81–90 of 315 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can use safe Australian ingredients to cook the recipe.
Where in Australia grows Sichuan peppercorns? They're almost exclusively grown in China and the general regions nearby to my knowledge.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The toxic dose is a vague term. You may not die from exposure, but you can still have effects, such as infertility, cancers or endocrine disruption.
If we really want to be precise, we should talk about parts per million (PPM). Scientific research establishes a safe level of consumption in terms of PPM, below which there are no detectable health effects. Generally when you see alarmism about "pesticides found in food" they're orders of magnitude below the PPM that would have any effect on human health.
We have all these terrible illnesses that we ascribe to bad luck, and then all of these new chemicals we haven't fully studied yet being sprayed on everything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but for Food related stuff, EU standards and regulation are truly superior for consumers, relative to US and other countries That is mostly a myth. EU and US take different approaches to setting food safety regulations, which means they have different lists of banned substances. The EU bans a lot of substances that have no evidence of actual adverse effects just out of an abundance of caution or sometimes even beca…
The message you respond to talks about "food stuff", which is admitedly blurry. You focus on food safety, which is very good in the US. But the EU also regulates heavily food quality and sustainability, and it usually shows IMO.
10% milk fat (more exactly 1.6 lb per pre-mixed gallon, but that's simply a bizarre way of phrasing it), no more than half air by volume. 6-10% other dairy solids (lactose, whey).
Compare with the UK: at least 5% fat (no cows need be involved)
France requires 5% milkfat, Germany at least requires the 10% milk fat, but no further requirements.
Canada pretends to be at 10%, but if you add any flavoring at all that can go down to 8%.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If we really want to be precise, we should talk about parts per million (PPM). Scientific research establishes a safe level of consumption in terms of PPM, below which there are no detectable health effects. Generally when you see alarmism about "pesticides found in food" they're orders of magnitude below the PPM that would have any effect on human health.
We have seen over and over again chemicals which are "safe to consume" or "not that bad" actually do have very severe effects. It's just very hard to link cause and effect. When someone dies of cancer we can't pinpoint it to coming from the pesticide on the blueberries they ate a few months ago. We have all these terrible illnesses that we ascribe to bad luck, and then all of these new chemicals we haven't fully stud…
The same argument applies to pesticide or any other substance. Without talking about specific numbers, it's just speculation.
For spices and tea it really makes sense to buy organic (not that there are no fraudsters but still).
People still use tea bags even though they're a top source of microplastics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cumin always shows up on these lists, whether it's with heavy metals or something else. It's to the point where I've more or less just stopped cooking with it because I don't trust it to be safe.
I probably have a weird gene or something but cumin smells like disgusting body odour to me and any food that has any trace of it I cannot eat or I will gag This doesn't happen to me with anything else, I'm not a picky eater and will happily eat literally anything else
You're not wrong. If you smell pure cumin (without any other spices or herbs), particularly if you grind and mix it with yogurt to make a salty lassi, you get a whiff of body odor. My kids called it "the BO drink".
It's a weird thing, but the smell becomes quite different in combination with other smells. It's an ingredient in many expensive perfumes, believe it or not! [1]
[1] https://www.fragrantica.com/news/CUMIN-Polarizing-Note-of-Sw...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If we really want to be precise, we should talk about parts per million (PPM). Scientific research establishes a safe level of consumption in terms of PPM, below which there are no detectable health effects. Generally when you see alarmism about "pesticides found in food" they're orders of magnitude below the PPM that would have any effect on human health.
Exactly, scientific research established that DDT was perfectly safe, too! Scientists even used to eat it to "prove" that it was safe. In reality it depends, being biology, "safe level" is also very relative since you don't know every effect the substance has on the body. That's why pesticides and other chemicals such as bisphenols are regularly phased out, since effects can appear long after "scientific research" es…
There's a common thought pattern among conspiracy theorists. "Some conspiracies turn out to be real" so that justifies their belief in their very specific conspiracy theory. The same pattern occurs when we talk about chemicals in our diet or the environment. "Some chemicals turn out to be dangerous" but that doesn't prove that a specific concentration of a specific chemical is doing anything, unless we have data to support the claim.
The report itself[†] blames the pesticide residue on a "boomerang effect" from EU countries: EU countries export these banned pesticides to third countries, those countries use the banned pesticides on the food they grow, and then the EU countries import that food. In effect, EU companies are still profiting off of the sale and use of banned pesticides on food that Europeans will eat. [†] https://www.foodwatch.org/fi…
Shouldn't EU ban ideally exports of good that it bans internally?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The United States has far stricter labeling standards than the EU. That's why US products appear to have more ingredients, they are required to say what their ingredients are mad from, even on identical products. Many things that are well known memes are completely false. Not everything in the EU is better regulated. Everyone always complains about chlorinated chicken, not realizing that <5% of US chicken is washed t…
> The United States has far stricter labeling standards than the EU Source for that? All I can find says EU have stricter labeling standards except for forum comments such as yours here. Edit: > Many things that are well known memes are completely false To me it looks like "USA shows more additives due to harsher labeling standards" is just a meme, everything I've seen says Europe has stricter requirements on what yo…
The European approach to food additives is visible. The EFSA assigns a 3- or 4-digit code to every food additive, and that number must be included on food labels if it’s used in a product. The EFSA believes this system makes it easier for consumers to look up and memorize specific additives.
In the US, those same additives are required to be printed out in full.Earlier quoted context omitted.
care to cite any decent research proving you point? there's an extensive body of research on synthetics having no effect on human health, from goverment funded, private and independent research... if you access your country's official institution you'll see there's plenty of synthetics allowed in organic agriculture just because they mimic perfectly "organic" substances interesting point too, is the lack of any exten…
Not all synthetics are dangerous, many are. Many are banned, with the list growing each year: https://www.npic.orst.edu/reg/restricted.html Why were they allowed in the first place, if "research" was enough? Science is not definitive, and what we believe to be an approximation of the truth today way be discovered to be totally wrong tomorrow. You are confusing science and religion. Would you defend, for instance, tha…
as many synthetic are developed... last time i was making an inventory of an exclusive corn and soybean high tech farm (selling on the hundreds millions USD) there was at least 45 different pesticides... some were distributed in a quantity of 10 mililiters! per hectare with machine with proper air filter at the cabine of the tractor never seen by the organic movement, which by the way, considering their ~ 30% increase in land, fertilizers and pesticides needs and their production totalling less than 2% of all the global food, feels quite a stretch to read author's conclusion of your last study...
your 2° cited study shows improvement on soil quality by variety/rotation, what it has to do with GMO technology? one literally can plant varied stuff while using synthetic pesticides... take a look on most health studies done in organics and health not controlling for life style factors, nor any major study even found dangerous levels of pesticides in food. don't get me wrong, there are niche cases were organic crops just make sense but when you start dismissing GMO technology for a 8 billion and growing world, which in decades will move out of the rural ambient (rural flight is an on going thing, literally no one wants to work in farms, much less in organic ones were the workload is much bigger, if not borderline on slavery (trust me, i did some WWOOF)), feels pure ignorancy out of greenwashing or small studies compared to what we rolled on science the past 30 years of GMO technology
https://biofortified.org/genera/independent-funding/
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3367244/
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7061863/
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.1600850
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6918800/
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10814746/