1
00:00:02,000 --> 00:00:05,280
Hello. Today we're talking about the
scary headlines that might make you
think that

2
00:00:05,280 --> 00:00:08,240
some of the food you eat every
single day could be
really dangerous.

3
00:00:08,240 --> 00:00:11,160
But sometimes what you read
isn't the full story.

4
00:00:11,160 --> 00:00:14,200
It might even be wrong, and that can
have some serious implications

5
00:00:14,200 --> 00:00:15,520
for your health.

6
00:00:18,720 --> 00:00:21,720
Every day we're bombarded with
conflicting information

7
00:00:21,720 --> 00:00:23,640
about our favourite foods.

8
00:00:25,320 --> 00:00:27,560
One minute we're told something's
good for us,

9
00:00:27,560 --> 00:00:28,880
the next it's not,

10
00:00:28,880 --> 00:00:31,560
and we're left feeling guilty about
what we're eating.

11
00:00:34,120 --> 00:00:37,120
Well, we've been wading through the
confusion to separate

12
00:00:37,120 --> 00:00:39,240
the scare stories from the truth,

13
00:00:39,240 --> 00:00:42,080
so you can choose your food
with confidence.

14
00:00:50,360 --> 00:00:53,160
Hello and welcome to
Food - Truth Or Scare,

15
00:00:53,160 --> 00:00:56,280
the programme that unpicks what's
behind some of those headlines

16
00:00:56,280 --> 00:00:58,320
we all read in the papers or online,

17
00:00:58,320 --> 00:01:01,400
so you'll know which ones are really
worth paying attention to

18
00:01:01,400 --> 00:01:03,560
and which you can safely ignore.

19
00:01:03,560 --> 00:01:07,560
It's really, really easy to see a
news story that makes you totally

20
00:01:07,560 --> 00:01:11,280
rethink what you should be eating to
avoid some serious health problems.

21
00:01:11,280 --> 00:01:14,760
But if the story you're reading is
barking up the wrong tree,

22
00:01:14,760 --> 00:01:17,400
you could end up making completely
the wrong decision.

23
00:01:17,400 --> 00:01:21,160
So, today we'll be bringing some
much-needed clarity to stories that,

24
00:01:21,160 --> 00:01:23,120
if you really did swallow what
they say,

25
00:01:23,120 --> 00:01:26,000
could have serious implications for
your health.

26
00:01:27,520 --> 00:01:31,320
Coming up... Oily fish has long been
called a miracle food,

27
00:01:31,320 --> 00:01:34,640
but now some reports claim it could
actually be dangerous.

28
00:01:34,640 --> 00:01:35,840
So, what's the truth?

29
00:01:35,840 --> 00:01:38,800
It's actually really worrying
because consumers, like yourself,

30
00:01:38,800 --> 00:01:41,080
are so confused about what they
should do.

31
00:01:41,080 --> 00:01:44,720
And Chris is as confused as anyone
when it comes to whether it's safe

32
00:01:44,720 --> 00:01:47,000
to eat steaks and burgers rare.

33
00:01:47,000 --> 00:01:49,920
So, we'll clear up which meats you
can eat pink.

34
00:01:49,920 --> 00:01:51,520
I wouldn't eat a burger like that.

35
00:01:51,520 --> 00:01:53,640
With the beef I'm fine, but with
the burger

36
00:01:53,640 --> 00:01:56,000
I'm maybe a little bit
more apprehensive.

37
00:02:02,280 --> 00:02:05,400
You know, Chris, it never fails to
amaze me how many headlines

38
00:02:05,400 --> 00:02:07,960
there are, and stories, about food.

39
00:02:07,960 --> 00:02:10,240
Every single day - and I get the
papers every morning -

40
00:02:10,240 --> 00:02:12,440
and there it is, another headline -

41
00:02:12,440 --> 00:02:14,120
another food, another warning.

42
00:02:14,120 --> 00:02:17,280
But, sometimes there's a headline
that sort of turns convention

43
00:02:17,280 --> 00:02:19,520
on its head, like oily fish.

44
00:02:19,520 --> 00:02:21,280
Now, since I was a kid at school,

45
00:02:21,280 --> 00:02:23,960
my mum was sticking that sort of
cod-liver oil in my mouth,

46
00:02:23,960 --> 00:02:26,120
every day going to school.
And, you know,

47
00:02:26,120 --> 00:02:28,440
we've been told that, in relation to
oily fish,

48
00:02:28,440 --> 00:02:30,960
that the omega-3 fatty
acids inside

49
00:02:30,960 --> 00:02:32,600
are really, really good for you.

50
00:02:32,600 --> 00:02:34,200
Yeah, well, we're told it's
brain food,

51
00:02:34,200 --> 00:02:36,440
it's good for our heart, and we
should eat it every week.

52
00:02:36,440 --> 00:02:39,200
And do you? I try to, actually.
Yeah, I do.

53
00:02:39,200 --> 00:02:42,480
Now, problem is, last autumn there
was a flurry of stories

54
00:02:42,480 --> 00:02:45,080
like this one. And it
was a French study,

55
00:02:45,080 --> 00:02:47,160
actually, and they were telling us
that oily fish

56
00:02:47,160 --> 00:02:48,880
was actually bad for us.

57
00:02:48,880 --> 00:02:51,760
So, I wanted to find out if those of
us who were eating it every week,

58
00:02:51,760 --> 00:02:53,800
as we've been told to do
for years,

59
00:02:53,800 --> 00:02:56,120
could in fact have been putting our
health at risk.

60
00:02:56,120 --> 00:02:58,680
And where better to start than by
the sea?

61
00:03:04,600 --> 00:03:09,360
Every year, we spend over
£1.5 billion on fresh fish,

62
00:03:09,360 --> 00:03:12,360
and our favourite by a long stretch
just happens to be

63
00:03:12,360 --> 00:03:15,240
one of the healthiest
around - salmon.

64
00:03:15,240 --> 00:03:17,280
Now, we've long been told
that salmon

65
00:03:17,280 --> 00:03:19,880
and other oily fish, like tuna
and mackerel,

66
00:03:19,880 --> 00:03:23,480
is so wonderfully good for us,
and we should eat plenty of it.

67
00:03:23,480 --> 00:03:26,440
But then suddenly last year, some
of the papers performed

68
00:03:26,440 --> 00:03:29,560
an abrupt about-turn, instead
saying that

69
00:03:29,560 --> 00:03:31,440
too much oily fish was bad,

70
00:03:31,440 --> 00:03:33,760
and could even lead us to an
early grave.

71
00:03:36,000 --> 00:03:39,320
Now, those headlines are the exact
opposite of everything I've always

72
00:03:39,320 --> 00:03:41,400
thought about it and indeed
believed in -

73
00:03:41,400 --> 00:03:44,920
that fish is really good for you and
you should eat it every week,

74
00:03:44,920 --> 00:03:47,120
especially if it's oily fish.

75
00:03:49,480 --> 00:03:52,120
Now, I must admit, I've always tried
to follow that advice,

76
00:03:52,120 --> 00:03:55,520
and like millions of other people
I even back up the fish I eat

77
00:03:55,520 --> 00:03:58,360
with fish oil supplements, as well.

78
00:03:58,360 --> 00:04:01,000
So those headlines really had
me worried.

79
00:04:01,000 --> 00:04:03,400
I now wonder whether the foods
I've been eating

80
00:04:03,400 --> 00:04:05,120
to try and keep me healthy

81
00:04:05,120 --> 00:04:08,320
might actually be doing me more harm
than good.

82
00:04:08,320 --> 00:04:12,160
But first off, I have to confess to
not being really sure which fish

83
00:04:12,160 --> 00:04:14,720
are classed as oily and
which aren't.

84
00:04:14,720 --> 00:04:17,680
I'm hoping that fishmonger
Kieran Hammond can help me out.

85
00:04:19,360 --> 00:04:23,240
Well, Kieran, I have to admire your
display, it's fantastic.

86
00:04:23,240 --> 00:04:25,920
So, which ones, as far as you're
concerned as the expert here,

87
00:04:25,920 --> 00:04:29,280
are the best oily fish? You've got
the sprats here, they're very good.

88
00:04:29,280 --> 00:04:31,640
A classic thing to do with that is
lightly flour it and fry it,

89
00:04:31,640 --> 00:04:33,160
it's a very easy meal. Yeah.

90
00:04:33,160 --> 00:04:35,800
We've got the sardines here, they're
great on the barbecue.

91
00:04:35,800 --> 00:04:38,600
Because they're so oily, they just
crisp up. Just put them straight on.

92
00:04:38,600 --> 00:04:40,000
Crisp up and they're lovely. Yes.

93
00:04:40,000 --> 00:04:42,280
And we've got the herrings, there,
and the tuna.

94
00:04:44,440 --> 00:04:47,720
It turns out there are a lot more
oily fish than I realised -

95
00:04:47,720 --> 00:04:51,880
12, in fact. As well as those
mackerel, sprats,

96
00:04:51,880 --> 00:04:53,640
sardines and herring,

97
00:04:53,640 --> 00:04:56,760
there are also pilchards,
trout, anchovies,

98
00:04:56,760 --> 00:05:00,320
whitebait and salmon, and a couple
of fish we eat less often here -

99
00:05:00,320 --> 00:05:02,080
carp and jack.

100
00:05:02,080 --> 00:05:03,640
Then, of course, there's tuna,

101
00:05:03,640 --> 00:05:07,120
although, perhaps surprisingly,
that's only considered an oily fish

102
00:05:07,120 --> 00:05:10,200
when it's fresh, not when it's
in cans,

103
00:05:10,200 --> 00:05:12,760
because, unlike with other types of
oily fish,

104
00:05:12,760 --> 00:05:15,960
the canning process removes a lot of
the beneficial oils

105
00:05:15,960 --> 00:05:17,960
that makes them so good for us.

106
00:05:17,960 --> 00:05:20,920
The oils are fatty acids
called omega-3s,

107
00:05:20,920 --> 00:05:24,640
and these fish store higher levels
of those fatty acids in their flesh,

108
00:05:24,640 --> 00:05:26,520
which of course we then eat.

109
00:05:26,520 --> 00:05:29,880
And the customers here in Whitstable
have definitely bought into

110
00:05:29,880 --> 00:05:32,640
the message that oily fish is good
for us.

111
00:05:35,280 --> 00:05:38,920
Well, I've heard that it can help

112
00:05:38,920 --> 00:05:42,480
slow down dementia and stuff
like that.

113
00:05:42,480 --> 00:05:45,120
Are you aware very much of, like,
oily fish?

114
00:05:45,120 --> 00:05:47,480
To try to get omega-3 for health?

115
00:05:47,480 --> 00:05:51,440
Yes, we are. Statistics show that
it's supposed to be beneficial,

116
00:05:51,440 --> 00:05:53,000
particularly for MS, so...

117
00:05:53,000 --> 00:05:55,600
And Michael takes it because I think
it's good for him.

118
00:05:55,600 --> 00:05:56,760
THEY LAUGH

119
00:05:56,760 --> 00:05:59,880
So, Michael, do you get it as an
insurance policy as well?

120
00:05:59,880 --> 00:06:01,840
It's good for your knees. Yes.

121
00:06:01,840 --> 00:06:04,720
It doesn't improve his hearing,
Gloria, but it's good for the knees!

122
00:06:04,720 --> 00:06:06,720
But do you ever read the headlines,
you know,

123
00:06:06,720 --> 00:06:09,080
in the daily papers, that will say,

124
00:06:09,080 --> 00:06:11,040
"Too much oily fish is bad for you"?

125
00:06:11,040 --> 00:06:13,480
How do you regard those headlines
when you see them?

126
00:06:13,480 --> 00:06:16,640
We take no notice, because there are
so many of them.

127
00:06:18,400 --> 00:06:21,640
Well, they might not take much
notice of those scary headlines,

128
00:06:21,640 --> 00:06:25,560
but I have to say I do, so I've
asked dietician Linia Patel

129
00:06:25,560 --> 00:06:27,680
to help me navigate the
choppy waters

130
00:06:27,680 --> 00:06:29,800
of those conflicting news reports.

131
00:06:29,800 --> 00:06:33,200
Look at this marvellous array
of fish. Amazing.

132
00:06:33,200 --> 00:06:36,760
'And whether they're recommending
oily fish or warning against it,

133
00:06:36,760 --> 00:06:39,520
'what all those reports have in
common is that they say

134
00:06:39,520 --> 00:06:43,480
'it's the omega-3 that makes it
good or bad for us.

135
00:06:43,480 --> 00:06:47,320
'But Linia most definitely comes
down on one side of the argument.'

136
00:06:47,320 --> 00:06:49,960
Originally, when they started
looking at the benefits of omega-3,

137
00:06:49,960 --> 00:06:51,960
they looked at the Inuits
in Greenland,

138
00:06:51,960 --> 00:06:56,040
and they saw that Inuits had really
low levels of heart disease,

139
00:06:56,040 --> 00:06:59,120
and that was correlated with their
intake of fish.

140
00:06:59,120 --> 00:07:01,480
So, we know, and there's lots
of evidence to show,

141
00:07:01,480 --> 00:07:05,280
that omega-3 has a good impact
on preventing heart disease and
treating it.

142
00:07:05,280 --> 00:07:09,680
But since then, they've found
omega-3 has a whole host
of benefits.

143
00:07:09,680 --> 00:07:12,920
Researchers are also interested in
the effect that oily fish might have

144
00:07:12,920 --> 00:07:16,240
on dementia, and it's hard not to be
impressed by claims

145
00:07:16,240 --> 00:07:18,040
that it can stave it off.

146
00:07:18,040 --> 00:07:22,120
But for me, there was one negative
headline that really hit home,

147
00:07:22,120 --> 00:07:26,240
and it's this one, saying that
eating oily fish increases your risk

148
00:07:26,240 --> 00:07:28,040
of developing diabetes.

149
00:07:28,040 --> 00:07:31,560
Now, I was diagnosed as being
pre-diabetic a few years ago,

150
00:07:31,560 --> 00:07:34,880
and I'm determined to try and make
sure that I don't develop

151
00:07:34,880 --> 00:07:37,280
full-blown Type 2 diabetes,

152
00:07:37,280 --> 00:07:39,640
so I'm pretty careful about what
I eat.

153
00:07:39,640 --> 00:07:42,920
This one says, "Diabetes risk soars
by a quarter...",

154
00:07:42,920 --> 00:07:44,120
which is very high,

155
00:07:44,120 --> 00:07:47,600
"..if you eat oily fish like salmon
or mackerel every day."

156
00:07:47,600 --> 00:07:49,760
Well, I wouldn't eat it every day
but, I mean,

157
00:07:49,760 --> 00:07:52,080
that is a scaremongering headline.

158
00:07:52,080 --> 00:07:54,040
It is, and we've always got
to remember

159
00:07:54,040 --> 00:07:56,960
there's a lot of media hype in terms
of nutrition.

160
00:07:56,960 --> 00:08:00,600
But when Linia looked at the
original study behind that headline,

161
00:08:00,600 --> 00:08:02,880
she discovered that the link
with diabetes

162
00:08:02,880 --> 00:08:06,080
actually had more to do with meat
than with fish.

163
00:08:07,160 --> 00:08:10,200
When you actually look at this study
in a little bit more detail,

164
00:08:10,200 --> 00:08:13,040
we find that actually it's not quite
as straightforward

165
00:08:13,040 --> 00:08:17,160
as linking your intake of oily
fish to diabetes.

166
00:08:17,160 --> 00:08:20,480
When the researchers were making the
completion of the study,

167
00:08:20,480 --> 00:08:24,200
they were linking it more to the
intake of essential fats

168
00:08:24,200 --> 00:08:26,600
that were found in meat, versus
oily fish.

169
00:08:28,720 --> 00:08:30,920
Well, I must say it's a relief to
hear Linia say

170
00:08:30,920 --> 00:08:32,880
that particular headline
wasn't right,

171
00:08:32,880 --> 00:08:35,640
even if it did unnecessarily
worry not just me,

172
00:08:35,640 --> 00:08:37,880
but, I'm sure, many of us as well.

173
00:08:37,880 --> 00:08:40,680
Next, though, I'm keen to hear
Linia's take on another

174
00:08:40,680 --> 00:08:42,760
that's even more concerning.

175
00:08:42,760 --> 00:08:44,880
"Eating too much oily fish could
increase your risk

176
00:08:44,880 --> 00:08:46,800
"of premature death."

177
00:08:46,800 --> 00:08:49,880
Very dramatic, and again when you
drill down into the research,

178
00:08:49,880 --> 00:08:52,720
it's not quite as straightforward
as this.

179
00:08:52,720 --> 00:08:55,160
'A number of newspapers ran
this story,

180
00:08:55,160 --> 00:08:58,360
'but some headlines oversimplified
the study's findings

181
00:08:58,360 --> 00:09:02,600
'and reported a link to oily fish
that simply wasn't there.'

182
00:09:02,600 --> 00:09:04,040
Now, the story said,

183
00:09:04,040 --> 00:09:06,400
"Right, we know that oily fish
actually increases your risk

184
00:09:06,400 --> 00:09:09,600
"of good cholesterol, so that must
make a link between oily fish

185
00:09:09,600 --> 00:09:12,200
"and premature death", but it's not
quite that straightforward.

186
00:09:12,200 --> 00:09:14,400
So, really this headline is all
about cholesterol...

187
00:09:14,400 --> 00:09:17,880
Exactly. ..and not really about oily
fish at all. Exactly, exactly.

188
00:09:17,880 --> 00:09:21,440
'In this case, the researchers found
that people who had kidney disease

189
00:09:21,440 --> 00:09:24,160
'and high levels of good cholesterol
in their blood

190
00:09:24,160 --> 00:09:26,360
'were at risk of dying prematurely,

191
00:09:26,360 --> 00:09:29,680
'but that's not what the
headline suggested.'

192
00:09:29,680 --> 00:09:31,400
What do you make of that, then, as
an expert,

193
00:09:31,400 --> 00:09:33,480
does this not infuriate you?
Frustrating.

194
00:09:33,480 --> 00:09:36,000
So, so frustrating. And it's
actually really worrying,

195
00:09:36,000 --> 00:09:38,200
because consumers, like yourself,
are so confused

196
00:09:38,200 --> 00:09:41,320
about what they should do, and I
spend my life trying to debunk myths

197
00:09:41,320 --> 00:09:42,960
that the media have created.

198
00:09:44,600 --> 00:09:47,600
Well, thank goodness we can all rest
easy and not worry about

199
00:09:47,600 --> 00:09:49,280
those two headlines.

200
00:09:49,280 --> 00:09:52,080
There is, however, still one group
of people for whom things

201
00:09:52,080 --> 00:09:56,080
may not be quite as clear-cut, and
that's pregnant women.

202
00:09:56,080 --> 00:09:59,280
Rachel Hudson lives not too far away
from Whitstable harbour,

203
00:09:59,280 --> 00:10:01,760
and she's expecting her
second child.

204
00:10:01,760 --> 00:10:04,440
But when one headline suggests that
eating fish

205
00:10:04,440 --> 00:10:07,360
could make her baby obese, and the
next says

206
00:10:07,360 --> 00:10:09,760
that oily fish could protect it
against allergies

207
00:10:09,760 --> 00:10:11,760
or boost its brainpower,

208
00:10:11,760 --> 00:10:15,000
it's no wonder that she doesn't know
who or what to believe.

209
00:10:15,000 --> 00:10:17,800
I don't think it's easy for pregnant
women to get the right message

210
00:10:17,800 --> 00:10:19,840
on food or oily fish.

211
00:10:19,840 --> 00:10:22,720
There is a little bit advice given
on nutrition,

212
00:10:22,720 --> 00:10:25,320
but not much, as far as
I'm concerned,

213
00:10:25,320 --> 00:10:27,560
so it is up to you to, just,
you know,

214
00:10:27,560 --> 00:10:31,720
look on the internet and ask other
people. And sometimes, you know,

215
00:10:31,720 --> 00:10:33,080
that's confusing.

216
00:10:34,120 --> 00:10:37,280
Not only has Rachel been put off by
some of those headlines,

217
00:10:37,280 --> 00:10:40,680
but GPs and health visitors also
tell pregnant women

218
00:10:40,680 --> 00:10:44,080
they should steer clear of eating
too much oily fish

219
00:10:44,080 --> 00:10:45,840
because it can contain pollutants

220
00:10:45,840 --> 00:10:48,880
that might be dangerous for
the baby.

221
00:10:48,880 --> 00:10:52,160
So, I've invited Rachel and fellow
pregnant mum Louise

222
00:10:52,160 --> 00:10:54,680
to meet Linia, whom I hope will,
once again,

223
00:10:54,680 --> 00:10:57,440
make sense of some of those
mixed messages.

224
00:10:57,440 --> 00:11:01,840
So, girls, when it comes to oily
fish, do you buy that?

225
00:11:01,840 --> 00:11:06,520
Well, I buy salmon more. Salmon and
the canned tuna is what I have.

226
00:11:06,520 --> 00:11:09,520
So, what do you rate as being
oily fish?

227
00:11:09,520 --> 00:11:12,680
When I hear oily, I think of, like,
smoked mackerel.

228
00:11:12,680 --> 00:11:16,760
I heard canned tuna come up there.
So, how does that sound?

229
00:11:16,760 --> 00:11:20,200
Well, canned tuna actually doesn't
have that much omega-3.

230
00:11:20,200 --> 00:11:22,080
Fresh tuna has more omega-3.

231
00:11:23,280 --> 00:11:25,880
Both Louise and Rachel admit that
they're unsure

232
00:11:25,880 --> 00:11:28,040
which fish is safe to eat
when pregnant,

233
00:11:28,040 --> 00:11:30,000
perhaps confused by those headlines

234
00:11:30,000 --> 00:11:33,640
suggesting that too much oily fish
might be bad for the baby.

235
00:11:33,640 --> 00:11:36,080
But then, are the headlines right?

236
00:11:36,080 --> 00:11:39,000
You know, omega-3's really important
in pregnancy, cos it helps

237
00:11:39,000 --> 00:11:43,960
in brain development, visual
development, nervous system etc.

238
00:11:43,960 --> 00:11:47,200
But Linia says the presence of
pollutants like mercury

239
00:11:47,200 --> 00:11:49,680
means that pregnant women should
have no more than

240
00:11:49,680 --> 00:11:52,520
two portions of oily fish a week.

241
00:11:52,520 --> 00:11:55,480
Can you set out, then, what the
girls should not have?

242
00:11:55,480 --> 00:11:58,840
Firstly, you should not be having
things like shark,

243
00:11:58,840 --> 00:12:02,000
marlin and swordfish at all, because
they're the fish

244
00:12:02,000 --> 00:12:04,680
that have the highest levels
of mercury.

245
00:12:04,680 --> 00:12:08,480
What you can have is maximum two
portions of oily fish -

246
00:12:08,480 --> 00:12:11,440
salmon, fresh tuna, mackerel -

247
00:12:11,440 --> 00:12:15,280
and then you can have white fish -
so cod, your plaice,

248
00:12:15,280 --> 00:12:19,000
your sea bass - you can have that as
much as you like.

249
00:12:19,000 --> 00:12:23,000
While the NHS advises pregnant women
to have no more than two portions

250
00:12:23,000 --> 00:12:26,520
of oily fish a week because of that
slight pollutant risk,

251
00:12:26,520 --> 00:12:29,960
Linia recommends that they boost
their omega-3 intake further

252
00:12:29,960 --> 00:12:31,960
with a small supplement.

253
00:12:31,960 --> 00:12:34,480
We know, particularly in the third
trimester, that's when

254
00:12:34,480 --> 00:12:36,880
the brain develops, so potentially
you could be looking

255
00:12:36,880 --> 00:12:40,440
to have a higher dose of omega-3
intake then.

256
00:12:40,440 --> 00:12:42,240
But there's a word of caution,
as well.

257
00:12:42,240 --> 00:12:44,840
Linia says pregnant women should
take a supplement

258
00:12:44,840 --> 00:12:48,920
that's clearly labelled "fish oil",
rather than "cod-liver oil",

259
00:12:48,920 --> 00:12:52,200
because cod-liver oil contains high
levels of vitamin A,

260
00:12:52,200 --> 00:12:54,600
which might just be harmful to
the baby.

261
00:12:54,600 --> 00:12:57,680
It's the clear advice that Rachel
and Louise have been looking for.

262
00:12:58,760 --> 00:13:00,600
You always want to better, like,

263
00:13:00,600 --> 00:13:03,040
your health and your baby's health,
and anything that I can do

264
00:13:03,040 --> 00:13:04,760
to make that better, then I'm going
to do it.

265
00:13:04,760 --> 00:13:07,400
And especially entering the third
trimester, now,

266
00:13:07,400 --> 00:13:09,280
I will be upping my fish intake

267
00:13:09,280 --> 00:13:13,360
and taking an omega-3
supplement, so...

268
00:13:13,360 --> 00:13:15,320
But if oily fish
contains pollutants,

269
00:13:15,320 --> 00:13:18,920
and as a result pregnant women are
told to limit their intake,

270
00:13:18,920 --> 00:13:21,800
does that mean the rest of us should
watch how much we have, as well?

271
00:13:22,800 --> 00:13:25,920
If you're not pregnant, Linia says
up to four portions a week

272
00:13:25,920 --> 00:13:27,520
would be fine.

273
00:13:27,520 --> 00:13:30,840
But I have to say that when Linia
recommended those supplements,

274
00:13:30,840 --> 00:13:32,800
it was music to my ears,

275
00:13:32,800 --> 00:13:36,480
because I've been taking fish oil
for decades, and I'm not alone.

276
00:13:36,480 --> 00:13:40,680
15% of all the supplements we buy
are fish oils.

277
00:13:40,680 --> 00:13:42,200
At King's College in London,

278
00:13:42,200 --> 00:13:45,560
Professor Tom Sanders has studied
the powers of omega-3

279
00:13:45,560 --> 00:13:48,160
from both fish and in supplements.

280
00:13:48,160 --> 00:13:50,680
His research suggests that the
millions of us who take

281
00:13:50,680 --> 00:13:53,840
fish oil supplements every year
really needn't bother...

282
00:13:53,840 --> 00:13:56,280
although he's going to have a real
job convincing me

283
00:13:56,280 --> 00:13:59,240
that I shouldn't be taking mine.

284
00:13:59,240 --> 00:14:01,480
This is my fatty acid one.

285
00:14:01,480 --> 00:14:03,280
Yeah. Oh, there we go.

286
00:14:03,280 --> 00:14:05,440
A few of them. They look more
like suppositories.

287
00:14:05,440 --> 00:14:07,920
GLORIA LAUGHS
I assure you, they're not! Yeah.

288
00:14:07,920 --> 00:14:10,320
'Now, I take a relatively high-dose
supplement, daily,

289
00:14:10,320 --> 00:14:12,160
'but as far as the professor
is concerned,

290
00:14:12,160 --> 00:14:14,640
'he says my whole week of pills is
just about the same

291
00:14:14,640 --> 00:14:16,560
'as one piece of oily fish.'

292
00:14:16,560 --> 00:14:21,240
Well, a typical tablet, like that,
would provide about half a gram,

293
00:14:21,240 --> 00:14:23,520
so if you took one of
those every day,

294
00:14:23,520 --> 00:14:25,240
about three and half grams a day,

295
00:14:25,240 --> 00:14:28,280
which is roughly about the same
as eating

296
00:14:28,280 --> 00:14:30,240
one piece of salmon,

297
00:14:30,240 --> 00:14:34,000
or probably two bits of mackerel,
a week.

298
00:14:34,000 --> 00:14:35,560
You see, I have an argument,

299
00:14:35,560 --> 00:14:39,200
maybe I'm just trying to validate
why I take so many vitamins...

300
00:14:39,200 --> 00:14:43,160
Because...if I had a proper diet
all the time,

301
00:14:43,160 --> 00:14:46,680
I would accept a doctor's advice
that says you don't need vitamins,

302
00:14:46,680 --> 00:14:50,200
but the thing is that we all don't
have a proper diet these days.

303
00:14:50,200 --> 00:14:53,880
Now, I know that you're sceptical,
but I like the theory of
taking them. Yeah.

304
00:14:53,880 --> 00:14:57,480
One of the problems I have,
generally, about supplements

305
00:14:57,480 --> 00:14:59,600
is that people are under
the illusion

306
00:14:59,600 --> 00:15:02,960
that the food we are eating now
is inferior

307
00:15:02,960 --> 00:15:04,960
to the food we have eaten in
the past.

308
00:15:04,960 --> 00:15:08,000
You know, maybe, actually, the food
people ate in Victorian times

309
00:15:08,000 --> 00:15:10,160
was great. It wasn't.
It was dreadful!

310
00:15:10,160 --> 00:15:14,040
They were all undersized, they
didn't live long, you know,

311
00:15:14,040 --> 00:15:15,320
survival was bad.

312
00:15:15,320 --> 00:15:17,360
We are better nourished now than we
have ever been,

313
00:15:17,360 --> 00:15:19,960
and that's why people are living
much longer.

314
00:15:21,680 --> 00:15:25,560
Even if I didn't eat any oily fish,
the professor would still prefer me

315
00:15:25,560 --> 00:15:28,280
to look for other natural sources
of omega-3,

316
00:15:28,280 --> 00:15:32,920
which he says will give me the
benefits that supplements might not.

317
00:15:32,920 --> 00:15:36,720
If you don't like oily fish, and
you're a vegetarian,

318
00:15:36,720 --> 00:15:40,400
then make sure you use rapeseed oil
and eat nuts.

319
00:15:40,400 --> 00:15:42,880
Like, walnuts are a very
good source,

320
00:15:42,880 --> 00:15:47,800
and eggs are a good source of
omega-3 fatty acids.

321
00:15:47,800 --> 00:15:51,080
But I'm not sure I'm ready to break
the habit of a lifetime yet.

322
00:15:51,080 --> 00:15:53,120
The jury is still out.

323
00:15:53,120 --> 00:15:56,000
Now, I'm going to argue the point
for this.

324
00:15:56,000 --> 00:15:58,040
I think I'm going to keep on
taking them

325
00:15:58,040 --> 00:16:01,240
because I know I'm not getting,
probably, in the average week,

326
00:16:01,240 --> 00:16:03,440
the right amount of oily fish.

327
00:16:03,440 --> 00:16:07,920
I don't see any harm in taking a
fish oil supplement

328
00:16:07,920 --> 00:16:11,720
as an insurance policy but I can't
say I can promise you

329
00:16:11,720 --> 00:16:13,720
it's going to deliver any benefit.

330
00:16:13,720 --> 00:16:16,320
Do you think it does you some good?

331
00:16:16,320 --> 00:16:18,160
Probably.

332
00:16:18,160 --> 00:16:21,000
So, whether it is better you get it
from a supplement or,

333
00:16:21,000 --> 00:16:23,360
as the professor says, from oily
fish itself -

334
00:16:23,360 --> 00:16:26,000
which is where he and I actually
agree to disagree -

335
00:16:26,000 --> 00:16:30,120
it's clear that, however you take
it, omega-3 does have real benefits,

336
00:16:30,120 --> 00:16:33,880
and those headlines suggesting that
it doesn't just aren't true.

337
00:16:42,240 --> 00:16:45,360
For a host of quick and easy ideas
for cooking oily fish

338
00:16:45,360 --> 00:16:47,960
like salmon, mackerel and sardines,

339
00:16:47,960 --> 00:16:50,040
all you have to do is go to...

340
00:16:51,800 --> 00:16:54,120
..where you'll also find plenty
of other recipes

341
00:16:54,120 --> 00:16:56,440
for some of the topics we're
covering in this series.

342
00:17:02,840 --> 00:17:06,080
Now, as important as what we eat,
is how we cook it,

343
00:17:06,080 --> 00:17:08,440
and that's especially true
with our meat.

344
00:17:08,440 --> 00:17:10,280
Tony's a local butcher here.

345
00:17:10,280 --> 00:17:12,640
Tony, can you tell me a little bit
more about what we've got?

346
00:17:12,640 --> 00:17:14,560
Yeah, we've got prime cuts of steak,

347
00:17:14,560 --> 00:17:18,200
sirloin, fillet, ribeye,
steak bone, frying.

348
00:17:18,200 --> 00:17:19,960
And when you are serving
your customers,

349
00:17:19,960 --> 00:17:21,600
do they ask you how do they cook it?

350
00:17:21,600 --> 00:17:23,960
Yes, they do, yes. How long to cook
it for.

351
00:17:23,960 --> 00:17:27,320
A steak, people like it cooked
well-done, medium, rare,

352
00:17:27,320 --> 00:17:29,240
so I give them the times that
they want.

353
00:17:29,240 --> 00:17:32,520
So, purely a preference, as far
as you are concerned?

354
00:17:32,520 --> 00:17:34,680
It's got nothing to do with
food safety?

355
00:17:34,680 --> 00:17:37,440
No, none at all. It is how you
prefer your meat.

356
00:17:37,440 --> 00:17:40,560
OK. And what about other meats?
Would you say it is true of those?

357
00:17:40,560 --> 00:17:43,040
Lamb can be served pink
or well-done,

358
00:17:43,040 --> 00:17:46,040
but with chicken and pork, I would
say cook it through.

359
00:17:46,040 --> 00:17:49,040
Well, we are not all lucky enough to
have a good friendly local butcher

360
00:17:49,040 --> 00:17:51,680
on hand to tell us whether the meat
we're eating is safe,

361
00:17:51,680 --> 00:17:54,800
so we have enlisted the help of two
thoroughly different meat eaters

362
00:17:54,800 --> 00:17:58,240
to put their different preferred
cooking types to the test.

363
00:18:01,200 --> 00:18:04,440
Every day, in restaurants all over
the country,

364
00:18:04,440 --> 00:18:06,760
countless waiters ask the
same question...

365
00:18:06,760 --> 00:18:08,760
"How would you like your
meat cooked?"

366
00:18:08,760 --> 00:18:11,680
And we've all got our own
particular response.

367
00:18:11,680 --> 00:18:14,120
I wouldn't eat pink pork. Erm...

368
00:18:14,120 --> 00:18:16,920
Pink beef, lamb, yes, but I'd be
very particular

369
00:18:16,920 --> 00:18:18,520
about where I bought it from.

370
00:18:18,520 --> 00:18:20,760
Meat, I like medium,

371
00:18:20,760 --> 00:18:22,800
I like it a bit red in the middle,
but not too red

372
00:18:22,800 --> 00:18:25,200
where the blood's dripping all over
the place.

373
00:18:25,200 --> 00:18:28,120
I just like to be always on the safe
side with it.

374
00:18:28,120 --> 00:18:30,120
I know a lot of people like it
nearly rare

375
00:18:30,120 --> 00:18:32,520
but it's not for me, that.

376
00:18:32,520 --> 00:18:34,400
I used to like the blood running,

377
00:18:34,400 --> 00:18:37,440
when you cut it and the blood
follows the knife,

378
00:18:37,440 --> 00:18:39,160
I used to like the beef like that.

379
00:18:41,000 --> 00:18:43,320
For me, a great steak is medium,

380
00:18:43,320 --> 00:18:46,120
and any other meats just have to be
cooked through.

381
00:18:46,120 --> 00:18:49,200
But it appears that advice,
from newspapers to restaurants,

382
00:18:49,200 --> 00:18:52,960
and even the people who set the
rules, all seem to be different.

383
00:18:52,960 --> 00:18:56,040
So, while one paper will warn that
a rare gourmet beefburger

384
00:18:56,040 --> 00:18:59,040
might be harbouring dangerous bugs,

385
00:18:59,040 --> 00:19:01,640
another will declare it's
apparently safe to eat,

386
00:19:01,640 --> 00:19:03,920
but only in restaurants and not
at home.

387
00:19:05,120 --> 00:19:08,000
So, with an increasing number of
restaurants revelling

388
00:19:08,000 --> 00:19:09,480
in serving red meat pink,

389
00:19:09,480 --> 00:19:12,280
I want to find out what's safe and
what's not.

390
00:19:14,880 --> 00:19:18,080
And as I can't rely on the papers to
give me a clear answer,

391
00:19:18,080 --> 00:19:20,480
I'm recruiting two
enthusiastic carnivores

392
00:19:20,480 --> 00:19:22,880
with very different
approaches to cooking

393
00:19:22,880 --> 00:19:25,280
to settle this quandary once and
for all.

394
00:19:26,520 --> 00:19:28,760
First, there's Sarah Neild
from Cheshire,

395
00:19:28,760 --> 00:19:32,080
who takes her love of rare meat to
the extremes.

396
00:19:32,080 --> 00:19:34,880
I think pork, beef and lamb

397
00:19:34,880 --> 00:19:37,960
are safe to eat down to raw

398
00:19:37,960 --> 00:19:41,760
because people eat them that way
across the world.

399
00:19:41,760 --> 00:19:43,280
So, I think that's safe.

400
00:19:44,960 --> 00:19:47,160
Well, she's certainly braver
than me.

401
00:19:47,160 --> 00:19:50,280
Next up is someone who couldn't
disagree with Sarah more,

402
00:19:50,280 --> 00:19:52,760
Nomsa Masamvi from Salford.

403
00:19:52,760 --> 00:19:55,760
It has been about five minutes, but
it's got a little bit longer to go

404
00:19:55,760 --> 00:19:58,680
because it's still quite undercooked
in the middle.

405
00:19:58,680 --> 00:20:02,120
She simply hates the sight of blood
in her meat.

406
00:20:02,120 --> 00:20:05,200
Nomsa's worried that unless she
cooks it for a long time,

407
00:20:05,200 --> 00:20:07,080
she won't kill off the
harmful bacteria

408
00:20:07,080 --> 00:20:09,920
that she fears could give her
food poisoning.

409
00:20:11,040 --> 00:20:14,680
And you can understand her concerns,
especially after newspaper reports

410
00:20:14,680 --> 00:20:18,480
saying that some meats and meat
products contain dangerous bacteria

411
00:20:18,480 --> 00:20:21,840
that can only be killed off when the
meat's thoroughly cooked through...

412
00:20:21,840 --> 00:20:24,120
which is exactly the way Nomsa
does it.

413
00:20:26,200 --> 00:20:29,600
Because it's still undercooked,
I still think that there is still

414
00:20:29,600 --> 00:20:32,040
some bacteria in the meat, and that
might cause me

415
00:20:32,040 --> 00:20:35,280
to have food poisoning or get ill
in some way.

416
00:20:35,280 --> 00:20:38,640
It is pretty clear that Sarah and
Nomsa are polar opposites

417
00:20:38,640 --> 00:20:41,280
when it comes to how they like their
meat cooked.

418
00:20:41,280 --> 00:20:43,000
But is either of them right?

419
00:20:43,000 --> 00:20:45,320
I've asked them to help me
investigate which meats

420
00:20:45,320 --> 00:20:47,720
it's safe to eat pink and which
might leave them

421
00:20:47,720 --> 00:20:51,000
with a nasty bout of food poisoning.

422
00:20:51,000 --> 00:20:52,920
I hope you don't mind, but I've
taken the liberty

423
00:20:52,920 --> 00:20:54,920
of ordering some food for you.

424
00:20:54,920 --> 00:20:57,840
'So, let's see how pink these two
are prepared to go.'

425
00:20:59,400 --> 00:21:02,920
So, we've got a lamb chop, a nice
piece of steak and a burger.

426
00:21:02,920 --> 00:21:05,440
So, if we start with the steak.

427
00:21:05,440 --> 00:21:09,840
Reasonably rare. Maybe sort of
medium-rare, I would say, actually.

428
00:21:09,840 --> 00:21:13,880
How does that look to you?
Appetising, or is that...?

429
00:21:13,880 --> 00:21:16,800
No, terrible. When you look at the
blood, you think,

430
00:21:16,800 --> 00:21:19,280
"Oh, is this safe enough for me
to eat?" You know?

431
00:21:19,280 --> 00:21:22,640
So, that's kind of off-putting
for me.

432
00:21:22,640 --> 00:21:23,960
Even if you were really hungry?

433
00:21:23,960 --> 00:21:26,440
No! Maybe I'll eat the veg but not
the meat.

434
00:21:28,000 --> 00:21:29,760
So it's a no from Nomsa,

435
00:21:29,760 --> 00:21:33,520
and, perhaps unsurprisingly,
a resounding yes from Sarah.

436
00:21:33,520 --> 00:21:36,000
I would expect it a little
bit bloodier than that.

437
00:21:36,000 --> 00:21:38,040
I'd eat that, and it looks very
appetising... Yeah.

438
00:21:38,040 --> 00:21:41,520
..but that's probably a tad over
where I would want it.

439
00:21:42,960 --> 00:21:44,840
To see how rare Nomsa will go,

440
00:21:44,840 --> 00:21:46,960
I have ordered the lamb chop only
slightly pink.

441
00:21:48,440 --> 00:21:50,560
OK, I mean, that's...
I think that's...

442
00:21:50,560 --> 00:21:53,240
That's not particularly pink, is
it, for lamb?

443
00:21:53,240 --> 00:21:56,320
No. You would eat that one? I would
eat that, yeah.

444
00:21:56,320 --> 00:21:58,800
You'd eat...? Oh. Yeah, that one's
not as bad.

445
00:21:58,800 --> 00:22:00,880
Not as bad. No!

446
00:22:00,880 --> 00:22:02,520
High praise indeed(!)
SHE LAUGHS

447
00:22:02,520 --> 00:22:06,560
'Next up is the dish that keeps
headline writers busy - the burger.

448
00:22:06,560 --> 00:22:09,720
'Is it or is it not safe to
eat pink?

449
00:22:09,720 --> 00:22:13,320
'Well, I, for one, am a bit nervous
about blood in my burger.'

450
00:22:13,320 --> 00:22:15,520
I wouldn't eat a burger like that.

451
00:22:15,520 --> 00:22:18,920
With the beef I'm fine, but with the
burger I'm maybe a little bit more

452
00:22:18,920 --> 00:22:21,160
apprehensive - what about you?

453
00:22:21,160 --> 00:22:22,520
How would you get on with that?

454
00:22:22,520 --> 00:22:25,520
With this one, it definitely needs
a little more cooking. Yeah.

455
00:22:25,520 --> 00:22:29,000
Well, I'd eat it. It's actually
pinker than I thought it would be.

456
00:22:29,000 --> 00:22:31,920
Yeah. But, yeah, I'd eat it.

457
00:22:31,920 --> 00:22:35,360
While Nomsa's worries are all to do
with the bugs and bacteria

458
00:22:35,360 --> 00:22:36,520
that might be in the meat,

459
00:22:36,520 --> 00:22:39,400
Sarah thinks that if you are
confident about where it comes from,

460
00:22:39,400 --> 00:22:41,360
there's no need to worry.

461
00:22:41,360 --> 00:22:43,720
I buy from our local butcher...
Mmm.

462
00:22:43,720 --> 00:22:46,240
..and their food is all traceable...
Yep.

463
00:22:46,240 --> 00:22:50,600
..so, I would cook their mince into
a burger

464
00:22:50,600 --> 00:22:54,240
and have it pink at home without
any qualms.

465
00:22:54,240 --> 00:22:57,680
But I wouldn't do that with
a lot of...

466
00:22:57,680 --> 00:23:00,960
Certainly not with a pre-made
supermarket burger.

467
00:23:00,960 --> 00:23:04,560
And Sarah's confidence even extends
to the one wildcard dish

468
00:23:04,560 --> 00:23:06,480
I've kept for the end - pork.

469
00:23:06,480 --> 00:23:08,960
While the Food Standards Agency says
it's a meat

470
00:23:08,960 --> 00:23:11,280
that absolutely must be
cooked through,

471
00:23:11,280 --> 00:23:14,840
restaurants all over the country are
now serving it pink too,

472
00:23:14,840 --> 00:23:17,560
and leading food magazines are
even suggesting

473
00:23:17,560 --> 00:23:20,120
it can be eaten pink at home.

474
00:23:20,120 --> 00:23:23,000
No prizes for guessing Nomsa
isn't convinced,

475
00:23:23,000 --> 00:23:25,240
but Sarah does eat pink pork.

476
00:23:25,240 --> 00:23:27,480
Why is that?
Because it'll be moister.

477
00:23:27,480 --> 00:23:30,840
I just think pork goes dry
so quickly... Yeah.

478
00:23:30,840 --> 00:23:34,320
..that I'd rather err on the
side of it being juicier.

479
00:23:34,320 --> 00:23:36,400
But for me,

480
00:23:36,400 --> 00:23:38,400
undercooked or pink pork would...

481
00:23:39,480 --> 00:23:41,360
Would scare the pants off of me,
I think.

482
00:23:41,360 --> 00:23:43,640
HE LAUGHS
So, let's have a look at this.

483
00:23:43,640 --> 00:23:45,280
Prepare to be scared, then, I think.

484
00:23:45,280 --> 00:23:48,520
Would you eat that? No.
Would you eat it?

485
00:23:48,520 --> 00:23:50,520
Aww... You're hesitant, aren't you?

486
00:23:50,520 --> 00:23:53,200
Do you know what?
I think I probably would.

487
00:23:53,200 --> 00:23:54,880
But that would be the...

488
00:23:54,880 --> 00:23:57,840
That would be your limit. Would you
have it any less cooked than that?

489
00:23:57,840 --> 00:23:59,200
Em...

490
00:23:59,200 --> 00:24:01,720
Well, I probably would.

491
00:24:01,720 --> 00:24:03,680
Pork is not a meat I eat an
awful lot.

492
00:24:03,680 --> 00:24:06,960
I'd certainly be happy to eat that,
and it looks lovely.

493
00:24:06,960 --> 00:24:10,720
'But while Sarah's confident about
the pork sold by her local butcher,

494
00:24:10,720 --> 00:24:13,880
'she wouldn't be quite so gung ho
buying from a supermarket

495
00:24:13,880 --> 00:24:16,840
'where she doesn't know where the
meat came from.

496
00:24:16,840 --> 00:24:20,600
'Last summer, the MRSA superbug was
found in pork on sale

497
00:24:20,600 --> 00:24:22,560
'in two British supermarkets,

498
00:24:22,560 --> 00:24:25,480
'and while it was only found in very
small amounts,

499
00:24:25,480 --> 00:24:27,960
'it certainly made me think about
how to make sure

500
00:24:27,960 --> 00:24:30,280
'all the meat I eat is
actually safe.'

501
00:24:31,440 --> 00:24:33,520
I, for one, would very much like to

502
00:24:33,520 --> 00:24:35,960
go and seek more advice
from an expert.

503
00:24:35,960 --> 00:24:38,680
Would you like to come along? Yes,
we would. Yes, that would be great.

504
00:24:38,680 --> 00:24:40,280
Brilliant. Let's go.

505
00:24:40,280 --> 00:24:43,200
'Even though the three of us all
have different ideas about

506
00:24:43,200 --> 00:24:46,800
'what's safe to eat, our concerns
are all based on the same thing -

507
00:24:46,800 --> 00:24:49,520
'the question of whether bugs or
bacteria in the meat

508
00:24:49,520 --> 00:24:51,440
'are killed when we cook it.'

509
00:24:53,720 --> 00:24:58,200
A week ago, I asked Dr Chloe James
from the University of Salford

510
00:24:58,200 --> 00:25:00,120
to test out just that.

511
00:25:00,120 --> 00:25:04,320
She lathered three steaks with
high levels of listeria and E. coli

512
00:25:04,320 --> 00:25:07,200
to see whether cooking the meat
would kill enough bacteria

513
00:25:07,200 --> 00:25:10,160
to protect us from the nasty effects
of eating them.

514
00:25:10,160 --> 00:25:12,560
If that particular type of E. coli

515
00:25:12,560 --> 00:25:16,480
was on the beef, for example, it
produces a highly potent toxin.

516
00:25:16,480 --> 00:25:20,880
It causes a lot of haemorrhage,
a lot of damage in the kidneys.

517
00:25:20,880 --> 00:25:24,480
Listeria can lead to
fever, diarrhoea,

518
00:25:24,480 --> 00:25:26,280
vomiting, muscle aches.

519
00:25:27,840 --> 00:25:30,680
One of the steaks was cooked until
it was well done,

520
00:25:30,680 --> 00:25:33,400
one was cooked in the style usually
called blue,

521
00:25:33,400 --> 00:25:35,600
for about 90 seconds on each side,

522
00:25:35,600 --> 00:25:39,040
and the third was left completely
raw, so not cooked at all.

523
00:25:40,240 --> 00:25:42,120
Next, she sampled the surface of
the meat,

524
00:25:42,120 --> 00:25:45,040
and left those samples to
grow cultures.

525
00:25:45,040 --> 00:25:48,680
Now, the vast majority of meat
bought in butchers and supermarkets

526
00:25:48,680 --> 00:25:52,000
isn't contaminated with anything
like the amount of bacteria

527
00:25:52,000 --> 00:25:53,600
Chloe laced our steaks with.

528
00:25:53,600 --> 00:25:55,400
So, will cooking kill it all off?

529
00:25:56,480 --> 00:25:59,000
Nice to meet you. Hi, Nomsa, nice to
meet you. I'm Sarah.

530
00:25:59,000 --> 00:26:02,280
Sarah, Nomsa and I have come to get
the results.

531
00:26:02,280 --> 00:26:03,880
What do the test results show?

532
00:26:03,880 --> 00:26:05,800
I've got some plates that I can
show you, here.

533
00:26:05,800 --> 00:26:06,920
Yeah, please, yeah.

534
00:26:06,920 --> 00:26:09,920
'So, this is the plate showing the
level of E. coli bacteria

535
00:26:09,920 --> 00:26:11,760
'found on the uncooked steak.

536
00:26:11,760 --> 00:26:14,560
'Unsurprisingly, it's almost
completely dark,

537
00:26:14,560 --> 00:26:17,760
'meaning the plate is covered
in bacteria.

538
00:26:17,760 --> 00:26:21,120
'But after cooking, even just for 90
seconds on each side,

539
00:26:21,120 --> 00:26:24,160
'a massive proportion of the
bacteria was killed.'

540
00:26:24,160 --> 00:26:28,520
So, the blue steak, you can see it's
a significant reduction,

541
00:26:28,520 --> 00:26:33,040
from about a quarter of a million
cells on the raw steak,

542
00:26:33,040 --> 00:26:35,840
there are about 4,000 cells here,

543
00:26:35,840 --> 00:26:39,360
that is about a 98% reduction in the
number of E. coli cells.

544
00:26:40,880 --> 00:26:43,840
So, if cooking the steak for such
a short period of time

545
00:26:43,840 --> 00:26:46,080
has killed off most of the E. coli,

546
00:26:46,080 --> 00:26:50,280
no prizes for guessing what Chloe
found on the well-done steak.

547
00:26:50,280 --> 00:26:52,360
Absolutely nothing grew whatsoever.

548
00:26:52,360 --> 00:26:54,080
The same goes for listeria.

549
00:26:54,080 --> 00:26:57,320
None at all survived on the surface
of the well-done steak,

550
00:26:57,320 --> 00:27:01,680
and only a tiny amount of listeria
was left on the rare steak.

551
00:27:01,680 --> 00:27:05,160
After cooking for a minute
and a half each side,

552
00:27:05,160 --> 00:27:10,000
you can see a single listeria cell
has survived.

553
00:27:10,000 --> 00:27:13,600
Chloe says that such a tiny amount
of listeria is very unlikely

554
00:27:13,600 --> 00:27:16,080
to have any adverse effects if it
was eaten.

555
00:27:17,280 --> 00:27:19,960
I would still be happy to eat
a steak

556
00:27:19,960 --> 00:27:22,440
that was cooked rare.

557
00:27:22,440 --> 00:27:25,320
I don't think it would pose any
particular harm.

558
00:27:25,320 --> 00:27:28,400
So, even though there are still
traces of both

559
00:27:28,400 --> 00:27:32,160
listeria and E. coli on the
blue sample?

560
00:27:32,160 --> 00:27:34,920
Absolutely. Not to the level that
you think

561
00:27:34,920 --> 00:27:37,160
we should be concerned
about eating it.

562
00:27:37,160 --> 00:27:40,200
The reason I am not worried from
the results of this experiment

563
00:27:40,200 --> 00:27:41,400
is that we started with an

564
00:27:41,400 --> 00:27:43,360
incredibly high number of E. coli
cells

565
00:27:43,360 --> 00:27:46,000
but it's highly unlikely that that
number of cells,

566
00:27:46,000 --> 00:27:50,320
particularly the number of E. coli
O157 cells, would be present.

567
00:27:50,320 --> 00:27:54,440
And so I don't think that's
particular cause for concern.

568
00:27:54,440 --> 00:27:57,240
OK, so, I mean, that must be music
to your ears, Nomsa, mustn't it?

569
00:27:57,240 --> 00:28:00,720
I am smiling all the way.
So, yours is completely safe.

570
00:28:00,720 --> 00:28:05,640
How do you feel, Sarah? Because you
are a big fan of rare steak.

571
00:28:05,640 --> 00:28:08,320
Yeah. When it's infected,
clearly there's an issue

572
00:28:08,320 --> 00:28:11,840
if you have got an E. coli infection
on the surface of meat,

573
00:28:11,840 --> 00:28:16,200
but that's why it's important to
source your meat well.

574
00:28:16,200 --> 00:28:19,240
With steaks, the harmful bacteria is
only present

575
00:28:19,240 --> 00:28:20,600
on the surface of the meat.

576
00:28:20,600 --> 00:28:24,920
It doesn't penetrate inside, so is
killed when the surface gets hot.

577
00:28:24,920 --> 00:28:27,680
But Chloe says the same isn't true
with pork,

578
00:28:27,680 --> 00:28:30,240
so while it may have become
fashionable for restaurants

579
00:28:30,240 --> 00:28:33,840
to serve it pink, Chloe really
wouldn't advise it.

580
00:28:33,840 --> 00:28:37,040
The pork can be tenderised and be
injected with things

581
00:28:37,040 --> 00:28:39,360
so that anything on the surface...
Could be pushed in.

582
00:28:39,360 --> 00:28:42,920
..could be introduced into the
pork muscle as well. Yes, yes.

583
00:28:42,920 --> 00:28:45,880
So, pork is very important to
cook thoroughly as well.

584
00:28:45,880 --> 00:28:49,840
And that advice is echoed by the
Food Standards Agency,

585
00:28:49,840 --> 00:28:52,640
the government body responsible for
setting guidelines

586
00:28:52,640 --> 00:28:54,600
on how we should cook our food.

587
00:28:54,600 --> 00:28:56,720
It says, "Wherever you buy it from,

588
00:28:56,720 --> 00:29:01,000
"any kind of pork should be cooked
through until the juices run clear."

589
00:29:01,000 --> 00:29:05,000
But the FSA's advice on burgers
isn't quite so straightforward,

590
00:29:05,000 --> 00:29:08,360
which is what's led to some of
those confusing headlines saying

591
00:29:08,360 --> 00:29:11,400
some burgers are OK to eat pink when
others aren't.

592
00:29:11,400 --> 00:29:15,800
So, we asked the FSA's Steve Wearne
to put the record straight.

593
00:29:15,800 --> 00:29:19,640
When you're cooking burgers at home,
you should cook them until they're

594
00:29:19,640 --> 00:29:23,360
done all the way through, there's
no pink, the juices run clear,

595
00:29:23,360 --> 00:29:25,200
and that it's piping hot.

596
00:29:25,200 --> 00:29:28,200
The reason is that burgers simply
aren't the same as steak.

597
00:29:28,200 --> 00:29:31,000
If you think about a steak, the
bugs are on the outside,

598
00:29:31,000 --> 00:29:33,400
so if you sear the steak you kill
the bugs.

599
00:29:33,400 --> 00:29:37,200
If you then make a burger from that
same piece of steak,

600
00:29:37,200 --> 00:29:41,040
you're mincing it up, so what was on
the outside is now on the inside,

601
00:29:41,040 --> 00:29:43,720
and so you need to cook it
thoroughly, all the way through.

602
00:29:45,280 --> 00:29:47,560
So, if that's true, how come
some restaurants

603
00:29:47,560 --> 00:29:49,800
are able to serve their
burgers pink

604
00:29:49,800 --> 00:29:52,200
without giving us all
food poisoning?

605
00:29:52,200 --> 00:29:55,600
Well, it depends on how each
restaurant makes their burgers,

606
00:29:55,600 --> 00:29:59,800
and if they can prove that it's
safe to serve pink.

607
00:29:59,800 --> 00:30:01,640
We know that there are
some restaurants

608
00:30:01,640 --> 00:30:05,240
who have controls in their kitchens,

609
00:30:05,240 --> 00:30:08,400
and all the way up the food chain
where they source from,

610
00:30:08,400 --> 00:30:12,920
where the slaughterhouses have taken
particular precautions,

611
00:30:12,920 --> 00:30:17,440
and we say that eating a burger
less than thoroughly cooked

612
00:30:17,440 --> 00:30:20,880
in a restaurant is unacceptable

613
00:30:20,880 --> 00:30:24,560
unless there are those controls all
the way through the chain.

614
00:30:24,560 --> 00:30:29,600
But we do also say that children and
people who are elderly or vulnerable

615
00:30:29,600 --> 00:30:32,640
shouldn't eat raw burgers or rare
burgers anywhere.

616
00:30:33,920 --> 00:30:36,880
If you're uncertain about the
restaurant that's serving you

617
00:30:36,880 --> 00:30:39,800
a pink burger, just ask them to
explain how they can be sure

618
00:30:39,800 --> 00:30:44,040
it's safe, or ask for it to be
a little bit more well-done.

619
00:30:44,040 --> 00:30:47,640
Like beef, lamb is OK to eat rare if
it's a whole piece of meat

620
00:30:47,640 --> 00:30:50,880
that's been seared on the outside,
but again, if it's been minced

621
00:30:50,880 --> 00:30:53,360
it needs to be cooked through.

622
00:30:53,360 --> 00:30:57,320
Back in Manchester, and time for me
to catch up with Sarah and Nomsa

623
00:30:57,320 --> 00:31:01,360
to see if they have changed their
minds over how to cook meats.

624
00:31:01,360 --> 00:31:04,480
So, I thought that was really
interesting. Yeah, it was
really interesting.

625
00:31:04,480 --> 00:31:07,720
What did you think about the pork -
did that make you change your mind?

626
00:31:07,720 --> 00:31:10,840
Erm... It's made me think I want to
look into it some more.

627
00:31:10,840 --> 00:31:12,920
Mh-hm. Yes, definitely.

628
00:31:12,920 --> 00:31:14,960
And the burger, did that make
you think?

629
00:31:14,960 --> 00:31:18,080
Ew, I wouldn't be eating any
medium-rare burgers.

630
00:31:18,080 --> 00:31:19,560
I will get them well-done,

631
00:31:19,560 --> 00:31:22,160
and if they come served without them
asking me, you know,

632
00:31:22,160 --> 00:31:23,680
"How do you like it done?" then...

633
00:31:23,680 --> 00:31:26,040
It's getting sent back.
Yeah, exactly.

634
00:31:26,040 --> 00:31:28,880
So, I suppose the million dollar
question is...

635
00:31:28,880 --> 00:31:31,280
how are you going to order
your steak?

636
00:31:31,280 --> 00:31:32,640
Blue, please.

637
00:31:32,640 --> 00:31:35,240
Blue. Can I have mine well-done,
no blood?

638
00:31:35,240 --> 00:31:38,920
So, no change. I'll have mine
medium, please.

639
00:31:38,920 --> 00:31:41,320
Thank you very much. Thank you.
Thank you.

640
00:31:49,040 --> 00:31:52,560
So, there you have it, it's not just
a case of preference after all.

641
00:31:52,560 --> 00:31:55,760
Some meat really is not safe to
eat rare,

642
00:31:55,760 --> 00:31:57,760
and that is what today's programme
is all about,

643
00:31:57,760 --> 00:32:01,320
finding out the truth behind those
very confident headlines

644
00:32:01,320 --> 00:32:03,640
that aren't necessarily quite
what they seem.

645
00:32:03,640 --> 00:32:07,160
And while we were given a bum steer
by the ones we saw earlier about

646
00:32:07,160 --> 00:32:11,440
oily fish being bad for us, that is
nothing compared to the impression

647
00:32:11,440 --> 00:32:13,720
you might get when you read this
next headline.

648
00:32:13,720 --> 00:32:16,400
It says, "Beware of cutting back on
salt,

649
00:32:16,400 --> 00:32:19,360
"it could even give you a heart
attack."

650
00:32:19,360 --> 00:32:21,640
Now that story was reported in lots
of the papers

651
00:32:21,640 --> 00:32:24,520
and they all seem to say
roughly the same thing,

652
00:32:24,520 --> 00:32:28,520
that while too much salt can lead to
conditions like heart disease,

653
00:32:28,520 --> 00:32:31,360
too little might be just as bad
for you.

654
00:32:31,360 --> 00:32:33,920
So, confusing. Yeah, that is really
hard to believe.

655
00:32:33,920 --> 00:32:37,200
And when we saw that headline we
just had to get to the bottom of it,

656
00:32:37,200 --> 00:32:39,880
so we asked Paralympic gold
medallist Danny Crates

657
00:32:39,880 --> 00:32:41,080
to investigate.

658
00:32:47,040 --> 00:32:51,680
Even before I won my medal in the
Paralympics, I always loved running.

659
00:32:51,680 --> 00:32:53,000
And I still do.

660
00:32:53,000 --> 00:32:55,120
But short distances are my thing.

661
00:32:58,080 --> 00:33:02,280
So I must confess, what this lot are
about to do fills me with dread -

662
00:33:02,280 --> 00:33:05,720
an epic 30-mile ultramarathon.

663
00:33:05,720 --> 00:33:09,520
It's on cold days like this that I
am certainly glad I have hung up my

664
00:33:09,520 --> 00:33:14,440
running shoes. I definitely do not
envy these athletes behind me.

665
00:33:14,440 --> 00:33:15,880
But the reason I'm here today is,

666
00:33:15,880 --> 00:33:19,320
whilst these competitors will be
concerned about strains, sprains,

667
00:33:19,320 --> 00:33:24,320
and whatever else this 30-mile,
gruelling course will throw at them,

668
00:33:24,320 --> 00:33:26,440
there may be something else going on
in their bodies

669
00:33:26,440 --> 00:33:28,440
and that could be dangerous.

670
00:33:29,920 --> 00:33:33,440
And that is because tough endurance
races like this one could see

671
00:33:33,440 --> 00:33:37,760
the levels of sodium in their blood
plunge to dangerously low levels.

672
00:33:37,760 --> 00:33:40,720
Our blood sodium is controlled by
the amount of salt we eat,

673
00:33:40,720 --> 00:33:43,160
but when these runners stop for a
drink en route,

674
00:33:43,160 --> 00:33:45,280
they will dilute their sodium levels

675
00:33:45,280 --> 00:33:49,360
and if they fall too far, it could
lead to dizziness, headaches,

676
00:33:49,360 --> 00:33:53,840
nausea and, in extreme cases,
it could even be fatal.

677
00:33:53,840 --> 00:33:57,520
Some runners aim to prevent this by
eating a little more salt.

678
00:33:57,520 --> 00:34:00,520
Now, normally that is a hugely
controversial message

679
00:34:00,520 --> 00:34:04,160
because, for years, we have been
told salt is bad for us.

680
00:34:04,160 --> 00:34:05,520
It raises the blood pressure,

681
00:34:05,520 --> 00:34:07,280
which increases your risk of strokes

682
00:34:07,280 --> 00:34:09,000
and heart disease.

683
00:34:09,000 --> 00:34:10,440
So I can't be the only one

684
00:34:10,440 --> 00:34:12,360
to have been amazed to read that

685
00:34:12,360 --> 00:34:15,080
instead of worrying about
eating too much salt,

686
00:34:15,080 --> 00:34:16,400
we might actually be harming

687
00:34:16,400 --> 00:34:18,080
our health by eating too little.

688
00:34:19,480 --> 00:34:20,960
So while I try to find out

689
00:34:20,960 --> 00:34:22,400
if I need to take these claims

690
00:34:22,400 --> 00:34:24,960
with a hefty pinch of...well, salt,

691
00:34:24,960 --> 00:34:27,640
Dr Stephen Mears from
Loughborough University is going

692
00:34:27,640 --> 00:34:29,400
to run some tests on these runners

693
00:34:29,400 --> 00:34:33,240
to see what impact a gruelling
race has on their sodium levels.

694
00:34:34,600 --> 00:34:39,200
Would you expect many of the runners
here today to suffer from salt

695
00:34:39,200 --> 00:34:43,400
loss? We might see some, sort of,
maybe 10% in ultra-races,

696
00:34:43,400 --> 00:34:46,440
pushing up towards 20, 30% and
they are the ones we need to look at

697
00:34:46,440 --> 00:34:48,400
in case there's any serious
problems.

698
00:34:48,400 --> 00:34:51,640
The telltale signs of low sodium
levels should be easy

699
00:34:51,640 --> 00:34:54,520
for the runners themselves to spot
during the race.

700
00:34:54,520 --> 00:34:56,760
You might start seeing some
bloatedness,

701
00:34:56,760 --> 00:34:58,880
you might feel discomfort in your
stomach.

702
00:34:58,880 --> 00:35:00,760
You might vomit some water up.

703
00:35:00,760 --> 00:35:02,760
You might start feeling dizzy,
nauseous.

704
00:35:02,760 --> 00:35:04,880
And this will gradually increase
if you continue

705
00:35:04,880 --> 00:35:07,040
at the same fluid ingestion rate.

706
00:35:07,040 --> 00:35:10,000
You cannot underplay this.
People do die.

707
00:35:10,000 --> 00:35:14,720
Yes, there's been several deaths
in the last 15-20 years.

708
00:35:14,720 --> 00:35:17,680
But some of the runners I met
were prepared.

709
00:35:17,680 --> 00:35:19,680
I usually have a steak.

710
00:35:19,680 --> 00:35:21,640
New potatoes, lots of salt on.

711
00:35:21,640 --> 00:35:25,040
And on a longer run, about 60 miles,
people just feed me potatoes,

712
00:35:25,040 --> 00:35:28,000
with salt just sprinkled on.

713
00:35:28,000 --> 00:35:30,640
Others, however, did not seem so
worried.

714
00:35:30,640 --> 00:35:35,000
Do you ever put any thought into
sodium in your body - like too much,

715
00:35:35,000 --> 00:35:37,160
too little? Do you have any thoughts
on that?

716
00:35:37,160 --> 00:35:39,240
I know about losing quite a bit
through sweat.

717
00:35:39,240 --> 00:35:41,680
I'm not sure I necessarily think
about replacing the salt.

718
00:35:41,680 --> 00:35:46,600
ANNOUNCER: Five, four, three,
two, one, go.

719
00:35:50,160 --> 00:35:52,960
Well, in a few moments, we'll see
how a race like this one

720
00:35:52,960 --> 00:35:56,720
can affect the levels of sodium
in the runners' bodies.

721
00:35:56,720 --> 00:35:59,760
Good effort. Keep going.

722
00:35:59,760 --> 00:36:03,920
But, of course, not many of us run
an ultramarathon in our spare time,

723
00:36:03,920 --> 00:36:07,080
so the idea of not consuming enough
salt is probably something

724
00:36:07,080 --> 00:36:09,040
we never even thought could be a
problem

725
00:36:09,040 --> 00:36:11,440
until we read it in the papers.

726
00:36:11,440 --> 00:36:13,800
Their story said that just like

727
00:36:13,800 --> 00:36:15,360
eating too much salt,

728
00:36:15,360 --> 00:36:16,600
a diet that is low in it

729
00:36:16,600 --> 00:36:18,440
could cause a heart attack

730
00:36:18,440 --> 00:36:19,960
and one report even declared

731
00:36:19,960 --> 00:36:21,560
salt is healthy.

732
00:36:21,560 --> 00:36:24,360
What is the truth? I'm sure it is
not just me

733
00:36:24,360 --> 00:36:26,880
that really needs to know.

734
00:36:26,880 --> 00:36:31,080
But I must confess, ever since I
competed in Celebrity MasterChef

735
00:36:31,080 --> 00:36:33,960
in 2015, I have gone to town
with salt in my cooking.

736
00:36:35,480 --> 00:36:36,880
Perfect.

737
00:36:36,880 --> 00:36:39,560
Professional chefs do the same
and I can see why

738
00:36:39,560 --> 00:36:41,680
because it is a taste I love.

739
00:36:41,680 --> 00:36:44,960
But as a result, I'm fairly sure
that I eat too much.

740
00:36:49,160 --> 00:36:51,240
So to see if I am overdoing it,

741
00:36:51,240 --> 00:36:55,120
I'm going to meet nutritional
therapist Dee Brereton-Patel.

742
00:36:55,120 --> 00:36:57,640
Hi, Dee. How are you doing, are
you all right? I'm good, thanks.

743
00:36:57,640 --> 00:36:59,040
Good to meet you, Danny.

744
00:36:59,040 --> 00:37:01,520
Dee, I love salt, you know? I put
it on my food.

745
00:37:01,520 --> 00:37:05,760
How much should I really be putting
in my body each day?

746
00:37:05,760 --> 00:37:09,280
The government guidelines say that
for adults we should be taking in

747
00:37:09,280 --> 00:37:11,960
no more than 6g of salt per day.

748
00:37:11,960 --> 00:37:14,200
That is equivalent to a teaspoon.

749
00:37:14,200 --> 00:37:17,120
So when you put it like that it
doesn't sound like very much.

750
00:37:17,120 --> 00:37:19,840
It is a sum of all our salt,

751
00:37:19,840 --> 00:37:23,760
so it is the salt that is already
present in the food we buy,

752
00:37:23,760 --> 00:37:26,680
plus the salt we add to foods at
home.

753
00:37:26,680 --> 00:37:30,440
On average, we each eat around 8g
of salt a day.

754
00:37:30,440 --> 00:37:32,520
So, if six is the recommended limit,

755
00:37:32,520 --> 00:37:34,920
we're eating a third more than we
should.

756
00:37:34,920 --> 00:37:37,800
So, Dee, this teaspoon of salt
is roughly 6g.

757
00:37:37,800 --> 00:37:38,960
That is my daily allowance.

758
00:37:38,960 --> 00:37:43,760
That's right. I have to be honest, I
would probably put that on one meal.

759
00:37:43,760 --> 00:37:46,160
But even before you have sprinkled
on any extra,

760
00:37:46,160 --> 00:37:48,400
there is salt in almost everything
you eat.

761
00:37:48,400 --> 00:37:51,840
A small tin of beans will give you
about 1.2g of salt.

762
00:37:51,840 --> 00:37:54,320
A chicken breast has 0.2g.

763
00:37:54,320 --> 00:37:57,520
And this bowl of soup alone has 3g,

764
00:37:57,520 --> 00:37:59,560
almost half our daily allowance.

765
00:37:59,560 --> 00:38:02,800
But that's nothing compared to my
favourite breakfast.

766
00:38:02,800 --> 00:38:04,360
A bacon butty.

767
00:38:04,360 --> 00:38:06,320
We know there's salt in bacon.

768
00:38:06,320 --> 00:38:08,120
But the bread is all right, OK?

769
00:38:08,120 --> 00:38:09,320
You'd be surprised.

770
00:38:09,320 --> 00:38:13,160
One slice of bread has 0.4g of salt
in.

771
00:38:13,160 --> 00:38:14,720
So I would have three.

772
00:38:14,720 --> 00:38:16,440
That is 1.2g of salt already.

773
00:38:16,440 --> 00:38:17,840
That's right. Yeah.

774
00:38:17,840 --> 00:38:22,720
You're getting about 2.25g of salt
in those two rashers of bacon.

775
00:38:22,720 --> 00:38:24,480
But I'm not just having two rashers
of bacon.

776
00:38:24,480 --> 00:38:26,600
I'm probably up to four rashers of
bacon... OK.

777
00:38:26,600 --> 00:38:29,320
..to fill my three slices of bread.
Yeah.

778
00:38:29,320 --> 00:38:32,640
So that is 4.5 there, 1.2 there,

779
00:38:32,640 --> 00:38:34,800
you've pretty much reached your
daily intake

780
00:38:34,800 --> 00:38:39,080
without putting any ketchup on.
Or butter. Or butter.

781
00:38:39,080 --> 00:38:41,000
Well, it's already pretty obvious

782
00:38:41,000 --> 00:38:43,320
that I'm definitely having
too much salt,

783
00:38:43,320 --> 00:38:46,720
which makes me wonder what all those
headlines about the risks of eating

784
00:38:46,720 --> 00:38:49,560
too little were really going on
about.

785
00:38:49,560 --> 00:38:52,880
While it is easy to see how the
ultramarathon runners might dilute

786
00:38:52,880 --> 00:38:54,240
the sodium in their blood,

787
00:38:54,240 --> 00:38:57,160
I find it really far-fetched to
think the rest of us could

788
00:38:57,160 --> 00:38:59,800
possibly eat so little salt it is
bad for us,

789
00:38:59,800 --> 00:39:02,080
as those headlines seem to suggest.

790
00:39:05,280 --> 00:39:08,360
And as it turns out,
I'm right to be sceptical

791
00:39:08,360 --> 00:39:11,800
because Professor Franco Cappuccio
from the World Health Organization

792
00:39:11,800 --> 00:39:14,280
says that the study the papers are
quoting

793
00:39:14,280 --> 00:39:17,560
wasn't quite as simple as the
reports made out.

794
00:39:17,560 --> 00:39:21,240
The professor has big concerns about
the size and health of the group

795
00:39:21,240 --> 00:39:24,760
measured in the study, which in any
case took a different approach

796
00:39:24,760 --> 00:39:29,160
to what constitutes too little salt
that most experts would recognise,

797
00:39:29,160 --> 00:39:30,920
including in its sample

798
00:39:30,920 --> 00:39:34,840
people consuming much more than
the usual limit of 6g.

799
00:39:34,840 --> 00:39:37,880
The low salt group that we are
looking at is

800
00:39:37,880 --> 00:39:43,240
about 7.5g of salt or less,
far above the recommended values.

801
00:39:43,240 --> 00:39:45,680
There is no other group studied
below that,

802
00:39:45,680 --> 00:39:48,600
so researchers haven't studied
the lower levels.

803
00:39:48,600 --> 00:39:51,160
Add to that, a confusion in some
reports

804
00:39:51,160 --> 00:39:53,200
between salt and sodium levels

805
00:39:53,200 --> 00:39:56,680
and the professor says it is easy to
see how coverage of the study

806
00:39:56,680 --> 00:39:59,240
ended up sending a message very
different

807
00:39:59,240 --> 00:40:01,280
to the one we're usually told.

808
00:40:01,280 --> 00:40:04,800
And while most of his criticisms are
around the research itself,

809
00:40:04,800 --> 00:40:07,960
he believes the reporters didn't
properly understand

810
00:40:07,960 --> 00:40:10,000
or check its conclusions,

811
00:40:10,000 --> 00:40:13,240
which he reckons could have had a
dangerous impact.

812
00:40:13,240 --> 00:40:18,160
We are bombarded by contrasting news
every day. Every day.

813
00:40:18,160 --> 00:40:20,240
That might have serious
consequences.

814
00:40:20,240 --> 00:40:23,080
People could stop taking drugs
because they read one thing.

815
00:40:23,080 --> 00:40:30,040
Or questioning the wisdom that has
been accepted for quite a long time.

816
00:40:30,040 --> 00:40:33,040
The professor is in no doubt that
when it comes to salt,

817
00:40:33,040 --> 00:40:36,480
the accepted wisdom really is
unshakeable.

818
00:40:36,480 --> 00:40:40,760
So, outside of all the medical
jargon, all the facts and figures,

819
00:40:40,760 --> 00:40:44,240
what you are basically saying is it
is common sense, eat less salt,

820
00:40:44,240 --> 00:40:46,000
we will live a healthier lifestyle

821
00:40:46,000 --> 00:40:49,280
and have reduced risk of
hypertension, heart disease, stroke.

822
00:40:49,280 --> 00:40:53,200
Absolutely. The evidence relating
salt to blood pressure

823
00:40:53,200 --> 00:40:54,560
is overwhelming.

824
00:40:54,560 --> 00:40:57,840
If you reduce your salt intake,
you reduce your blood pressure.

825
00:40:57,840 --> 00:41:02,720
So, it is likely that if you reduce
blood pressure,

826
00:41:02,720 --> 00:41:06,720
you reduce a cardiovascular event,
there is no argument about that.

827
00:41:06,720 --> 00:41:11,320
And it's robust and probably the
strongest possible evidence we have

828
00:41:11,320 --> 00:41:13,440
in medicine and public health in
modern times.

829
00:41:13,440 --> 00:41:16,160
CHEERING

830
00:41:18,440 --> 00:41:21,880
So it turns out the headlines were
simply wrong

831
00:41:21,880 --> 00:41:25,200
and we really don't need to worry
about not getting enough salt

832
00:41:25,200 --> 00:41:28,000
from our food but there's no
escaping the fact

833
00:41:28,000 --> 00:41:30,400
that for the runners of the
ultramarathon, at least,

834
00:41:30,400 --> 00:41:33,440
what they drink could end up
dangerously reducing their sodium

835
00:41:33,440 --> 00:41:34,760
levels during the race.

836
00:41:34,760 --> 00:41:37,560
So I'm back in Yorkshire to check on
their results.

837
00:41:37,560 --> 00:41:40,800
I have to admit these athletes are a
tough breed.

838
00:41:40,800 --> 00:41:44,320
They've just endured a gruelling
30-mile race.

839
00:41:44,320 --> 00:41:47,320
But I'll be really interested to see
what effect it has had on their

840
00:41:47,320 --> 00:41:48,640
sodium levels.

841
00:41:50,840 --> 00:41:54,120
The good news is that Stephen's
blood tests gave most of the runners

842
00:41:54,120 --> 00:41:55,680
the all clear.

843
00:41:58,520 --> 00:42:01,240
I'm ruined. Everything hurts.

844
00:42:02,560 --> 00:42:04,640
We're just taking a capillary blood
sample,

845
00:42:04,640 --> 00:42:06,640
so we can take a small amount of
blood

846
00:42:06,640 --> 00:42:08,760
and then we can measure
the amount of sodium

847
00:42:08,760 --> 00:42:10,240
that is in the blood.

848
00:42:11,720 --> 00:42:14,760
You've got good numbers, in normal
ranges again.

849
00:42:16,680 --> 00:42:18,280
Results were good.

850
00:42:18,280 --> 00:42:20,360
Serum sodium, the blood sodium
concentration was

851
00:42:20,360 --> 00:42:22,160
within normal ranges.

852
00:42:22,160 --> 00:42:24,600
In fact, as it was such a cold day,

853
00:42:24,600 --> 00:42:27,640
very few runners here drank
excessive amounts of water.

854
00:42:27,640 --> 00:42:31,800
So on this occasion, there were no
big falls in blood sodium levels.

855
00:42:31,800 --> 00:42:34,080
Would you have expected to see
different sets of results

856
00:42:34,080 --> 00:42:35,520
had the weather been hot?

857
00:42:35,520 --> 00:42:38,040
Yeah, we probably would've seen
completely different results

858
00:42:38,040 --> 00:42:39,680
if it was hotter.

859
00:42:39,680 --> 00:42:41,800
People would have thought,
"I need to drink more."

860
00:42:41,800 --> 00:42:43,880
So it's that perception of
how much they drink.

861
00:42:43,880 --> 00:42:47,360
So thinking, "It's hot today, I
need to get more fluids on board."

862
00:42:50,440 --> 00:42:53,080
So, while the dangers of getting
too little salt might make

863
00:42:53,080 --> 00:42:55,360
great material for headline writers,

864
00:42:55,360 --> 00:42:57,600
it seems that, in reality, no diet,

865
00:42:57,600 --> 00:43:00,360
and not even this 30-mile
endurance race,

866
00:43:00,360 --> 00:43:04,480
can see your sodium levels plummet
so low that it might be dangerous.

867
00:43:04,480 --> 00:43:08,360
For this lot, there is something
many of them really do need now

868
00:43:08,360 --> 00:43:10,640
and it is not salt.

869
00:43:10,640 --> 00:43:14,320
I have been waiting for a cup of tea
for about the last 20 miles.

870
00:43:19,440 --> 00:43:21,680
Now, let's face it, I've been around
long enough to know

871
00:43:21,680 --> 00:43:24,720
that we shouldn't believe everything
that we read in the papers.

872
00:43:24,720 --> 00:43:28,480
But, you know, those salt headlines
really did take me by surprise.

873
00:43:28,480 --> 00:43:31,120
I know. It would have been so easy
for people to see them and think

874
00:43:31,120 --> 00:43:34,080
it's safer to eat more salt when
the opposite is true,

875
00:43:34,080 --> 00:43:36,280
but I guess the same goes for
your oily fish, doesn't it?

876
00:43:36,280 --> 00:43:39,400
It sure does. And by the way, you
can find a whole host of delicious

877
00:43:39,400 --> 00:43:42,880
recipes and lots of ideas for
cooking with oily fish.

878
00:43:42,880 --> 00:43:43,920
That's at...

879
00:43:46,400 --> 00:43:49,240
We'll be back to debunk some
more headlines very soon.

880
00:43:49,240 --> 00:43:51,440
But for now, though, that is all
we have got time for.

881
00:43:51,440 --> 00:43:54,720
Thanks for joining us. Until next
time, goodbye. Bye-bye.