80% of Processed Foods in U.S. are Banned in Other Nations

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2014 10:51 PM GMT
    FDA-Approved-Food-300x229.jpg
    80% of pre-packaged foods sold in the United States are actually banned in other nations. And for good reason.

    Whether it’s toxic soda brands like Mountain Dew, or sugary artificial cereals and carcinogenic ‘potato’ chips, around 80% of the processed food variety within the US actually contains ingredients that are banned around the world in countries like Canada and the United Kingdom. As a matter of fact, sometimes they’re banned throughout the entire European Union. The FDA, however, seems quite alright with these disease-linked substances lurking within the food supply.

    You may be shocked to hear that Mountain Dew, Fresca and Squirt all contain brominated vegetable oil, a substance that has been banned in more than 100 countries "because it has been linked to basically every form of thyroid disease - from cancer to autoimmune diseases - known to man."

    You might also be upset to hear that the food coloring used to make your kid's delicious Mac & Cheese dinner visually appealing - yellow #5 and yellow #6, namely - is made from coal tar, which among other things is an active ingredient in lice shampoo and has been linked to allergies, ADHD, and cancer in animals. And gaaaaah.

    And the USDA? Oh, well they also went ahead and approved the very same toxic pesticide that the EU banned just days earlier over significant health concerns and links to the destruction of the bee population — a population which we need in order to generate a staple crop supply for the entire globe.

    Banned Ingredients In Your Food
    According to a report in Yahoo Sunshine, a team of researchers actually went in and discovered the percentage of items banned based on the examination of ingredients the products contain that were banned across the globe.

    From substances like Olestra (used in low fat products and linked to gastrointestinal disorders and of course increased weight gain ironically enough) to thyroid-decimating brominated vegetable oil, hundreds of thousands of products were found to be utilizing these disease-riddled ingredients that the rest of the world shuns due to health concerns.

    Meanwhile, Americans are being sold these ‘food’ products throughout the nation via deep discounts and heavy promotions through their local grocery stores. And what does the government have to say?

    The same government that cracks down on raw milk and natural supplements. Well, the US government goes ahead and allows for Big Food corporations to unleash their entire medley of health-crushing ingredients within the food supply, and then uses phony corporate science to say that it’s ‘unscientific’ to criticize these companies for their complete lack of concern for public safety.

    The bottom line? Ditch any processed food you may be consuming, and don’t be fooled by phony Big Food corporate science. Over 80% of what’s considered food here in the US has been banned in other nations, and citizens there would never dream of eating the yoga mat chemicals that we call chicken nuggets here in the USA.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 26, 2014 3:12 PM GMT
    Great stuff. If it was summarized in an article, can you post the link? Would like to send it to my sisters who are raising kids.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 26, 2014 3:38 PM GMT
    Nivek saidGreat stuff. If it was summarized in an article, can you post the link? Would like to send it to my sisters who are raising kids.


    http://naturalsociety.com/80-percent-processed-foods-us-banned-other-nations/

    Though... while I can't say that I eat much by way of processed foods, I also suspect they're not that bad and will go to McD's etc on occasion.

    I think if activists wanted to make a real difference in this world - instead of coming across as nags, they'd find ways to deliver / create businesses that make great tasting foods that don't use these ingredients but are also affordable.
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Feb 26, 2014 4:08 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Nivek saidGreat stuff. If it was summarized in an article, can you post the link? Would like to send it to my sisters who are raising kids.


    http://naturalsociety.com/80-percent-processed-foods-us-banned-other-nations/

    Though... while I can't say that I eat much by way of processed foods, I also suspect they're not that bad and will go to McD's etc on occasion.

    I think if activists wanted to make a real difference in this world - instead of coming across as nags, they'd find ways to deliver / create businesses that make great tasting foods that don't use these ingredients but are also affordable.

    Ugh, it's like you've forgotten every post about organic farming and the evils of Monsanto that RJ's "nags" have been posting about for the past year.

    It's just like how you distort the dangers of a nuclear meltdown with your bananas comparison, or shrug off the growing pollution problem in China with Kuznets curve.

    I can just imagine your answer to the inevitable future lung cancer crisis will be that it's up to the individual to know which air to breathe...
  • wellwell

    Posts: 2265

    Feb 26, 2014 4:08 PM GMT
    I think it is even easier than that; if ye don't buy it, there won't be a market for it. (I do my own cooking & don't go out to restraunchs'.)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 26, 2014 4:09 PM GMT
    HottJoe said
    riddler78 said
    Nivek saidGreat stuff. If it was summarized in an article, can you post the link? Would like to send it to my sisters who are raising kids.


    http://naturalsociety.com/80-percent-processed-foods-us-banned-other-nations/

    Though... while I can't say that I eat much by way of processed foods, I also suspect they're not that bad and will go to McD's etc on occasion.

    I think if activists wanted to make a real difference in this world - instead of coming across as nags, they'd find ways to deliver / create businesses that make great tasting foods that don't use these ingredients but are also affordable.

    Ugh, it's like you've forgotten every post about organic farming and the evils of Monsanto that RJ's "nags" have been posting about for the past year.

    It's just like how you distort the dangers of a nuclear meltdown with your bananas comparison, or shrug off the growing pollution problem in China with Kuznets curve.

    I can just imagine your answer to the inevitable future lung cancer crisis will be that it's up to the individual to know which air to breathe...


    How I distorted the dangers? Compared to your hysteria? You might want to revisit those threads and look at what I've written. The only one doing the distorting here is you.

    It's really unfortunate you aren't a better student of history or science.
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Feb 26, 2014 4:14 PM GMT
    wellwell saidI think it is even easier than that; if ye don't buy it, there won't be a market for it. (I do my own cooking & don't go out to restraunchs'.)

    So, it's commendable that you and the Riddler are eating healthy, but doesn't it concern either of you that the food industry is harming the environment and health of the population at large? Even if you circumvent the traditional food/restaurant industry by eating organic, you're still a member of society which on a whole is on a crash course that food industry is at the helm of.
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Feb 26, 2014 4:16 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    HottJoe said
    riddler78 said
    Nivek saidGreat stuff. If it was summarized in an article, can you post the link? Would like to send it to my sisters who are raising kids.


    http://naturalsociety.com/80-percent-processed-foods-us-banned-other-nations/

    Though... while I can't say that I eat much by way of processed foods, I also suspect they're not that bad and will go to McD's etc on occasion.

    I think if activists wanted to make a real difference in this world - instead of coming across as nags, they'd find ways to deliver / create businesses that make great tasting foods that don't use these ingredients but are also affordable.

    Ugh, it's like you've forgotten every post about organic farming and the evils of Monsanto that RJ's "nags" have been posting about for the past year.

    It's just like how you distort the dangers of a nuclear meltdown with your bananas comparison, or shrug off the growing pollution problem in China with Kuznets curve.

    I can just imagine your answer to the inevitable future lung cancer crisis will be that it's up to the individual to know which air to breathe...


    How I distorted the dangers? Compared to your hysteria? You might want to revisit those threads and look at what I've written. The only one doing the distorting here is you.

    It's really unfortunate you aren't a better student of history or science.

    You've written that the very food you won't eat yourself is the ONLY solution to feeding the world's population, which is heresay.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 26, 2014 4:18 PM GMT
    HottJoe said
    wellwell saidI think it is even easier than that; if ye don't buy it, there won't be a market for it. (I do my own cooking & don't go out to restraunchs'.)

    So, it's commendable that you and the Riddler are eating healthy, but doesn't it concern either of you that the food industry is harming the environment and health of the population at large? Even if you circumvent the traditional food/restaurant industry by eating organic, you're still a member of society which on a whole is on a crash course that food industry is at the helm of.


    That's a remarkable claim considering the still increasing life expectancy we have. Please consider looking at the actual science and using real data before trying take choices away from others.

    I think pretty much everyone who eats at McDonald's (in particular the greasy stuff) or eats processed foods understands that there are risks. I'd be shocked if they didn't (then again I'm pretty surprised a large majority of Democrats don't know that it takes a year for the earth to revolve around the sun). But the trade off is increasing the risk of cancer decades away versus say convenience now.

    I can understand why the label of nag used here hits home for you. But instead of being that nag, why not create a better solution or choice?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 26, 2014 4:20 PM GMT
    HottJoe saidYou've written that the very food you won't eat yourself is the ONLY solution to feeding the world's population, which is heresay.


    I haven't written that. In fact quite the opposite. And it's heresy not heresay. I'm glad though you bring up the point that this is more an issue of religious rather than any scientific fervor for you.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 26, 2014 4:23 PM GMT
    new there was a reason why i've never had KD before, other than the fake cheese smell.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 26, 2014 4:32 PM GMT
    SigmaX saidnew there was a reason why i've never had KD before, other than the fake cheese smell.


    What is KD?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 26, 2014 6:25 PM GMT


    In addition, most restaurants have healthy options. The question is cost - which is undeniably a trade off for many of them.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 26, 2014 7:12 PM GMT
    http://youtu.be/8wtrpj7lF5o?t=1m55s
    Truth in comedy. Kind of sums it up
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 26, 2014 9:37 PM GMT
    YourName2000 said
    HottJoe said
    riddler78 said
    HottJoe said
    riddler78 said
    Nivek saidGreat stuff. If it was summarized in an article, can you post the link? Would like to send it to my sisters who are raising kids.


    http://naturalsociety.com/80-percent-processed-foods-us-banned-other-nations/

    Though... while I can't say that I eat much by way of processed foods, I also suspect they're not that bad and will go to McD's etc on occasion.

    I think if activists wanted to make a real difference in this world - instead of coming across as nags, they'd find ways to deliver / create businesses that make great tasting foods that don't use these ingredients but are also affordable.

    Ugh, it's like you've forgotten every post about organic farming and the evils of Monsanto that RJ's "nags" have been posting about for the past year.

    It's just like how you distort the dangers of a nuclear meltdown with your bananas comparison, or shrug off the growing pollution problem in China with Kuznets curve.

    I can just imagine your answer to the inevitable future lung cancer crisis will be that it's up to the individual to know which air to breathe...


    How I distorted the dangers? Compared to your hysteria? You might want to revisit those threads and look at what I've written. The only one doing the distorting here is you.

    It's really unfortunate you aren't a better student of history or science.

    You've written that the very food you won't eat yourself is the ONLY solution to feeding the world's population, which is heresay.

    Why do you argue with it? It's got half a brain...it's pointless. You'll have better luck convincing cigarette companies that their product is dangerous than have Piddler concede an obvious point, lol. The idiot would argue that the world is flat to Galileo. icon_wink.gif

    Move on...no intelligent life here, as has been proven for years by countless others.


    I think it's brave how open you are with your struggles with sobriety and literacy. Thank you for your courage.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 26, 2014 9:45 PM GMT
    they should make it illegal but only in a few states.

    you can eat anything you want by a doctor's prescription

    you can eat anything you want in the confines of your own kitchen so long long as the neighbors cant detect the cooking odors.

    cant be seen eating it on your front porch.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 26, 2014 10:01 PM GMT
    Mac & Cheese??? Seriously??? I can't eat Mac & Cheese????
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 26, 2014 10:04 PM GMT
    http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2013/06/21/eight_toxic_foods_a_little_chemical_education.php

    most are covered here

    looks a-okay
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 26, 2014 10:26 PM GMT
    YourName2000 said
    riddler78 saidI think it's brave how open you are with your struggles with sobriety and literacy. Thank you for your courage.

    Swing and a miss, there Sparkles. Considering you're missing an entire suit in your deck of cards, you'll appreciate that those of us who aren't are immune to your mental incontinence.

    You've turned yourself into a laughable caricature, Clement. No one has 'done this' to you but yourself. icon_wink.gif


    Lol - your personal attacks suggest that I've hit the mark but thank you for proving again what an impotent cyber bully you are. It really doesn't surprise me - though just a tip: may I suggest you consider posting only when sober? Again, I thank you for your courage for being so open with the inner demons you deal with.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 26, 2014 10:35 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    YourName2000 said
    HottJoe said
    riddler78 said
    HottJoe said
    riddler78 said
    Nivek saidGreat stuff. If it was summarized in an article, can you post the link? Would like to send it to my sisters who are raising kids.


    http://naturalsociety.com/80-percent-processed-foods-us-banned-other-nations/

    Though... while I can't say that I eat much by way of processed foods, I also suspect they're not that bad and will go to McD's etc on occasion.

    I think if activists wanted to make a real difference in this world - instead of coming across as nags, they'd find ways to deliver / create businesses that make great tasting foods that don't use these ingredients but are also affordable.

    Ugh, it's like you've forgotten every post about organic farming and the evils of Monsanto that RJ's "nags" have been posting about for the past year.

    It's just like how you distort the dangers of a nuclear meltdown with your bananas comparison, or shrug off the growing pollution problem in China with Kuznets curve.

    I can just imagine your answer to the inevitable future lung cancer crisis will be that it's up to the individual to know which air to breathe...


    How I distorted the dangers? Compared to your hysteria? You might want to revisit those threads and look at what I've written. The only one doing the distorting here is you.

    It's really unfortunate you aren't a better student of history or science.

    You've written that the very food you won't eat yourself is the ONLY solution to feeding the world's population, which is heresay.

    Why do you argue with it? It's got half a brain...it's pointless. You'll have better luck convincing cigarette companies that their product is dangerous than have Piddler concede an obvious point, lol. The idiot would argue that the world is flat to Galileo. icon_wink.gif

    Move on...no intelligent life here, as has been proven for years by countless others.


    I think it's brave how open you are with your struggles with sobriety and literacy. Thank you for your courage.


    Just when I think you couldn't possibly be a more disgusting creature, you surprise me and sink to an even greater depth of corruption. I personally don't know if he has a drinking problem or not, but you seem to think he does....so you think it's appropriate to bring that up in a public forum because you can't win an argument any other way? Only someone with a very black soul would do such a thing.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 26, 2014 10:38 PM GMT
    Scruffypup saidJust when I think you couldn't possibly be a more disgusting creature, you surprise me and sink to an even greater depth of corruption. I personally don't know if he has a drinking problem or not, but you seem to think he does....so you think it's appropriate to bring that up in a public forum because you can't win an argument any other way? Only someone with a very black soul would do such a thing.


    I can understand why it's a sensitive subject for him (and you for that matter), but people in glass houses... What he deals with is self evident in his posting and maybe a little tough love is in order. And please don't forget his literacy problem. I notice as well that this is another time you've leaped to the defense of poor Yourname. But be assured he's poor as a result of poor life choices and genetics.

    That said, it's sad that those like you and he are unable to cobble together coherent arguments and go straight to the personal attacks but really can't take it when it comes back around. It's understandable why you see anyone who can so easily rip apart your arguments like me and others to be such a threat.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 27, 2014 1:48 AM GMT
    dre4mbo1 saidhttp://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2013/06/21/eight_toxic_foods_a_little_chemical_education.php

    most are covered here

    looks a-okay


    Thanks for the link. Fixed it for those who aren't interested in being consumed by hysteria. From your link:

    This brings me to the grand wrap-up, and some of the language in that last item is a good starting point for it. I'm talking about the "POISON, which will kill you if you ingest enough" part. This whole article is soaking in several assumptions about food, about chemistry, and about toxicology, and that's one of the big ones. In my experience, people who write things like this have divided the world into two categories: wholesome, natural, healthy stuff and toxic chemical poisons. But this is grievously simple-minded. As I've emphasized in passing above, there are plenty of natural substances, made by healthy creatures in beautiful, unpolluted environments, that will nonetheless kill you in agony. Plants, fungi, bacteria, and animals produce poisons, wide varieties of intricate poisons, and they're not doing it for fun.

    And on the other side of the imaginary fence, there are plenty of man-made substances that really won't do much of anything to people at all. You cannot assume anything about the effects of a chemical compound based on whether it came from a lovely rainforest orchid or out of a crusty Erlenmeyer flask. The world is not set up that way. Here's a corollary to this: if I isolate a beneficial chemical compound from some natural source (vitamin C from oranges, for example, although sauerkraut would be a good source, too), that molecule is identical to a copy of it I make in my lab. There is no essence, no vital spirit. A compound is what it is, no matter where it came from.

    Another assumption that seems common to this mindset is that when something is poisonous at some concentration, it is therefore poisonous at all concentrations. It has some poisonous character to it that cannot be expunged nor diluted. This, though, is more often false than true. Paracelsus was right: the dose makes the poison. You can illustrate that in both directions: a beneficial substance, taken to excess, can kill you. A poisonous one, taken in very small amounts, can be harmless. And you have cases like selenium, which is simultaneously an essential trace element in the human diet and an inarguable poison. It depends on the dose.

    Finally, I want to return to something I was saying way back at the beginning of this piece. The author of the BuzzFeed article knows painfully little about chemistry and biology. But that apparently wasn't a barrier: righteous conviction (and the worldview mentioned in the above three paragraphs) are enough, right? Wrong. Ten minutes of unbiased reading would have served to poke holes all through most of the article's main points. I've spent more than ten minutes (as you can probably tell), and there's hardly one stone left standing on another. As a scientist, I find sloppiness at this level not only stupid, not only time-wasting, but downright offensive. Couldn't anyone be bothered to look anything up? There are facts in this world, you know. Learn a few.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 27, 2014 1:59 AM GMT
    Duh, countries do this to protect their own farmers.

    Maybe we should import some mad cow disease from the UK.