And of course some foods are banned in the US but not Europe.
Do you have any examples? (Genuinely interested)
[deleted]
What Foods Are Banned in Europe but Not Banned in the U.S.?
71–80 of 130 posts
Re: What Foods Are Banned in Europe but Not Banned in the U.S.?
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have any examples? (Genuinely interested)
Washed eggs (required in the US) vs unwashed eggs (required in Europe)
Interesting, never knew there was a difference. Just looked it up: in EU chickens are vaccinated against salmonella and the US not. But cleaning them does make the eggs vulnerable due to removing the outer protective layer. Hence they need to be refrigerated. Still strange though every fridge I know comes with a egg basket though nobody I know in the Netherlands puts their eggs in the fridge.
Re: What Foods Are Banned in Europe but Not Banned in the U.S.?
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many of these food tech choices are the difference between more starvation and high enough yield to feed poor people. If we farmed the way we did 100 years ago, there would be mass starvation. The yield just isn’t there. The FDA faces the same ethical dilemma every time they decide on new drugs. A slow approval process is literally letting people suffer and die in exchange for trials with more certainty. The old FDA…
If the cause of starvation were under-production, I’d sympathize with this argument. But given the amount of food waste in Western countries, I’d say the real issue is one of distribution or access. Producers make production efficient not in order to feed the poor, but to increase margin by lowering the costs of production. Growth hormones exist to make the agriculturist more money, they don’t help feed a war torn co…
The cause of starvation is lack of food available at a given price point.
Producers make production efficient to capture more of the market at the lower price points on the demand curve. There aren’t enough rich people to pay for thick margins at a large scale in the food industry. The only ones with large margins are the organic farmers selling to rich people.
Growth hormones exist to make chicken much faster, which means much cheaper chicken for consumers and to make the chicken raisers more money. If it weren’t cheaper, people wouldn’t buy more of it and it likely wouldn’t be worth the investment.
Here’s a thought exercise, why do you think sellers of factory chickens outsell free range chickens by orders of magnitude? If the only difference was margin and not price, nobody would buy the factory stuff.
Re: What Foods Are Banned in Europe but Not Banned in the U.S.?
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Anytime we talk about "banning" something I prefer a very conservative approach (conservative as in let's not ban things unless we are really sure). We are constantly learning new things that upend what we used to accept as science regarding nutrition and how the human body works. I think we do ourselves a disservice sometimes by banning things that we don't understand (and sometimes we think we understand but reall…
>then I don't think I get the logic on the default being "okay, feed it to your kids!" Why would you feed something to your kids just because it’s legal? Who are the idiots that just pick things blindly off of shelves in stores without reading what’s in it? Sugar is completely legal, yet I read the amounts of sugars in foods to avoid high sugar items. I’m also not giving my children bottles of olive oil to drink with…
Do you always read all ingredients for prepared food you buy?
Re: What Foods Are Banned in Europe but Not Banned in the U.S.?
#75And of course some foods are banned in the US but not Europe.
Do you have any examples? (Genuinely interested)
Sodium cyclamate - used as an artificial sweeter in the EU but banned in the US (and other countries).
Re: What Foods Are Banned in Europe but Not Banned in the U.S.?
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many of these food tech choices are the difference between more starvation and high enough yield to feed poor people. If we farmed the way we did 100 years ago, there would be mass starvation. The yield just isn’t there. The FDA faces the same ethical dilemma every time they decide on new drugs. A slow approval process is literally letting people suffer and die in exchange for trials with more certainty. The old FDA…
If the cause of starvation were under-production, I’d sympathize with this argument. But given the amount of food waste in Western countries, I’d say the real issue is one of distribution or access. Producers make production efficient not in order to feed the poor, but to increase margin by lowering the costs of production. Growth hormones exist to make the agriculturist more money, they don’t help feed a war torn co…
We’re dumping corn into fuel precisely because we incentivize it over meat and dairy...
Re: What Foods Are Banned in Europe but Not Banned in the U.S.?
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Surely it makes more sense to be cautious about the things we ingest.. Completely agree > If you aren't sure, then I don't think I get the logic on the default being "okay, feed it to your kids!". False dichotomy. I don't think the choices are either "ban it" or "okay, feed it to your kids!" There's a middle ground there that I think makes more sense.
What’s the middle ground you are referrring to? Don’t feed it to kids but feed to adults? If you don’t know something is safe for consumption then it shoulnd’t be sold, right?
Getting into specific policy prescriptions is tempting the fate of Godwin's Law, but I don't believe it's wise or even possible to regulate every single molecule that gets sold for consumption.
Constant evaluation, testing, and liability for people/companies that knowingly use dangerous or harmful ingredients can go a long way here. In fact often times it's the only way broader datasets can be gathered. The market provides a strong incentive here as well not to poison your customers.
I also think that education, including warnings on packages, and then letting adults make their own decisions, is a good way to go. One state that I know of recently banned a pest control chemical because some idiot sprayed his dog's food bowl with it. The dog later died. The state's knee jerk response of banning it is counter-productive IMHO. I've been using it for DIY pest control for many years and it is one of the most effective I know of, and when used as directed is perfectly safe (don't spray anything that will be ingested with it, such as dog food bowls, gardens, etc).
Re: What Foods Are Banned in Europe but Not Banned in the U.S.?
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
We’re pretty sure that wheat is safe, right? We don’t have a proof in a mathematical sense but it’s clear that wheat is ok to eat.
Actually, no, there's plenty of people that believe wheat not be safe. Obviously this is true as well if you have Celiacs, which also wasn't widely known until relatively recently.
Your definition of safe does not correspond to most peoples’ definition when it comes to food. Safe, in this context for most people, means safe for general consumption. Unsafe means that the product causes harm in just about everyone who consumes it.
Re: What Foods Are Banned in Europe but Not Banned in the U.S.?
#79Re: What Foods Are Banned in Europe but Not Banned in the U.S.?
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
What’s the middle ground you are referrring to? Don’t feed it to kids but feed to adults? If you don’t know something is safe for consumption then it shoulnd’t be sold, right?
Getting into specific policy prescriptions is tempting the fate of Godwin's Law, but I don't believe it's wise or even possible to regulate every single molecule that gets sold for consumption. Constant evaluation, testing, and liability for people/companies that knowingly use dangerous or harmful ingredients can go a long way here. In fact often times it's the only way broader datasets can be gathered. The market pr…
The market provides a strong incentive here as well not to poison your customers.
The history of corporate malfeasance and the desire of people to optimize for short term gain versus long term gain indicates that your view is not supported by reality.
For example see the cigarette industry and how it deliberately made its products addictive and more dangerous.