141–150 of 153 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank you that’s it. I had remember some folks comparing products debunking those claims “see red #5 is not in the European version”
Red 5 is not allowed in Europe and doesn't have an E number, so in this case they are right.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t recall the exact number, but well over half that have been in common use were eventually banned. Edit Prior to this administration: Butter yellow, Green 1, Green 2, Orange 1, Orange 2, Orange B, Red 1, Red 2, Red 4, Red 32, Sudan 1, Violet 1, Yellow 1, Yellow 2, Yellow 3, Yellow 4 + some more in the really early days. EU had a longer list including Titanium dioxide.
Titanium dioxide is naturally occurring.
[Weed is] jus' a plant
Like poppies and sugar cane
Coca and some science make some good cocaine
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was looking at this paper which seems to have a bunch of citations. Different colors are associated with different flavors in certain countries. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13411-015-0031-3#... But yes I think the food color is ultimately important to succeeding in the marketplace and we aren't going to be getting rid of food dyes in manufactured food anytime soon.
Wait? If artificial dyes become forbidden. Won't it make competiton easier since your competitors can't use dyes either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>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…
What level of evidence is acceptable before stopping things entering our food chain? Is it anything that doesn't have positive evidence of harm ok? Presumably a little bit of study is required... So how much? How many interactions should be studied? Is there a benefit trade off (I'm actually struggling here, so if you think so, perhaps you can clarify what benefits would lead to a a higher risk of harm)?
Peanuts have very clear evidence of harm (at least to those who are allergic), and it's unclear what "benefits" it has besides "it tastes good". Why allow it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is not naturally occurring in the human diet.
This is the same argument people use against bread, and against meat.
We should use lead pipes because they are made from naturally occurring lead. Synthetic PEX pipes have to go because: synthetic.
Truth be told they both probably leech chemicals into the water supply.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What level of evidence is acceptable before stopping things entering our food chain? Is it anything that doesn't have positive evidence of harm ok? Presumably a little bit of study is required... So how much? How many interactions should be studied? Is there a benefit trade off (I'm actually struggling here, so if you think so, perhaps you can clarify what benefits would lead to a a higher risk of harm)?
>What level of evidence is acceptable before stopping things entering our food chain? Is it anything that doesn't have positive evidence of harm ok? Peanuts have very clear evidence of harm (at least to those who are allergic), and it's unclear what "benefits" it has besides "it tastes good". Why allow it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the kind of nerd-snark that makes normal people not trust anything from the mouths of "experts." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovKw6YjqSfM
The point is it's totally possible for some artificial dyes to potentially be harmful and need to be regulated, but eliminating them all just because they're "artificial" is woo-woo nonsense on the same order as my deliberately parodic example. Know what else is artificial? Insulin and penicillin.
Even if they may have side effects/allergies, we tolerate them because they provide extremely large benefits to the population. You can't compare that to a chemical we use to make the colors of candies pop more.
No one is dying or getting seriously ill because their Fruit Loops had bland and unsaturated colors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your unhealthy habits should not be normalized but unfortunately it is via mass advertising.
You don't know anything about me what kind of comment is this? Assumptions like this is why I don't want other people making decisions for me