Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Walmart U.S. moves to eliminate synthetic dyes across all private brand foods

corporate.walmart.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 153 posts

Re: Walmart U.S. moves to eliminate synthetic dyes across all private brand foods

#101

Post by gruez »

hollerith wrote: post #91
rootusrootus wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I personally have known people who develop migraines after eating food with artificial dyes Yeah, my mom was the same way when she had food with MSG in it. But only when she knew there was MSG in it.

When your mom eats something that is bad for her and her brain can tell it is bad for her, then if that experience is repeated a lot, then every time it encounters that thing or even thinks about that thing, her brain will tend to cause a defensive reaction, which itself is unpleasant and can affect your mom's behavior. None of this need be conscious or deliberate.

I don't think gp is trying to imply that she's explicitly making it up, just that the phenomena is in her head. To take an absurd example, it's probably safe to say that electromagentic sensitivity doesn't actually exist (ie. radio waves aren't actually causing people pain/distress), even if sufferers aren't lying to others about their experiences.

Re: Walmart U.S. moves to eliminate synthetic dyes across all private brand foods

#102

Post by gruez »

pixl97 wrote: post #96
tayo42 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I want to eat fruit loops, why are you getting involved? We have options and can make our own decisions about what to eat.

1. Because you'll feed them to your kids who do not make their own decisions, other than if they'll pay to remove cancers off their anus or die at home at 25. 2. Because a massive food industry would gladly lie about how unsafe their product is just like tobacco companies and they have far more money than you to befuddle the research.

>1. Because you'll feed them to your kids who do not make their own decisions, other than if they'll pay to remove cancers off their anus or die at home at 25.

How about we mandate physical activity for kids as well, given all the known harms of being inactive? Maybe refer kids to CPS if they're too fat too?

Re: Walmart U.S. moves to eliminate synthetic dyes across all private brand foods

#103

Post by tayo42 »

pixl97 wrote: post #96
tayo42 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I want to eat fruit loops, why are you getting involved? We have options and can make our own decisions about what to eat.

1. Because you'll feed them to your kids who do not make their own decisions, other than if they'll pay to remove cancers off their anus or die at home at 25. 2. Because a massive food industry would gladly lie about how unsafe their product is just like tobacco companies and they have far more money than you to befuddle the research.

This is a little dramatic

Tobacco still isn't illegal. We're all free to smoke.

Were given information and we're free to do what we want with it.

Re: Walmart U.S. moves to eliminate synthetic dyes across all private brand foods

#104

Post by gruez »

dlivingston wrote: post #58
psunavy03 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But this is likely also an attempt to market to people who think things like "but I don't want to be exposed to chemicals" while not realizing water is a chemical.

Very funny, but also flippant and glib. When people -- myself included -- say they have a problem with chemicals in food, they of course mean artificial chemicals: that is, compounds, preservatives, dyes, and flavors that are non-naturally present for that particular food item and were added for their shelf life, taste, aesthetic, or addictive properties. Next time you visit your grocery store, go read the ingredient…

>1. Studies use large, population-based sample sizes and their effects are based on their statistical significance on these populations. In other words, "side effects" are a population-level phenomenon, not an individual phenomenon. It is plausible that individual side effects are hidden as statistical noise. This is a problem with pharmacological studies as well and there is no easy solution to it AFAIK.

I don't get it, are you trying to imply there might be 0.0001% of people with negative side effects, they're not getting picked up, and for that reason those substances should have never been approved? If so what does that say about allergens? If the Colombian exchange happened today, should we ban peanuts on the basis that a few percent of people get side effects?

>but it is blindingly obvious (to me, at least) that the meat of the problem is environmental, primarily diets, and these compounds are wreaking havoc on the endocrine systems of the population causing a massive uptick in obesity and diabetes.

How is it "blindingly obvious" that it's caused by artificial colors specifically though? Otherwise it's a leap to go from "there must be something in the food" to "we should ban artificial colors".

Re: Walmart U.S. moves to eliminate synthetic dyes across all private brand foods

#106

Post by [deleted] »

gruez wrote: post #101
hollerith wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When your mom eats something that is bad for her and her brain can tell it is bad for her, then if that experience is repeated a lot, then every time it encounters that thing or even thinks about that thing, her brain will tend to cause a defensive reaction, which itself is unpleasant and can affect your mom's behavior. None of this need be conscious or deliberate.

I don't think gp is trying to imply that she's explicitly making it up, just that the phenomena is in her head. To take an absurd example, it's probably safe to say that electromagentic sensitivity doesn't actually exist (ie. radio waves aren't actually causing people pain/distress), even if sufferers aren't lying to others about their experiences.

[deleted]

Re: Walmart U.S. moves to eliminate synthetic dyes across all private brand foods

#107

Post by aeonik »

_e8at wrote: post #85

Can someone please explain to me why people are so hostile to this? Like even if you don't care, why would people be against putting less chemicals in food?

Because chemistry is awesome, and chemicals give us amazing modern super powers.

Also, everything is a chemical.

A subset of both natural and artificial chemicals cause cancer, we should identify those carcinogens and not eat those. At least not too much.

Re: Walmart U.S. moves to eliminate synthetic dyes across all private brand foods

#108

Post by 4d4m »

rapjr9 wrote: post #76
4d4m wrote: post #41

What a HUGE win for everyone's health. Kudos.

Indeed. So what is missing from the list? Perhaps emulsifiers?

Absolutely. I found out late in life that emulsifiers like soy lethicin are awful for us. Take those out next please

Re: Walmart U.S. moves to eliminate synthetic dyes across all private brand foods

#109

Post by colechristensen »

porridgeraisin wrote: post #66
hermannj314 wrote: post #36

If China stops buying our soybeans, we can start planting other things. Aren't natural food dyes just a great way to encourage diversity in domestic agriculture? I am not an expert in synthetic vs. natural, but I feel like this decision isn't actually about health (I don't see any reason to believe why Wal-Mart cares at all about the health of Americans) but rather some larger macroeconomic reality.

Disclaimer: numbers are from memory > china China imports only 21% of it's soy from america. Down from 40% 5y back. America consistently exports only half of its soy output. The other half is all used domestically. To be clear, almost all soy in the world is used for animal feed, not for humans to consume. My exact knowledge of poultry is limited, but I believe broiler chickens are made possible (3kg in 50 days) only…

>In america too corn soy are not native.

Corn was domesticated in Mexico like 10,000 years ago. It is indeed native in so far as an extremely human selected crop can be. (selective breeding over thousands of years not genetic engineering)

Re: Walmart U.S. moves to eliminate synthetic dyes across all private brand foods

#110

Post by viewtransform »

colechristensen wrote: post #62
hermannj314 wrote: post #36

If China stops buying our soybeans, we can start planting other things. Aren't natural food dyes just a great way to encourage diversity in domestic agriculture? I am not an expert in synthetic vs. natural, but I feel like this decision isn't actually about health (I don't see any reason to believe why Wal-Mart cares at all about the health of Americans) but rather some larger macroeconomic reality.

Ugh. THE SAME NUMBER OF SOYBEANS ARE GETTING CONSUMED. If China is buying South American soybeans instead of US soybeans than whoever was buying from South America is going to buy from the US because it's not like 8 million tons of soybeans per month are magically getting created in Brazil. It's not that there will be no market effect but it's pretty close to a zero sum game because the global production and consumpt…

Brazil increase in production this year is 5.3 million metric tons. So looks like Brazil can replace US exports to China without affecting existing customers.

Brazil’s 2025/26 Soy Crop Seen Growing 3% Versus the Previous Cycle

https://www.agriculture.com/partners-brazil-s-2025-26-soy-cr...

Post reply on HN