"Having a varied diet. Real food, fresh food. . ." @5:10 sums it up. Seems like something we already knew.
Yes, Andy, we probably did.
And no-one took any notice. What Jamie Oliver did was to (a) Teach people that they didn´t need to take a Culinary Institute course to cook good food. (b) That cooking was not necessarily complicated - it was simple. (c) Good-tasting food just needs fresh ingredients; not something grabbed out of a supermarket freezer. (d) Cooking good food is actually fun, not a chore. (e) Good, simple food brings people together.
As for School Dinners, well I doubt most of you here have ever experienced the dire, disgusting, carelessly prepared muck served up in British schools. I have, and I can assure you, it´s worse than you could possibly imagine. So if you think Jamie was trying to be a Crusader - he was. Whether he actually made a difference, i don´t know, but 10/10 for trying. Crappy food every day when you´re young because no-one can be bothered to cook properly is unacceptable.
Another misuse of the meaning of the word hero. He didn't run into a burning building, save a coupe of children from the flames, then cook a great meal for them on the heat from the burning house.
And who said heroes had to do something akin to Bruce Willis or Batman? A hero is someone who is also admired for outstanding achievements or qualities. Mahatma Ghandi was a hero; Susan B.Anthony was a hero; Franklin Roosevelt was a hero; Winston Churchill was a hero. Depends on how you define "Hero".
And as for TV chefs - they´re like fashion. One year it´s purple, another year it´s black, another year it´s pink.