Module G - What Not To Eat?

What Not To Eat?

Module G

Look at the pictures

• What do they have in common?

• How can we categorize them?

Open Ended

What do they have in common?

How can we categorize them?

Vocabulary

^{obvious - מובן מאליו}

^{avoid - להימנע}

^{influenced by - מושפע ע"י}

^{manufacturer - יצרן}

^{involvement - מעורבות}

^{representative - נציג}

Vocabulary

evidence -ראיות

fund - קרן

impact - השפעה

exaggerate - להגזים

reconsider - לשקול מחדש

consumption - צריכה

Useful expressions

• pose a risk

• health authorities

• tooth decay

• medical journal

• promote a view

• advertising campaign

Watch this video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEA-G9m9S0Y

Open Ended

What is the issue discussed in the video?

What are some of the effects sugar has on our bodies?

WHAT NOT TO EAT?

(lines 1-6)

Which poses a greater risk to our health ־ fried foods, or sweet desserts? To most of us, the answer is obvious. For decades, we've been told by health authorities that fatty foods are responsible for a whole range of serious illnesses, and should be avoided. Sugar, on the other hand, was said to cause nothing worse than tooth decay. But now it seems that our ideas regarding both fat and sugar need rethinking. The reason: they may have been influenced by manufacturers of sugar and of sugar-rich foods working to protect their interests.

Multiple Choice

1. What point does the writer make in lines 1-6?

• (i) Fat poses a higher risk to our health than sugar does.

• (ii) Sugar used to cause less damage than it does today.

• (iii) The causes of tooth decay are not well understood

• (iv) Information we get about food may be unreliable.

(lines 7-15)

One example of such activity was uncovered last year in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), which published an alarming report on the involvement of the American sugar industry in scientific research in the 1960s. At that time, researchers were debating which types of food ־ those high in sugar, or those high in fat ־ might increase the risk of heart disease. But then, in 1965, a representative of the industry named John Hickson paid three Harvard University scientists to write a review of studies done on the subject. Hickson himself decided which studies would be reviewed, and made it clear what conclusions he expected. Not surprisingly, the team found the evidence linking heart disease to fat much stronger than the evidence linking it to sugar. 

Multiple Select

2. What do we learn from lines 7-15?

PUT A √ BY THE TWO CORRECT ANSWERS.

• (i) Why heart disease was common in the 1960s.

• (ii) Why the JAMA report was only published last year.

• (iii) What the scientific debate in the 1960s was about.

• (iv) Why the risk of heart disease is mainly linked with food.

• (v) How Hickson influenced the results of the Harvard review.

Open Ended

3. What conclusion were the Harvard scientists expected to reach? (lines 7-15)

COMPLETE THE SENTENCE.

Sugar is less likely to ....... .

(lines 16-23)

When the review was published in 1967 in a prestigious medical journal, most scientists accepted its conclusion. Since then, the sugar and food manufacturers have continued taking steps to keep sales high. Again and again, they have shifted the blame for various health problems away from sugar. For instance, a major manufacturer of sugary drinks is funding a group of scientists who promote the view that the main cause of obesity is lack of exercise, despite evidence that physical activity has only minimal impact on weight. In addition, advertising campaigns have greatly exaggerated the benefits of sugar ־ for example, by claiming that it is the most important source of energy for the body.

Open Ended

4. What are we told in lines 16-23 about the sugar and food manufacturers? Give ONE answer.

COMPLETE THE SENTENCE.

We are told why ..................

(lines 24-29)

The manufacturers' efforts have been remarkably successful, and much of the Western world continues to consume foods high in sugar. Meanwhile, people have greatly restricted their consumption of fat as it has come to be viewed as the leading dietary cause of major diseases. And yet, despite the popularity of low-fat diets, disease rates are still rising dramatically. Consequently, increasing numbers of scientists are asking themselves whether the role of sugar has been wrongly overlooked.  

Multiple Choice

What do we learn from lines 24-29? (ii) Why low-fat foods may be bad for our health.

• (i) Why people began consuming foods high in sugar.

• (ii) Why low-fat foods may be bad for our health.

• (iii) Why low-fat diets became popular.

• (iv) How diets can improve health.

Open Ended

6. COMPLETE THE SENTENCE.

In the phrase "the role of sugar" (line 28), the writer is referring to the role of sugar in ........................ .

(lines 30-34)

One person who has long been waiting for that question to be raised is award-winning science writer Gary Taubes. For 15 years, Taubes has written about the hidden forces shaping the fatsugar debate, and provided readers with updated findings on the health risks of sugar. Conclusive evidence of the damage it can cause may be years away, he says. Nevertheless, he insists that what we already know should be enough to make us reconsider what we eat and drink. 

Open Ended

7. What change in our eating habits would Taubes like us to make? (lines 30-34)