What is Natural Food Anyway?

245

Replies

  • sullus
    sullus Posts: 2,839 Member

    Not sure how you got there from here. I'm saying that humans adding enzymes to sugar water is no LESS "natural" than bees doing it.

    And I'm saying common sense tells me it is.

    And I'm saying common sense tells me that it isn't. Adding enzymes to sugar water to convert about 50% of it to Fructose, is adding enzymes to sugar water to convert about 50% of it to Fructose, is adding enzymes to sugar water to convert about 50% of it to Fructose ....

    And since humans are just as naturally occurring as bees ....
  • jwdieter
    jwdieter Posts: 2,582 Member
    Clearly, "natural" is a word with many interpretations. So what?
  • Acg67
    Acg67 Posts: 12,142 Member
    My mom is always telling me something or other is 'natural' and I always say 'hemlock is natural!'

    As far as food goes, though, I figure if you are eating whole foods you prepared yourself or as close to it as you can get you are doing well.

    LOL I always say arsenic is all natural no added ingredients.

    We are talking about FOOD. Are we so screwed up that we can't recognize what food is anymore? But if you think equating food with arsenic is a good argument to justify eating foods that come in a box; well, good for you. The OP probably agrees.

    I completely agree that "natural" food is something that is not processed. No ingredient list. Of course, some of our "natural" foods are questionable with GMO, pesticides, synthetic fertilizers etc. Many people are very deluded on what is "natural" food and the term is used extremely loosely by the food industry and it's easy to be aware of it if one has any functioning brain cells left. Everything we eat comes from nature in some way, but the label "natural" has become a scam.

    Might want to look up what processed means...
  • RllyGudTweetr
    RllyGudTweetr Posts: 2,019 Member
    Food found on Earth = Natural food. None of that foreign Alpha Centauri garbage for me, no, sir.
  • highervibes
    highervibes Posts: 2,219 Member
    Jeeze... leave for a Wendy's chili and THIS happens lol
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member

    Not sure how you got there from here. I'm saying that humans adding enzymes to sugar water is no LESS "natural" than bees doing it.

    And I'm saying common sense tells me it is.

    And I'm saying common sense tells me that it isn't. Adding enzymes to sugar water to convert about 50% of it to Fructose, is adding enzymes to sugar water to convert about 50% of it to Fructose, is adding enzymes to sugar water to convert about 50% of it to Fructose ....

    And since humans are just as naturally occurring as bees ....

    I think you are being ridiculous just for the sake of argument.
  • toaster6
    toaster6 Posts: 703 Member
    We are talking about FOOD. Are we so screwed up that we can't recognize what food is anymore? But if you think equating food with arsenic is a good argument to justify eating foods that come in a box; well, good for you. The OP probably agrees.

    I completely agree that "natural" food is something that is not processed. No ingredient list. Of course, some of our "natural" foods are questionable with GMO, pesticides, synthetic fertilizers etc. Many people are very deluded on what is "natural" food and the term is used extremely loosely by the food industry and it's easy to be aware of it if one has any functioning brain cells left. Everything we eat comes from nature in some way, but the label "natural" has become a scam.

    Heh. Can you not process that it's an adequate example to demonstrate that "natural" <> "good for you" That's all. Nobody "can't recognize what food is any more"

    Are we so screwed up that nobody can recognize a rhetorical device to demonstrate the fallacy of the word "natural"?

    Ok, we can use food then. Blowfish is all-natural food that can kill you if not prepared properly. Taro, ackee fruit, & cassava are toxic if you don't catch them at the exactly the right amount of ripe. Cassava, elderberry leaves (for teas) & bitter almonds have naturally occurring cyanide and can cause health issues if you consume too much. Unpasteurized honey can also cause health issues.
  • highervibes
    highervibes Posts: 2,219 Member

    Ok, we can use food then. Blowfish is all-natural food that can kill you if not prepared properly. Taro, ackee fruit, & cassava are toxic if you don't catch them at the exactly the right amount of ripe. Cassava, elderberry leaves (for teas) & bitter almonds have naturally occurring cyanide and can cause health issues if you consume too much. Unpasteurized honey can also cause health issues.

    Any food can cause 'health issues'
  • jwdieter
    jwdieter Posts: 2,582 Member
    Well, according to search, the last time someone brought up a topic about "natural food" prior to this thread was 3 months ago. Clearly an important definition to nail down.
  • sullus
    sullus Posts: 2,839 Member

    Not sure how you got there from here. I'm saying that humans adding enzymes to sugar water is no LESS "natural" than bees doing it.

    And I'm saying common sense tells me it is.

    And I'm saying common sense tells me that it isn't. Adding enzymes to sugar water to convert about 50% of it to Fructose, is adding enzymes to sugar water to convert about 50% of it to Fructose, is adding enzymes to sugar water to convert about 50% of it to Fructose ....

    And since humans are just as naturally occurring as bees ....

    I think you are being ridiculous just for the sake of argument.

    Nope. I believe my own bull****.

    Here's the point. Honey and HCFS have extremely similar chemical composition, and are made (processed, engineered, I dont care) basically the same way.

    However, Honey is touted as a "good sweetener" because it's "natural". Processed foods are bad .. honey is highly processed, but it's good anyway.

    The OP's point was that words like processed and natural create different reactions to similar foods based on perceptions of what these words imply to people.

    Honey and HCFS are, chemically, nearly identical. Sure honey has some pollen and bee legs in it, but the 2 liquids are not significantly different from each other.

    But here we are with people saying one is better than the other because of how it is sourced. Your body can not tell the difference between the fructose in HFCS and Honey. Your body treats HFCS and honey the same way. But one's good for you, and one's bad for you, because people, or whatever. It's a pretty clear demonstartion of the OP's point.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member

    Not sure how you got there from here. I'm saying that humans adding enzymes to sugar water is no LESS "natural" than bees doing it.

    And I'm saying common sense tells me it is.

    And I'm saying common sense tells me that it isn't. Adding enzymes to sugar water to convert about 50% of it to Fructose, is adding enzymes to sugar water to convert about 50% of it to Fructose, is adding enzymes to sugar water to convert about 50% of it to Fructose ....

    And since humans are just as naturally occurring as bees ....

    I think you are being ridiculous just for the sake of argument.

    Nope. I believe my own bull****.

    Here's the point. Honey and HCFS have extremely similar chemical composition, and are made (processed, engineered, I dont care) basically the same way.

    However, Honey is touted as a "good sweetener" because it's "natural". Processed foods are bad .. honey is highly processed, but it's good anyway.

    The OP's point was that words like processed and natural create different reactions to similar foods based on perceptions of what these words imply to people.

    Honey and HCFS are, chemically, nearly identical. Sure honey has some pollen and bee legs in it, but the 2 liquids are not significantly different from each other.

    But here we are with people saying one is better than the other because of how it is sourced. Your body can not tell the difference between the fructose in HFCS and Honey. Your body treats HFCS and honey the same way. But one's good for you, and one's bad for you, because people, or whatever. It's a pretty clear demonstartion of the OP's point.

    You are now mixing apples and oranges. Saying it's "better" or "healthier" is not the same as saying it's "natural". Honey straight from the hive is not processed any more than a stalk of broccoli is processed because it starts as a seed and is processed by the sun, soil, rain, etc. and is made of chemicals.
  • sullus
    sullus Posts: 2,839 Member

    Nope. I believe my own bull****.

    Here's the point. Honey and HCFS have extremely similar chemical composition, and are made (processed, engineered, I dont care) basically the same way.

    However, Honey is touted as a "good sweetener" because it's "natural". Processed foods are bad .. honey is highly processed, but it's good anyway.

    The OP's point was that words like processed and natural create different reactions to similar foods based on perceptions of what these words imply to people.

    Honey and HCFS are, chemically, nearly identical. Sure honey has some pollen and bee legs in it, but the 2 liquids are not significantly different from each other.

    But here we are with people saying one is better than the other because of how it is sourced. Your body can not tell the difference between the fructose in HFCS and Honey. Your body treats HFCS and honey the same way. But one's good for you, and one's bad for you, because people, or whatever. It's a pretty clear demonstartion of the OP's point.

    You are now mixing apples and oranges. Saying it's "better" or "healthier" is not the same as saying it's "natural". Honey straight from the hive is not processed any more than a stalk of broccoli is processed because it starts as a seed and is processed by the sun, soil, rain, etc. and is made of chemicals.

    Honey and HCFS are processed the same amount. You care when the chemical processing happens and who does it. I do not. I see them as the same.

    Ok, so .. are hothouse tomatoes less natural than ones grown outdoors? They're in a human created "unnatural" environment being forced to unnaturally grow out of season. They don't get rained on, but humans must water them. and onward ...

    What about hydroponic tomatoes? That gell looks cool, but it sure ain't "natural" ... Are these less natural than the ones in your garden?
  • jennifershoo
    jennifershoo Posts: 3,198 Member
    Indeed, lots of people are dumb. Surprised? Sadly, no.
  • jennifershoo
    jennifershoo Posts: 3,198 Member
    I always like Honey v HFCS in the "natural" debate. I consider Honey to be a highly processed (with chemicals, no less!!) food. They're basically the same thing - sugar water processed with enzymes, then evaporated to a sugary syrup that contains about 55% fructose.

    Yet one's an all-natural wondersweetener, and the other is the most evil, guaranteed to give you the diabetus, sweetener that ever existed.

    HFCS is no less "natural" than Honey. Why does it matter if a human or bee adds the enzymes?

    Pasteurized honey is processed. Raw honey is not. Buy raw honey.
  • jennifershoo
    jennifershoo Posts: 3,198 Member
    I always like Honey v HFCS in the "natural" debate. I consider Honey to be a highly processed (with chemicals, no less!!) food. They're basically the same thing - sugar water processed with enzymes, then evaporated to a sugary syrup that contains about 55% fructose.

    Yet one's an all-natural wondersweetener, and the other is the most evil, guaranteed to give you the diabetus, sweetener that ever existed.

    HFCS is no less "natural" than Honey. Why does it matter if a human or bee adds the enzymes?

    This^
    I think it makes a big difference whether bees or humans add the enzymes. That's like asking whether it matters if humans add a bunch of chemicals to food or mother nature does. Sure it's all chemicals, but all chemicals in food are equal.

    Honey from a bee hive is a far cry from HFCS. So is pure maple syrup, even though it is cooked to turn it from sap to syrup.

    Sometimes it's necesary to not look just at words like enzymes and chemicals and use a little comon sense.
  • sullus
    sullus Posts: 2,839 Member
    I always like Honey v HFCS in the "natural" debate. I consider Honey to be a highly processed (with chemicals, no less!!) food. They're basically the same thing - sugar water processed with enzymes, then evaporated to a sugary syrup that contains about 55% fructose.

    Yet one's an all-natural wondersweetener, and the other is the most evil, guaranteed to give you the diabetus, sweetener that ever existed.

    HFCS is no less "natural" than Honey. Why does it matter if a human or bee adds the enzymes?

    Pasteurized honey is processed. Raw honey is not. Buy raw honey.

    Raw honey is chemically processed by bees.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member

    Nope. I believe my own bull****.

    Here's the point. Honey and HCFS have extremely similar chemical composition, and are made (processed, engineered, I dont care) basically the same way.

    However, Honey is touted as a "good sweetener" because it's "natural". Processed foods are bad .. honey is highly processed, but it's good anyway.

    The OP's point was that words like processed and natural create different reactions to similar foods based on perceptions of what these words imply to people.

    Honey and HCFS are, chemically, nearly identical. Sure honey has some pollen and bee legs in it, but the 2 liquids are not significantly different from each other.

    But here we are with people saying one is better than the other because of how it is sourced. Your body can not tell the difference between the fructose in HFCS and Honey. Your body treats HFCS and honey the same way. But one's good for you, and one's bad for you, because people, or whatever. It's a pretty clear demonstartion of the OP's point.

    You are now mixing apples and oranges. Saying it's "better" or "healthier" is not the same as saying it's "natural". Honey straight from the hive is not processed any more than a stalk of broccoli is processed because it starts as a seed and is processed by the sun, soil, rain, etc. and is made of chemicals.

    Honey and HCFS are processed the same amount. You care when the chemical processing happens and who does it. I do not. I see them as the same.

    Processing has nothing to do with it. The post is about what is natural. Seriously, I do not believe you can't see the difference between bees gathering nectar and partially digesting it and men in lab coats creating HFCS. You keep jumping subjects, but I still think you are just arguing for the sake of arguing.
  • jwdieter
    jwdieter Posts: 2,582 Member
    Honey and HCFS are processed the same amount. You care when the chemical processing happens and who does it. I do not. I see them as the same.

    One ingredient cannot exist without a chemistry set. One you can walk out and grab with your hand. It's fine to consider them similar in sugar components, but it's mildly insane to think they were processed equally.

    The functional difference between the two, aside from a slightly different ratio of fructose, is one gets injected into everything while the other doesn't.
  • sullus
    sullus Posts: 2,839 Member

    Nope. I believe my own bull****.

    Here's the point. Honey and HCFS have extremely similar chemical composition, and are made (processed, engineered, I dont care) basically the same way.

    However, Honey is touted as a "good sweetener" because it's "natural". Processed foods are bad .. honey is highly processed, but it's good anyway.

    The OP's point was that words like processed and natural create different reactions to similar foods based on perceptions of what these words imply to people.

    Honey and HCFS are, chemically, nearly identical. Sure honey has some pollen and bee legs in it, but the 2 liquids are not significantly different from each other.

    But here we are with people saying one is better than the other because of how it is sourced. Your body can not tell the difference between the fructose in HFCS and Honey. Your body treats HFCS and honey the same way. But one's good for you, and one's bad for you, because people, or whatever. It's a pretty clear demonstartion of the OP's point.

    You are now mixing apples and oranges. Saying it's "better" or "healthier" is not the same as saying it's "natural". Honey straight from the hive is not processed any more than a stalk of broccoli is processed because it starts as a seed and is processed by the sun, soil, rain, etc. and is made of chemicals.

    Honey and HCFS are processed the same amount. You care when the chemical processing happens and who does it. I do not. I see them as the same.

    Processing has nothing to do with it. The post is about what is natural. Seriously, I do not believe you can't see the difference between bees gathering nectar and partially digesting it and men in lab coats creating HFCS. You keep jumping subjects, but I still think you are just arguing for the sake of arguing.

    This goes back to "natural" .. I find humans just as natural as bees, and therefore their processes are just as natural as the bees. (tip: I dont believe a single thing on this planet is "unnatural")
  • shannashannabobana
    shannashannabobana Posts: 625 Member
    We are talking about FOOD. Are we so screwed up that we can't recognize what food is anymore? But if you think equating food with arsenic is a good argument to justify eating foods that come in a box; well, good for you.
    Dude, the hemlock/arsenic thing is a joke. With me it’s generally in response to a ‘natural’ pill or some sort of processed food. The point is ‘natural’ does not equal healthy.

    If I am buying premade foods I look at the ingredient list. If it’s short, that’s a good sign. If I can pronounce and identify all of the ingredients, even better.
    I consider Honey to be a highly processed (with chemicals, no less!!) food.
    I think you’re buying the wrong kind of honey, then. Although I did look at the ingredient list one what I original thought was honey but was apparently 'honey sauce' from popeyes yesterday. Honey, Corn Syrup, HFCS, and a couple other things including I think one more sugar source. Who adds sugar to honey? Popeyes apparently!
  • sullus
    sullus Posts: 2,839 Member
    Honey and HCFS are processed the same amount. You care when the chemical processing happens and who does it. I do not. I see them as the same.

    One ingredient cannot exist without a chemistry set. One you can walk out and grab with your hand. It's fine to consider them similar in sugar components, but it's mildly insane to think they were processed equally.

    The functional difference between the two, aside from a slightly different ratio of fructose, is one gets injected into everything while the other doesn't.

    Ok then. So if a baby cow drinks milk and pukes up cottage cheese, it's more natural cottage cheese than when humans add the same enzymes to milk in a vat?
  • Shock_Wave
    Shock_Wave Posts: 1,573 Member
    bump for later to read responses
  • highervibes
    highervibes Posts: 2,219 Member
    Everything on Earth is natural, therefore all food is natural. Eat what you like, because it's natural.
  • sullus
    sullus Posts: 2,839 Member
    We are talking about FOOD. Are we so screwed up that we can't recognize what food is anymore? But if you think equating food with arsenic is a good argument to justify eating foods that come in a box; well, good for you.
    Dude, the hemlock/arsenic thing is a joke. With me it’s generally in response to a ‘natural’ pill or some sort of processed food. The point is ‘natural’ does not equal healthy.

    If I am buying premade foods I look at the ingredient list. If it’s short, that’s a good sign. If I can pronounce and identify all of the ingredients, even better.
    I consider Honey to be a highly processed (with chemicals, no less!!) food.
    I think you’re buying the wrong kind of honey, then. Although I did look at the ingredient list one what I original thought was honey but was apparently 'honey sauce' from popeyes yesterday. Honey, Corn Syrup, HFCS, and a couple other things including I think one more sugar source. Who adds sugar to honey? Popeyes apparently!

    No. Raw honey straight from the hive is a chemically processed product.
  • sullus
    sullus Posts: 2,839 Member
    I always like Honey v HFCS in the "natural" debate. I consider Honey to be a highly processed (with chemicals, no less!!) food. They're basically the same thing - sugar water processed with enzymes, then evaporated to a sugary syrup that contains about 55% fructose.

    Yet one's an all-natural wondersweetener, and the other is the most evil, guaranteed to give you the diabetus, sweetener that ever existed.

    HFCS is no less "natural" than Honey. Why does it matter if a human or bee adds the enzymes?

    Pasteurized honey is processed. Raw honey is not. Buy raw honey.

    Raw honey is chemically processed by bees.

    You just want to troll so badly, that's getting ridiculous!

    Explain how my statement is inaccurate.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    Honey and HCFS are processed the same amount. You care when the chemical processing happens and who does it. I do not. I see them as the same.

    One ingredient cannot exist without a chemistry set. One you can walk out and grab with your hand. It's fine to consider them similar in sugar components, but it's mildly insane to think they were processed equally.

    The functional difference between the two, aside from a slightly different ratio of fructose, is one gets injected into everything while the other doesn't.

    Ok then. So if a baby cow drinks milk and pukes up cottage cheese, it's more natural cottage cheese than when humans add the same enzymes to milk in a vat?

    vomit = cottage cheese. That's not ridiculous at all. :huh:
  • highervibes
    highervibes Posts: 2,219 Member
    the only way to use the word appropriately is if it's used as an adjective to describe something not of this Earth. Argument over. lol
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    I always like Honey v HFCS in the "natural" debate. I consider Honey to be a highly processed (with chemicals, no less!!) food. They're basically the same thing - sugar water processed with enzymes, then evaporated to a sugary syrup that contains about 55% fructose.

    Yet one's an all-natural wondersweetener, and the other is the most evil, guaranteed to give you the diabetus, sweetener that ever existed.

    HFCS is no less "natural" than Honey. Why does it matter if a human or bee adds the enzymes?

    Pasteurized honey is processed. Raw honey is not. Buy raw honey.

    Raw honey is chemically processed by bees.

    You just want to troll so badly, that's getting ridiculous!

    Explain how my statement is inaccurate.

    Bees don't process honey. They process nectar to make honey.
  • shannashannabobana
    shannashannabobana Posts: 625 Member
    Eat what you like, because it's natural.
    Including Hemlock!
    No. Raw honey straight from the hive is a chemically processed product.
    I think this is dumb but if you believe everything in existence on this earth counts as natural fine, why are you even talking about this?

    Functionally Natural does not equal Healthy.
  • sullus
    sullus Posts: 2,839 Member
    I always like Honey v HFCS in the "natural" debate. I consider Honey to be a highly processed (with chemicals, no less!!) food. They're basically the same thing - sugar water processed with enzymes, then evaporated to a sugary syrup that contains about 55% fructose.

    Yet one's an all-natural wondersweetener, and the other is the most evil, guaranteed to give you the diabetus, sweetener that ever existed.

    HFCS is no less "natural" than Honey. Why does it matter if a human or bee adds the enzymes?

    Pasteurized honey is processed. Raw honey is not. Buy raw honey.

    Raw honey is chemically processed by bees.

    You just want to troll so badly, that's getting ridiculous!

    Explain how my statement is inaccurate.

    Bees don't process honey. They process nectar to make honey.

    Excellent semantic point. Should have use "has been" instead of is.