Report comment

This article again seems intended to mislead and distract. The opening sentence seems intended to imply that Ben Goldacre had criticized the Sunday Times article or the underlying position, which he has not. Then the article misleadingly suggests that the substance of the article ‘Five-a-day foods packed with sugar as being the "stunning revelation that fruit contains sugar," when in fact the article is in *favor* of fruit and does not suggest that it is packed with sugar: the article is instead highlighting the excessive sugar content of fruit *juices* , in contrast with fruit, and its source suggests that juice (*unlike* fruit) should not count toward "five-a-day."

The article provides zero substantive rebuttal of this position, but instead goes on to repeat yet again its tempest-in-a-teapot complaint that the National Obesity Forum's projections on obesity in 2050 are a couple of percentage points higher than those of the UK Health Forum, even though both projections have over half the British populations obese by that time. It is as if public safety authorities were warning people to get out of town because an asteroid was hurtling toward the heart of London, and The Grocer was quibbling over whether the space rock weighed a trillion tons or 10 billion tons less.