
It took me ages to give up midget gems!!

Posted by Holly at 2005/08/02 19:59:05.

I am only 12 and I can't believe that people could kill animals to make sweets and they used crushed insects to make red food colouring, when there is no necessity to make a meal look a bit nicer.
It took me ages to give up midget gems!!

Posted by Holly at 2005/08/02 19:59:30.

Post a comment