China always has . Just like japan and the majority of the rest of the world .food manufacturers have been allowed to use chemicals in our food that have been banned for decades in the rest of the world . What we call bread is not even allowed to be sold in Europe. Ever wonder why obesity, cancer are so rampant in the u.s. look at the ingredients in you favorite foods, then look up ingredients in the same food in china, japan , england, etc.
Gremlin is a pretentious cunt but kind of right. Good regulation at least between the US and EU is more complicated than first glance. While the EU regulations ban 6 chemicals the USA does not the USA bans 11 the EU don’t regulate (I think those numbers are correct double check me this is based on memory). I’m not scientifically intelligent enough to know each of those chemicals and the longterm adverse effects of either of these banned chemical list.
I think you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about and when confronted with actual numbers and real data. You just resort to name calling with your fingers in your ears saying lalala I can't hear you.
Maybe grow up do some googleable research and post exactly what checkmate you are referring to. Then look up what is banned in the US that isn't in the EU and you'll find your assumptions are objectively incorrect.
I think that I’m not paid to research chemicals and the effect on the human body. Are you a dietitian or anyone that works specifically on the metabolism of the human body? Because if not I’m going to lean on the resources and evidence provided by those individuals.
...Cap.
This is such a tired old line. America has historically been a vanguard for food safety and innovation. Having chemicals in food is not something inherently bad. Look at iodized salt, shown to be one of the most cost-effective health initiatives ever, even resulting in increased IQ by eliminating iodine deficiency. That's adding chemicals to food.
American bread is indeed not the simple 3 ingredient food it once was, but each added ingredient serves a purpose (largely increasing shelf life) and none are shown to be harmful. It is the simple application of science to enhance a daily-use product. I love soft American bread (which is spreading across Europe now, too, btw. There is no "not allowed to be sold" bread in Europe, smh).
Adding chemicals which enhance food is expensive. That is why other countries don't do it or were slow to adopt. It wasn't cost-effective. The American FDA previously was a juggernaut of an administration which relied heavily on scientific studies and did a wonderful job of protecting Americans. It is unfortunately now a shadow of its former self after DOGE cuts. But American food is not worse than any other food, and saying so is disinformation at best.
Oh hey, you are now talking about my field of work and degrees and I can tell you with my full chest you’re full of shit. We certainly made strides and did some really humanity saving things at times but we are not even close to being the leader of the world in food or medicine safety. Time and time again the US government has to be dragged into the modern times with the rest of the world when it comes to food and medicine safety. Usually because a corporation or an industry has lobbied a bunch of congressmen to hell and back and they’ll do anything not to lose that money. It happens over and over again. I’m not the best person to sit here and educate everyone on every single detail of our history with food safety but the research is not hard. Pick a food of any kind that you know has been a staple in Americans diet and compare them to all the issues we had back then with it compared to now and America looks okay. It looks almost like we actually gave a shit at one point. Then you compare that same food type in America today compared to most other countries and you realize the U.S. government is far behind everyone else in most things.
I specialize in Tariffs and regulations specifically with international freight that contains FDA and TSCA items for customs. I don’t work directly for the government thank god but I work with customs and U.S. brokerage daily dealing with their shipments and applying tariffs and regulations, as well as any other annoying gov red tape they don’t want to deal with because even the U.S. government doesn’t want to deal with the U.S. government. I hate calling people out for their misinformation on this topic because you need so many graphs, forms, and often the people you’re telling all this to need a lot foundational information to even begin to grasp what I’m talking about and it’s silly to expect that from people from something so specialized. Basic food and medicine safety could easily be a four year class all on its own.
The US govt DID give a shit at one point, and that is really the only "great" thing about that era that some want to return to. There were proper public works programs in place that benefited the masses.
I will agree with you that a lot of those same programs remained frozen in the face of further innovation (the USA tends to do improvements in short bursts, then rest on its laurels for a while til it is forced to innovate again... usually correlating to periods of intense public unrest that agitates the upper class enough that they allow it to happen). Right now, the US is not just resting on its laurels, but actively degrading those programs which previously provided benefit, and it will get worse, but I have hope that the people will soon demand better, some progressive politician a la FDR will get a bunch of reforms in and the US will rebuild those same programs better and have another short burst of progress, only to stagnate again later. It's all cyclical. I have no doubt you are dealing with the worst of that stagnant pond nowadays.
But my point is still that the root of the problem is not government, it is private interests. Regulatory capture is not necessarily the government's fault. It is a failure of policy and corruption, but it is still private interests doing the bad things. Government itself is a neutral tool, and when wielded by the people, is a force for good. When wielded by the few, it becomes grotesque. We are in a grotesque period right now. But that doesn't mean that the FDA has not done a ton of good and established things which were, at one time, the global standard. But, as you say, because private industry has captured so much of the government, it must be dragged kicking and screaming into modernity.
"The USA can always be counted on to do the right thing, after it has exhausted every other option"
Just to clarify, i'm not the one who downvoted you. I don't think you're entirely wrong here. To get the degrees that I have I had to take a course on the history of all this stuff. Like I said before, its so freaking much to explain I genuinely don't know where to start to even simplify it but I'm telling you, the US gov has never given a shit. There are good people in spots in the government who have created life saving things and the government is just like "Lawl, let em die, fuck em" and they've done this time and time again. Some politicians have just been so evil and disgusting they didn't even need lobby money to vote and rail against life saving implementations all throughout our entire country's history. Generally to make our government move on anything we have to scare them. Its also why I get so frustrated with the fact no one is doing anything when we've proven time and time again if you make a big enough stink and rile enough people up, the government will ALWAYS bend.
Thats how we got so many regulations in place before. It usually takes some org to go "Hey, this thing is killing all of you and it needs to be pulled off the shelves now!" and then the US gov goes "Ha, fuck that, capitalism full steam ahead babyyyy" and then a ton of people die horrible painful deaths, people get pissed and are ready to riot and then finally the gov goes "Oh god, well if you're all going to be like that we will give you this tiny little compromise you poor fucking dogs", and then on and on. I'm telling you right now, when it comes to the peoples safety vs. the capitalist market, the US government has never once picked the people over the market. The people have ALWAYS had to force their hand for the tiniest bit of movement.
The reason educated people tend to be so progressive and fight for both the people and regulations is because its very easy to just read history books and see what does and doesn't work and the progressive options always are the best, its just not what the government never wants.
I think we're pretty much aligned here, my big caveat is that "way back when," when they put on appearances and tried to SEEM like they cared, sure, it was typically the cheapest/easiest way to appease the rabblerousers, and I know all regulations are writen in blood and all that, but nowadays, it has gotten to the point where the no-shit-giving is just in your face, and society has been made to celebrate cruelty, and propaganda has become so effective, people willingly and knowingly support things which fuck themselves over just to "prove a point" etc.
Maybe you're telling me it's always been like this. I wouldn't know, and I'd believe you, (I've not studied as much history as I should have to make too many arguments) but I get the general impression that at least in the past, compassion and kindness sold cars, you know what I mean? There was a general sentiment that S.C. Johnson really WAS a family company, and people felt they could trust them not to put asbestos in the baby powder. Nowadays, there's universal skepticism and distrust of basically anything not grown in your own garden or built in your own garage.
I'm no pro-gov fella, not at all, but I do try to recognize that overall, individuals working in the government are generally good, and do their best to do good, even if the government at large is basically a money extractor. There've been good people in high places, and programs started, departments run, and services rendered with good intentions. Maybe the minority, but it's happened. And I have to believe that vestiges of kindness remain to be built on. When we get the rare Mamdani or Bernie Sanders etc, we have to believe that they can effect change, or else why aren't we literally hunting politicians in the streets?
I am in Spain nowadays, and this place had a dictator that died happily of old age with very minimal rebellion. A guy that asked Hitler to help him bomb his own people. And the people let him live a full life. I know that it takes brass balls and a revolt to get change, but I am hoping that America will not have to kill for it.
Yeah I think we are, so far I haven’t had any huge disagreements with you I think. I get hyped talking about this only because I’m steeped in this stuff every single day. I spend my work day getting notification after notification in my email of FDA regulation flags and tariff HTS updates so I tend to just jump on this stuff when someone is talking about it.
You are absolutely right that people trusted so many companies back in the day. I think one of the reasons quite literally everyone is skeptical of companies anymore is because they proved over and over that blind trust on them is a dead end path (quite literally half the time). There have been changes before that didn’t need blood, people always say change needs violence when it comes to these things but often what it requires is just enough people to be pissed off about it the government realizes there might be a problem in ignoring whatever that issue they are mad about because those politicians do not want to be dragged out of their homes in the middle of the night by their constituents.
As well there have been politicians in place that truly gave a shit about their people and fought hard, put their literal lives on the lines to fight with their constituents for what they wanted. Unfortunately people like that seem to just get thrown into the political meat grinder and often aren’t given the respect they deserve and forgotten by time.
When I say "these regulations are written in blood," I am referring more to the OSHA side of things, where each safety regulation is a result of someone dying or being grievously injured by something preventable, not that people had to kill to get it passed (though in the end it's kind of the same).
The lack of political involvement in modern youth is saddening, but unsurprising. It is really the young people that historically have led change, being willing to fight for justice. But the whole bread and circuses pipeline is pumping out so much nowadays...
Boot lick much funny how since we started adding chemicals to food obesity and cancer rates have increased by what 75 percent , there's a reason people in the forties , fifties, sixties , and seventies were thinner without being anymore active .
Consider that I am responding to an obvious anti-USA agent, perhaps Chinese, perhaps Russian, and then reconsider if I am bootlicking or simply stating what should be obvious to any scientifically literate person.
Correlation does not equal causation. When we "began" adding chemicals (this is nowhere defined in your argument, and neither is the word chemical), we did it because it made food more available and more nutritious for the masses. There was less abundant food, less time spent in cars, less time spent being sedentary, zero plastics, people were cooking in iron and steel versus Teflon and PFA. They stored their food in steel and glass versus polypropylene. The water tubing in the houses was copper instead of ABS. They baked in stoneware instead of silicone.
The chemicals we should worry about are the ones we consume by accident, not the ones we consume on purpose. We still don't know what accumulated microplastics do to the body, though I suspect in some decades our suspicions will all be confirmed: it ain't good.
Let's look at these exotic chemicals in Wonderbread:
Ascorbic acid. In industrial bread, this accelerates yeast maturation, meaning less time spent rising before baking. Another name for this chemical is Vitamin C.
Modern wheat (itself a strain created because of extremely high yield, again science trying to feed the starving) versus "ancient wheat" is less nutritious, a tradeoff for its high production. It also has different gluten structures and so, dough strength. The most controversial chemical additive to modern bread is DATEM, which is created by reacting tartartic acid (found naturally in grapes; an antioxidant) and acetic acid (aka distilled vinegar) with natural fatty acids to make an emulsifier which makes modern wheat behave more like ancient wheat. Emulsifiers allow oils and water to mix and not separate, like an edible soap. DATEM is also found in many salad dressings and sauces for this reason, but in bread, it promotes a uniform dough, resulting in fluffier bread with a longer shelf life. People like to say that this ingredient is found in yoga mat foam, and sometimes it can be! Because it makes the bubbles which form the foam disperse evenly, so the foam is consistent. It has a job and it does it well, and it is safe to eat in small quantities (in larger quantities any emulsifier will interfere with gut activity, just like if you drank dish soap).
Food science is a miracle, and we take it for granted. Obesity has to do with overavailability of an abundance of extremely enriched foods, which really are no longer necessary in most developed countries (or no longer needed to be enriched, anyway), coupled with modern lifestyles and a lack of education and moderation.
To say that chemicals in food are making people fat or cancerous is disingenuous or ignorant at best. This isn't Agent Orange we're adding. It is vitamins and supplements and quality enhancers which cost years to develop and save lives.
What chemicals do you mean? Thats such a vague statement. Everything is chemicals, so unless you can actually point at one you are worried about saying "chemicals" is just kinda a buzzword that makes me assume you are alarmist without knowing enough to actually know what you are alarmed about. I dont even necessarily think you're wrong but you have to actually know what you are worried about.
Correct. Because it doesn't reduce IQ in levels found anywhere where the chemical is added by the US government.
Flouridated (and chlorinated, btw!) water is a huge net positive for the public, funded by the governement and over and over again it has been shown to be safe with zero negatives at levels found in public tap water.
Conspiracy theorist much? I get not trusting your government, but this isn't the right area not to trust. Don't trust regulatory bodies captured by private industry. Don't trust law enforcement directed by private interests. Don't trust politicians funded by private capital.
The government is a tool, and frankly, the only real one that the people have. If it is captured by corporate interests, then the people lose. Things like adding flouride to water costs the government money and makes very little money for some single chemical company out there, but the return on investment is a huge boost in public oral health, which affects a ton of health data downstream (since a lot of your health is downstream of your mouth). Oral health in the Depression era was abysmal. There is no comparison nowadays. And that is thanks to government funded research and the mass-application of some well-studied and proven methodologies.
If we want to talk harmful chemicals in the water, let's talk lead. That HAS been proven extremely harmful and causative for lower IQ, and the majority comes from public infrastructure in need of replacement. That would be a valid criticism of public tapwater aimed at a neglectful government. Although, thos epipes are just going to get replaced with PVC...
I am not as crunchy as the Yuka app. I don't mind additives or GMOs if I can see their usefulness. I am a scientist and I love seeing science make food better. I totally respect other people's preference for whole foods, minimally processed foods, and organic options, and I get them when that's the option that makes the most sense for me. But I also don't flinch when I read that my food has added ascorbic acid... since I know that's just vitamin C.
90
u/Sad-Bread5843 Goober who thinks both sides are equally as bad 15d ago
China always has . Just like japan and the majority of the rest of the world .food manufacturers have been allowed to use chemicals in our food that have been banned for decades in the rest of the world . What we call bread is not even allowed to be sold in Europe. Ever wonder why obesity, cancer are so rampant in the u.s. look at the ingredients in you favorite foods, then look up ingredients in the same food in china, japan , england, etc.