61–70 of 153 posts
Synthetic and “natural” is so hazy. What’s the difference between a dye that’s synthetically made and one where we crush up bugs and extract the same exact chemical (real thing.). Why don’t we just eliminate most dyes overall…
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.
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 consumption of soy really isn't changing that much.
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 thing is, there are many chemicals which are safe to drink in reasonable amounts, and many chemicals that are not safe to drink in any amount. People deciding not to eat something because "it has chemicals in it" is a pretty ignorant take.
it's already easy to eat and drink things without any dyes or even artificial flavoring (except OTC medication always has that nonsense, but now my advil is also dye-free) but Neil deGrasse Tyson explains the life-expectancy of people back when everything was natural and organic https://www.instagram.com/reel/DMpuL2GMQSd/embed/
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.
> 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 because of a diet consisting of a certain kind of corn and certain kind of soy.
> We can start planting other things
American farms and the entire supply chain is pretty hardwired to corn and soy, for the same reasons punjab/haryana farms are hardwired to rice (even tho it's arid land, rice isn't even native, thus uses up groundwater too fast).
Government-set/subsidized price floors, insurance, storage programs specifically for 4 program crops, of which one was corn, and to which soy was a later addition. India has the same thing for rice etc.
Soy/corn rotation also caused extreme lock-in, since soy leaves a lot of nitrogen in the soil after harvest, and corn needs a lot of nitrogen.
There are many other factors, but essentially, the entire farm supply chain is locked in to corn/soy in most American farmland similar to how most punjab/haryana supply chain is stuck in rice/wheat alternation and resulting farmland/aquifer overuse.
In america too corn soy are not native. And the excess nitrogen goes down the rivers and causes hypoxia in the gulf of (mexico|america). Very symmetric problem.
It's extremely expensive to get them to grow anything different. For starters, removing the price floors and such is electoral suicide. Most of the farmers (that remain) depend on these things heavily. You can complete the rest...
More random stats: 40% of us corn goes to animal feed, 40% goes to ethanol (for blending with petrol among other things), and the rest is other stuff.
Even more: 70% of soy goes to animal feed, primarily broiler chicken, 15% goes to oil. Margarine, processed crap, lots of fried goods, all use this. I think you can even make plastic with it. I forgot what the other 15% was... And the people actually eating tofu, soy milk, etc are a tiny percentage and don't even register.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I could not find my reference but I thought it was something more along the lines that either they don’t need to be disclosed in the EU or they go under different safer sounding names.
They are under Exxx codes. Not even safer sounding they are just listed by their technical codes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IIRC they switched to natural dyes in 2017, but sales fell because average people are "shiny object" driven. So they reverted it.
Not that I'm aware of.. The product I tested was after 2017 is still advertised here in Canada with natural colours, made with fruit juices. The US parent company is also committing to it as well. https://www.wkkellogg.com/our-impact/make-eating-well-easy/q...
https://www.fooddive.com/news/silly-general-mills-artificial...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I want these decisions to be bases on scientific and medical data, not on gut feeling or unfounded personal belief. I have no issue with regulating specific dyes or additives in food, or groups of related chemicals. And your anecdote is not scientific data. You cannot draw any conclusions from that.
[flagged]