Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Should you be able to pronounce the names of product ingredients?
Replies
-
-
Should you be able to pronounce the names of product ingredients? (that we eat)
YES.
7 -
It's also sad that people will eat things with no consciousness as to the ingredients
What if those ingredients you don't understand are actually good for you and you are missing out?9 -
-
Bottom line is, what you put in your mouth is one of the few things you have complete control of. It would be irresponsible to not know what it is you are digesting. Regardless if you can pronounce it or not, if you dont recognize it, look it up.2
-
It's also sad that people will eat things with no consciousness as to the ingredients
When I see something I don't know on a label, I look it up. I got a tiny computer that fits in the palm of my hand that lets me do it very quickly.
You're mistaken about the choice you're actually facing. It isn't "Should I buy this bread with an ingredient I don't recognize or not?" It's actually "Should I remain ignorant or should I educate myself?"12 -
It's also sad that people will eat things with no consciousness as to the ingredients
You do realize that things like apples and bread are also comprised of thousands of ingredients right?
The issue I have with the anti-processed-food types is that they seem to be completely missing the point. You look at a "processed food" label and you see a list of 16 ingredients many of which have difficult to pronounce names and the response seems to be "look at how many ingredients this has, that is so many and I don't know what they are". Then you look at a label from an "whole foods" "organic" whatever product and it lists "Apples, Oats" and you think...just two ingredients and I know what they are, great.
Here is the issue though. The processed food ingredient list is a complete list...it has 16 ingredients but that is all it has. It isn't that it has a ton of ingredients it actually has very few ingredients which is why it is possible to actually list them all. In contrast whole foods like "apple" or "oats" don't actually list out the ingredients because whole foods have thousands of ingredients and it would be completely impractical to list them all out. But issue is it gives the false impression that somehow whole foods are simple while processed foods are complex when actually it is the complete opposite. If you have a drink that is flavored with fructose refined from corn until it is a syrup comprised almost entirely of the molecule fructose then that is a simple ingredient...if, on the other hand, you flavor a drink with a fruit juice then there are going to be hundreds if not thousands of ingredients in that. Almost all (like 99%) of "processed" ingredients are just purified plant products that take those thousands of ingredients and select out the one or two "active" ingredients in a refinement process. They are by definition much simpler. When you get those thousands down to one then you can just call it by its actual name, like amylopectin or some other name that scares people when it shows up on boxes.
That isn't making any sort of value judgement on it. I just have the smirk a bit when someone says "I want to know exactly what is in my food" and on that basis they choose the whole foods. You have no idea what is in an apple. "Apple" isn't a descriptive ingredient...it is just a name we gave a fruit that has thousands of ingredients in it. Almost everything you eat you have no idea what is in it. If you truly want to know exactly what is in what you are eating then you'd be better off eating processed foods because they tend to have specific engineered ingredients. If you eat high fructose corn syrup in it then that is exactly what that is, a syrup mostly comprised of the molecule fructose. Does eating what you know make that somehow the better choice? No, it doesn't....and that is the point. It is a silly argument to make.
Honestly I don't even think it is the point right, I think most people who say that are actually saying they want to eat whole foods that have been part of the human diet for hundreds of years because they are unsure or do not trust the introduction of processed ingredients that may or may not be at considerably higher concentrations than what would be found in "natural" whole foods. But that has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not you know what is in your food or whether or not you can pronounce it.
11 -
Do you think that a criteria for a safe/healthy product (food, health, or medical) is that it contains ingredients you can pronounce? Isn't this more a reflection on the language skills of the consumer than the efficacy/safety of a product? (This could be scary since the average American tests out a 5th grade reading level.)
Would you use a product that listed any of these ingredients?
ergocalciferol
cholecalciferol
nicotinamide riboside
dihydrogen monoxide
On a related note, most people can't pronounce my last name. Does that mean that I'm dangerous?
I absolutely would use products with those ingredients.... I was a Microbiology major/Chemistry minor 20 years ago. Side note: there are very few chemicals that I cannot pronounce, except for the molecule Aluminum (don't know why but can't say that word so I use the British pronounciation: aluminium). I also know one person that has never been able to pronounce CABERNET.0 -
Yes pronounciation seems such a silly criteria - pronouncing something and understanding what it is are 2 different things.
Like I said before I could have a lisp and not be able to pronounce spinach - that doesn't mean I don't know what it is.
IRL I often read out pathology results to patients - for the life of me I just cannot pronounce sebhorrheic keratosis. Have been dealing with such results for years and I know darn well what it is - but still can't pronounce it right.2 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »
It's also sad that people will eat things with no consciousness as to the ingredients
You do realize that things like apples and bread are also comprised of thousands of ingredients right?
The issue I have with the anti-processed-food types is that they seem to be completely missing the point. You look at a "processed food" label and you see a list of 16 ingredients many of which have difficult to pronounce names and the response seems to be "look at how many ingredients this has, that is so many and I don't know what they are". Then you look at a label from an "whole foods" "organic" whatever product and it lists "Apples, Oats" and you think...just two ingredients and I know what they are, great.
Here is the issue though. The processed food ingredient list is a complete list...it has 16 ingredients but that is all it has. It isn't that it has a ton of ingredients it actually has very few ingredients which is why it is possible to actually list them all. In contrast whole foods like "apple" or "oats" don't actually list out the ingredients because whole foods have thousands of ingredients and it would be completely impractical to list them all out. But issue is it gives the false impression that somehow whole foods are simple while processed foods are complex when actually it is the complete opposite. If you have a drink that is flavored with fructose refined from corn until it is a syrup comprised almost entirely of the molecule fructose then that is a simple ingredient...if, on the other hand, you flavor a drink with a fruit juice then there are going to be hundreds if not thousands of ingredients in that. Almost all (like 99%) of "processed" ingredients are just purified plant products that take those thousands of ingredients and select out the one or two "active" ingredients in a refinement process. They are by definition much simpler. When you get those thousands down to one then you can just call it by its actual name, like amylopectin or some other name that scares people when it shows up on boxes.
That isn't making any sort of value judgement on it. I just have the smirk a bit when someone says "I want to know exactly what is in my food" and on that basis they choose the whole foods. You have no idea what is in an apple. "Apple" isn't a descriptive ingredient...it is just a name we gave a fruit that has thousands of ingredients in it. Almost everything you eat you have no idea what is in it. If you truly want to know exactly what is in what you are eating then you'd be better off eating processed foods because they tend to have specific engineered ingredients. If you eat high fructose corn syrup in it then that is exactly what that is, a syrup mostly comprised of the molecule fructose. Does eating what you know make that somehow the better choice? No, it doesn't....and that is the point. It is a silly argument to make.
Honestly I don't even think it is the point right, I think most people who say that are actually saying they want to eat whole foods that have been part of the human diet for hundreds of years because they are unsure or do not trust the introduction of processed ingredients that may or may not be at considerably higher concentrations than what would be found in "natural" whole foods. But that has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not you know what is in your food or whether or not you can pronounce it.
Lovely response. Makes sense.0 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »
It's also sad that people will eat things with no consciousness as to the ingredients
You do realize that things like apples and bread are also comprised of thousands of ingredients right?
The issue I have with the anti-processed-food types is that they seem to be completely missing the point. You look at a "processed food" label and you see a list of 16 ingredients many of which have difficult to pronounce names and the response seems to be "look at how many ingredients this has, that is so many and I don't know what they are". Then you look at a label from an "whole foods" "organic" whatever product and it lists "Apples, Oats" and you think...just two ingredients and I know what they are, great.
Here is the issue though. The processed food ingredient list is a complete list...it has 16 ingredients but that is all it has. It isn't that it has a ton of ingredients it actually has very few ingredients which is why it is possible to actually list them all. In contrast whole foods like "apple" or "oats" don't actually list out the ingredients because whole foods have thousands of ingredients and it would be completely impractical to list them all out. But issue is it gives the false impression that somehow whole foods are simple while processed foods are complex when actually it is the complete opposite. If you have a drink that is flavored with fructose refined from corn until it is a syrup comprised almost entirely of the molecule fructose then that is a simple ingredient...if, on the other hand, you flavor a drink with a fruit juice then there are going to be hundreds if not thousands of ingredients in that. Almost all (like 99%) of "processed" ingredients are just purified plant products that take those thousands of ingredients and select out the one or two "active" ingredients in a refinement process. They are by definition much simpler. When you get those thousands down to one then you can just call it by its actual name, like amylopectin or some other name that scares people when it shows up on boxes.
That isn't making any sort of value judgement on it. I just have the smirk a bit when someone says "I want to know exactly what is in my food" and on that basis they choose the whole foods. You have no idea what is in an apple. "Apple" isn't a descriptive ingredient...it is just a name we gave a fruit that has thousands of ingredients in it. Almost everything you eat you have no idea what is in it. If you truly want to know exactly what is in what you are eating then you'd be better off eating processed foods because they tend to have specific engineered ingredients. If you eat high fructose corn syrup in it then that is exactly what that is, a syrup mostly comprised of the molecule fructose. Does eating what you know make that somehow the better choice? No, it doesn't....and that is the point. It is a silly argument to make.
Honestly I don't even think it is the point right, I think most people who say that are actually saying they want to eat whole foods that have been part of the human diet for hundreds of years because they are unsure or do not trust the introduction of processed ingredients that may or may not be at considerably higher concentrations than what would be found in "natural" whole foods. But that has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not you know what is in your food or whether or not you can pronounce it.
Great points and well said. A perfect example of the above (a food which almost everybody would agree is "whole", "clean", "unprocessed", etc.):
4 -
Kind of late to the party on this one, but it provoked a thought:tbright1965 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »tbright1965 wrote: »SuzySunshine99 wrote: »It's almost as dumb as "Only shop on the perimeter of the grocery store".
I agree, and I always ask people if they never buy toilet tissue or cleaning products?
In my recent remodeled supermarket, the wine, alcohol and beers are now located on the left side of one of the entrances and very close to the vegetables and fruit stands. There is a lot of traffic in that area, that is for sure!
Well, I mostly adhere to the perimeter rule.
I don't get my tissues and cleaning products at the market. I get those at the warehouse club
At least my intent is to steer myself, and anyone who wishes to emulate what I'm doing, to buy meat, fish, chicken, dairy, fruits, vegetables, etc and steer clear of the meal kits, cereals, and other things that are more processed. I realize all food is processed to a certain extent, unless one is eating it raw. However, do I really need a pasta sauce that has added sugar? Do I really need my Raisin Bran to have sugar as one of the ingredients? Do I really need little chocolate donuts, Twinkies and Doritos? (No, but I don't always say no to them either, just have them much less frequently.)
But I will buy bread, pasta, etc. But I try to fill my cart with fresh proteins and vegetables as much as possible and leave out the potato chips, snack cakes, sugary cereals, and their cousins that often lurk in the middle of the store.
I don't use the rule because I fear chemistry. (Better living through modern chemistry.) I do it because the foods in the middle seem to be more calorie dense and that doesn't work well with T2Dm and limiting my calorie and carb intake as per my dietitian/diabetes coaches guidance and plan for my eating.
As much as I'd love a pack of little chocolate donuts, I'm better off using the same 420 calories (420, coincidence?) having a two or three egg omelette with two slices of center cut bacon, peppers, onions and maybe a banana depending on if my BG was above or below 100 when I woke that morning.
If this works for you, use it. If not, take anything that is worthwhile and leave what isn't.
But even if I decide to forgo the pasta sauce with added sugar, I have to go to that aisle anyway to get my canned tomatoes (or my pasta). If I decide to skip the raisin bran with sugar, I'm still going to that aisle to get my steel-cut oats. That's why the rule has never made sense to me.
I don't think the rule is NEVER go down those aisles. I've taken it to mean limit your trips down those aisles, or be careful in those aisles.
I'm a firm believer in your can eat almost anything, save those who have true diagnosed medical issues. (I.E. we would be breaking out the Epi-Pen if my wife had shellfish.)
Heck, I ate 6 full sized donuts in the local Tour de Donut bike race. But I was pretty sure I was going to burn the 1800 calories up in the 34 miles of the race, so it was a net zero.
I just don't do that every day, or even every month. But I did check with my Dr. and he said I was good for 6 donuts on that day.
So I just take it as not a NEVER, but rather a beware when you are going down these aisles. The box may suggest that Raisin Bran is "healthy" but do I really need 46g of carbs and 18g of sugar for breakfast? Maybe I would be better off with the oats and adding my own fruit to the bowl.
I'm certainly not Keto at 203g carbs/day, so I'm not suggesting that sort of woo.
Just saying be careful in the center of the store
Not everything that says "Healthy" or "High Fiber" or "Natural" on the label is what it says it is.
I wonder if one of the issues with these kinds of rules is between those of us who think a rule is a rule and so take them literally, and those who see them as general guidance or shorthand for something? That's what you seem to be doing, rather than defending it as a rule.
I'll admit that I honestly have never understood the benefit of the perimeter rule, since it seems to assume that the person for whom it could have value must have absolutely 0 idea of what foods have what qualities, what a healthy diet consists of, so on. Maybe some people are that ignorant, such that they seem simplistic rules of this sort, but it seems rather insulting to me, and I 100% agree that on the whole a healthy diet ideally would be made up of lots of produce, meat and eggs (if one eats animal products), and then some basic staples like canned tomatoes, boxed or bagged pasta or oats or bread, beans (canned or dried), and frozen produce. (Much of this is not on the perimeter in most stores, and also store layout varies.)
For me, I don't get meat at the grocery store ever -- I get fish elsewhere, mostly get meat from a farm, and have a local meat market that I go to when I don't use the farm. I get eggs and milk and yogurt from a farm, mostly, but when I don't I buy yogurt at the grocery store, and the yogurt at my store is in an aisle (it has a great yogurt selection too, since a neighborhood to the west of me has a large Middle Eastern population and they tend to have yogurts that serve that community). I also get in-season veg from the green market or a farm subscription. So what I get at my grocery store is out of season veg and fruit, non local fruit (bananas, clementines, lemons), frozen veg and fruit, and then staples, which are in the aisles. Also cheap olive oil, although I have a different store for good olive oils and vinegars.
So I don't really shop the perimeter at all, yet I think my diet is healthy and it's certainly made up of mostly whole foods.
I really don't understand what this perimeter rule is supposed to be adding.4 -
Yeah, this. I like to know what's in what I buy too, so I tend to research it (rarely do now, since it's rare I think of buying something with an ingredient that I'm not familiar with).2 -
Knowing how to pronounce the ingredient isn't all that important. For me, being able to recognize all the ingredients is more important. I'm in college so general chemistry helps me know what sort of things ingredients are. Learn some chemistry, use google, and stay educated!2
-
unless people have a medical reason to avoid a specific ingredient, i dont think they need to learn chemistry, use google, stay educated.
Sure, they can if they want to and some people are into nitty gritty detail
But most people really dont need to micro manage their diet - just follow some basic nutrition principles like Eat more whole foods, eat a variety of fruit and veg, keep 'treat' foods to moderation.
and if you also want to lose weight - Eat less, move more.1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions