« Slum tourism: Pro-poor, or simple voyeurism? | Main | Mines a pint… »

March 14, 2008


Allan Buckwell

Apart from the fact that it is politicians who decide agricultural policy in Europe not economists, this article has got completely the wrong end of the stick. The CAP has resulted for most of the last 40 years in higher prices not lower prices, so consumption of meats, dairy products, carbohydrates and fats (saturated or not) hae been lower in EU countries compared to the situation without the CAP. So we could argue that without the CAP CHD would have been higher not lower.

Sarah Mellor

I was under the impression that, politically at least, there was some economic foundation to the CAP, though agree certainly that it is politics that has kept it in place for so long. however, as a nutritionist rather than either a politician or economist, I admit I would struggle to qualify the numbers.

Either way, I think the authors of the report are also arguing that the production of saturated fats and starch in the EU may not have been so high should the CAP not have been in place...and therefore our dietary exposure not have been so high? In retrospect, who can say? The US also have high rates of CHD, despite a 'free market' food production system.

I'd be interested to hear your comments, Allan, about what health consequences might arise from the predicted competition for land between food and fuel? Any thoughts?

The comments to this entry are closed.

June 2018

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30