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.
USA vs. Europe, NY Times
Replies
-
I prefer not to eat gmo If I can help it I just don’t think it’s natural or healthy. I find American packaged foods are mostly horrible with bitter/ artificial aftertaste.
I’m from England, lived in Spain a few years now in the US in my opinion food here is lower quality but larger portions and too much “cheese”. Does anyone else hate the taste of high fructose corn syrup products?9 -
American food (including packaged) is hugely variable, to generalize about it as if it was all one thing is odd.
Personally, I rarely eat anything with HFCS, but it does tend to taste less good than those made with sugar, to me. I don't really eat a ton of packaged foods that include sweetener, though.4 -
Thank you, The_Enginerd. So, so many plants can have many more proteins, its fortunate, they do not appear in our diet that often.
Like bananas, many apple varieties, potatoes, oats, leeks, peanuts, strawberries, ginger, watermelons etc?
Plants *have* to have more proteins than animals because they require all the cellular machinery to carry out photosynthesis. I don't get why you think more proteins = bad?
1 -
Chantelle9112 wrote: »I prefer not to eat gmo If I can help it I just don’t think it’s natural or healthy. I find American packaged foods are mostly horrible with bitter/ artificial aftertaste.
I’m from England, lived in Spain a few years now in the US in my opinion food here is lower quality but larger portions and too much “cheese”. Does anyone else hate the taste of high fructose corn syrup products?
We constantly engage in unnatural behavior and "natural" doesn't equal beneficial or good, why draw this specific line?
American packaged food comes in all kinds of forms and tastes. This is a bizarre generalization.9 -
janejellyroll wrote: »...American packaged food comes in all kinds of forms and tastes. This is a bizarre generalization.
Actually...I would agree with this one, and I'm an American. I had a medical issue for a while where I was having bad allergic reactions but we didn't know to what. Ended up having to make all my own foods from very fresh products, couldn't even have grains or dried spices. And when I was trying foods again that were packaged - yeah, blech. I honestly thought something new had been done to the foods I tried, because there was so much bitterness or this odd chemical-aftertaste. And then finally did some research and found out that, no, it's just what we do to our packaged food. All of it.
Because while there may be variety in the actual food itself, there is a huge homogeneity in the chemicals use ON the food. Most grains, for example, have certain chemicals used on them during storage, like insecticides or anti-fungals. Most processing lines use similar soaps and cleansers, and most packages have some similar linings because it's food safe and the cheapest. Most packaged foods use one out of only a small list of preservatives or anti-bacterials/anti-fungals on them. Most foods contain a small number of ingredients that have a lot of chemicals used in processing (for example, corn starch and corn syrup both have sulfites used in their processing, during the wet corn milling).
And if you don't eat these all the time? You CAN taste these. And it absolutely is bitter or has odd taste that I can only describe as 'chemical.' Kind of like how some toilets have that blue water and it smells chemical - you couldn't say WHAT chemical, but it's noticeable, you know?
These chemicals are often not on any labels, because these are used for 'processing,' so are not considered ingredients. Also, there are enough people who have allergy-equivalent reactions to some of the more common preservatives that we know that these chemicals DO remain in the food. Because these folks react to the food.
Heck, for a good example? Buy some 100% orange juice, and then buy some oranges. Juice the oranges. Then boil both the store bought juice and the fresh juice until you have maybe 1/3 the volume and taste them. The store bought orange juice is tremendously more bitter, in my experience, and that bitterness is the same as I started to taste after I had been away from packaged foods for a long while.7 -
janejellyroll wrote: »...American packaged food comes in all kinds of forms and tastes. This is a bizarre generalization.
Actually...I would agree with this one, and I'm an American. I had a medical issue for a while where I was having bad allergic reactions but we didn't know to what. Ended up having to make all my own foods from very fresh products, couldn't even have grains or dried spices. And when I was trying foods again that were packaged - yeah, blech. I honestly thought something new had been done to the foods I tried, because there was so much bitterness or this odd chemical-aftertaste. And then finally did some research and found out that, no, it's just what we do to our packaged food. All of it.
Because while there may be variety in the actual food itself, there is a huge homogeneity in the chemicals use ON the food. Most grains, for example, have certain chemicals used on them during storage, like insecticides or anti-fungals. Most processing lines use similar soaps and cleansers, and most packages have some similar linings because it's food safe and the cheapest. Most packaged foods use one out of only a small list of preservatives or anti-bacterials/anti-fungals on them. Most foods contain a small number of ingredients that have a lot of chemicals used in processing (for example, corn starch and corn syrup both have sulfites used in their processing, during the wet corn milling).
And if you don't eat these all the time? You CAN taste these. And it absolutely is bitter or has odd taste that I can only describe as 'chemical.' Kind of like how some toilets have that blue water and it smells chemical - you couldn't say WHAT chemical, but it's noticeable, you know?
These chemicals are often not on any labels, because these are used for 'processing,' so are not considered ingredients. Also, there are enough people who have allergy-equivalent reactions to some of the more common preservatives that we know that these chemicals DO remain in the food. Because these folks react to the food.
Heck, for a good example? Buy some 100% orange juice, and then buy some oranges. Juice the oranges. Then boil both the store bought juice and the fresh juice until you have maybe 1/3 the volume and taste them. The store bought orange juice is tremendously more bitter, in my experience, and that bitterness is the same as I started to taste after I had been away from packaged foods for a long while.
Not snarky, genuinely curious -- would you consider yourself to be a super-taster?0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »[quote=
We constantly engage in unnatural behavior and "natural" doesn't equal beneficial or good, why draw this specific line?
American packaged food comes in all kinds of forms and tastes. This is a bizarre generalization.
I don’t just draw this line for example I had my children born at home naturally and it was perfect for me. I don’t like that companies are sneaky about gmos too, like if they are so awesome for you write about it on the product.5 -
Chantelle9112 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »[quote=
We constantly engage in unnatural behavior and "natural" doesn't equal beneficial or good, why draw this specific line?
American packaged food comes in all kinds of forms and tastes. This is a bizarre generalization.
I don’t just draw this line for example I had my children born at home naturally and it was perfect for me. I don’t like that companies are sneaky about gmos too, like if they are so awesome for you write about it on the product.
You're communicating this to me via computer, so clearly there are some situations where you've chosen unnatural over natural.11 -
janejellyroll wrote: »...American packaged food comes in all kinds of forms and tastes. This is a bizarre generalization.
Actually...I would agree with this one, and I'm an American. I had a medical issue for a while where I was having bad allergic reactions but we didn't know to what. Ended up having to make all my own foods from very fresh products, couldn't even have grains or dried spices. And when I was trying foods again that were packaged - yeah, blech. I honestly thought something new had been done to the foods I tried, because there was so much bitterness or this odd chemical-aftertaste. And then finally did some research and found out that, no, it's just what we do to our packaged food. All of it.
Because while there may be variety in the actual food itself, there is a huge homogeneity in the chemicals use ON the food. Most grains, for example, have certain chemicals used on them during storage, like insecticides or anti-fungals. Most processing lines use similar soaps and cleansers, and most packages have some similar linings because it's food safe and the cheapest. Most packaged foods use one out of only a small list of preservatives or anti-bacterials/anti-fungals on them. Most foods contain a small number of ingredients that have a lot of chemicals used in processing (for example, corn starch and corn syrup both have sulfites used in their processing, during the wet corn milling).
And if you don't eat these all the time? You CAN taste these. And it absolutely is bitter or has odd taste that I can only describe as 'chemical.' Kind of like how some toilets have that blue water and it smells chemical - you couldn't say WHAT chemical, but it's noticeable, you know?
I rarely eat packaged foods. I sometimes eat oats (Bob's Red Mill, usually), I sometimes eat dried pasta (imported from Italy), I sometimes eat canned tomatoes (Italian or American, no sugar added, because that's weird), I buy dry beans and lentils, and I sometimes buy canned beans/chickpeas. I buy cottage cheese and yogurt from the farmers market more often than not (although sometimes Fage yogurt). (I buy eggs from a farm too.) I get tofu/tempeh, but it's non GMO (because I buy it at WF more than because I care).
I buy olive oil, vinegars, and spices.
Hmm. I do buy smoked salmon, and frozen fruits and veg.
Despite this, when I do have something packaged, I don't perceive bitterness or a chemical aftertaste at all. At least not with the foods I choose. (I like a lot of greens some people call bitter, so maybe I just wouldn't notice.)3 -
Chantelle9112 wrote: »
I don’t just draw this line for example I had my children born at home naturally and it was perfect for me. I don’t like that companies are sneaky about gmos too, like if they are so awesome for you write about it on the product.
genetic engineering is a technology and a process not an ingredient. Should bread packaging list out the types of fertilizers used to grow crops that produced the grain that was used to bake the bread even if the bread did not contain the fertilizer? What use would that serve? Not all information is useful or relevant.
If a product has a sticker on it that says "GMO" that doesn't actually tell you anything about the actual ingredients of the product, nor nutrition, nor safety, nor caloric value or anything really. All it tells you is that at least one of the ingredients within was sourced from an organism whose genome was genetically altered using molecular biological techniques developed over the last 60 years. Doesn't say that that ingredient itself is a result of those genetic changes...most aren't. So what use is it?7 -
kshama2001 wrote: »One thing I did not mention above. Wheat has three sets of genes, it managed this feat of science on its own at some stage in its natural development. I've not seen it recorded that there are any other organisms which have achieved this same feat naturally. One of the issues we humans have can with the plant, is with the protein gluten, only what they do not tell us is the genetic background of wheat inflates the number of proteins wheat contains, some of those who test negative for gluten may well react to one or more of these other proteins.
I fear the use of chemicals. I like organic foods when possible because the number of chemicals used in their production is much smaller and less damaging to us and the soil, than the dominant chemicals in general agriculture. Naturally the productivity teds to be lower from such plants which increases the unit costs. As the quality of the soils the plants are grown in improves the productivity will increase. I discovered some time ago the principal cell in our lungs which take oxygen from the atmosphere was utilised from some mould or similar, these simple structures are damaged by salicylate/paraben which pollutes our atmosphere from weed killers, household detergents, personal hygiene products, preservatives in foods and so much more. (I find all this sciency stuff incredibly interesting, I really wish more of you were even a tiny bit interested, remember, I used to be unable to go into public spaces because of others laundry residue and perfumes, take heed because I fear this could happen to a few of you)
As I have said, I am one of the outliers having dietary/health problems caused by living in this chemical Dependant world. Its true many plants which are gmo will not need the same chemicals and any ordinary agricultural crop but I believe we are playing fast and loose with our quality of life and this is causing the rise in chronic illness and autoimmune disorders, even weight gain.
BTW, smoking over here in the UK is only permitted in ones own homes not in public places, it has been so for years. There was even talk of parents being prosecuted for smoking in the car with their children present! Over here we walk on pavements and drive on roads. We have so much more to concern ourselves with than scientists finding ways to increase food crops by messing with plant structures, how about reducing the rate of abnormal weather incidents such long dry, hot summer burning up the ground then torrential rainfall washing them or large populated areas away. Pardon, this is global warming and no one believes in that on here, do they?
Stay Healthy. Happy New Year to one and all.
I developed chemical sensitivities after working in a building that turned out to have toxic mold. I am MUCH better than I was in 1999, but still cannot use my backyard when my neighbor is drying clothes with fabric softener sheets, and I can tell when she is doing laundry from surprisingly far out in the woods.
People who have not experienced sensitivities like this find it hard to believe but once they have experienced this they are changed for life.5 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »One thing I did not mention above. Wheat has three sets of genes, it managed this feat of science on its own at some stage in its natural development. I've not seen it recorded that there are any other organisms which have achieved this same feat naturally. One of the issues we humans have can with the plant, is with the protein gluten, only what they do not tell us is the genetic background of wheat inflates the number of proteins wheat contains, some of those who test negative for gluten may well react to one or more of these other proteins.
I fear the use of chemicals. I like organic foods when possible because the number of chemicals used in their production is much smaller and less damaging to us and the soil, than the dominant chemicals in general agriculture. Naturally the productivity teds to be lower from such plants which increases the unit costs. As the quality of the soils the plants are grown in improves the productivity will increase. I discovered some time ago the principal cell in our lungs which take oxygen from the atmosphere was utilised from some mould or similar, these simple structures are damaged by salicylate/paraben which pollutes our atmosphere from weed killers, household detergents, personal hygiene products, preservatives in foods and so much more. (I find all this sciency stuff incredibly interesting, I really wish more of you were even a tiny bit interested, remember, I used to be unable to go into public spaces because of others laundry residue and perfumes, take heed because I fear this could happen to a few of you)
As I have said, I am one of the outliers having dietary/health problems caused by living in this chemical Dependant world. Its true many plants which are gmo will not need the same chemicals and any ordinary agricultural crop but I believe we are playing fast and loose with our quality of life and this is causing the rise in chronic illness and autoimmune disorders, even weight gain.
BTW, smoking over here in the UK is only permitted in ones own homes not in public places, it has been so for years. There was even talk of parents being prosecuted for smoking in the car with their children present! Over here we walk on pavements and drive on roads. We have so much more to concern ourselves with than scientists finding ways to increase food crops by messing with plant structures, how about reducing the rate of abnormal weather incidents such long dry, hot summer burning up the ground then torrential rainfall washing them or large populated areas away. Pardon, this is global warming and no one believes in that on here, do they?
Stay Healthy. Happy New Year to one and all.
I developed chemical sensitivities after working in a building that turned out to have toxic mold. I am MUCH better than I was in 1999, but still cannot use my backyard when my neighbor is drying clothes with fabric softener sheets, and I can tell when she is doing laundry from surprisingly far out in the woods.
People who have not experienced sensitivities like this find it hard to believe but once they have experienced this they are changed for life.
I believe in unexplained allergic reactions....that isn't it.
Let's say someone suffers from some sort of unexplained allergic reaction or symptom. They respond by looking around their environment when they have the reaction and they pick something they think might be the cause. They then notice that assumed environmental trigger and shortly after have the symptom. From that they conclude that IS the cause and are confident enough to proclaim it as such to others.
To those people I'm not doubting they have debilitating reactions or symptoms, it is simply I am skeptical that one can just figure out the causative agent of something with an n of 1 and anecdotal experience.
By analogy it is like the person who claims they have seen an alien spacecraft. It is not really that I doubt that one night in the desert they saw a strange object in the sky that they could not identify....rather I am simply skeptical of the conclusion they reached that it must therefore be an alien spacecraft.6 -
n=1 100x times with the same results will clue in most people or perhaps some of us are just special.
11 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »n=1 100x times with the same results will clue in most people or perhaps some of us are just special.
n=1 refers to one person, not the number of times they experience symptoms. This sort of thing is why we have blinded scientific studies. Individuals will pattern-seek and find something....doesn't mean what they found is the cause. When I say individuals I am referring to all people incluiding myself, no one individual is a reliable source...we are all full of biases and desires to find explanations to our problems and solutions for what we want to change and we tend to find them where we look....which should tell you something.7 -
All I was saying after the same person repeats the same n=1 for 100 times and getting the same results it would normally have meaning to that one person. Do you agree?2
-
GaleHawkins wrote: »All I was saying after the same person repeats the same n=1 for 100 times and getting the same results it would normally have meaning to that one person. Do you agree?
Sure I accept that a persons belief has meaning for that person...as I said I am not questioning that persons belief, I am questioning that method as an means of establishing actual causality. If a person finds that whenever they are near clothes that have been treated by a fabric softner that they get a rash on their skin and they decide to avoid fabric softners and they stop getting the rash then it is logical for them to decide to avoid that situation to avoid the rash. The issue I take is them deciding they have shown in some objective way that they have an allergy to an ingredient within that fabric softner....they haven't. If they take it upon themselves to tell others how that ingrredient causes that rash...that isn't really a good thing. An individuals coincidental experience is not a good basis for determining the actual cause of things, never has been for anything....that is why Science is useful. But ultimately if the way the person decided that X causes Y is just by their own personal experience then really they are just going off their own assumptions and nothing more and I don't personally find that very convincing.
If I have an allergy to something I do not personally have the ability or resources necessary to by myself determine for certainty the cause of it. That is not an easy thing to do. I might find that if I avoid X I don't get the symptoms and then I can make a decision if I want to avoid X or not...but to decide that means X is for sure the cause is to basically decide that that mysterious object in the sky is for sure an alien spacecraft. Its an overreach...claiming you know something you frankly cannot really know.
5 -
In studying the placebo effect I ran into quantum mechanics so it seems we may not physically exist as I was taught many years ago. So certainty of everything just flew out the window that I was certain about a year ago.
I am now certain there is no certainty about the meaning of words.
Perhaps the placebo effect is from beyond our normal senses. I do agree with you that we can come to think our thoughts are reality when they may have never existed like many memories that we have are actually false memories that came from who knows where.7 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »In studying the placebo effect I ran into quantum mechanics so it seems we may not physically exist as I was taught many years ago. So certainty of everything just flew out the window that I was certain about a year ago.
I am now certain there is no certainty about the meaning of words.
Perhaps the placebo effect is from beyond our normal senses. I do agree with you that we can come to think our thoughts are reality when they may have never existed like many memories that we have are actually false memories that came from who knows where.
I can only assume you misunderstood what I was trying to say. I'm not claiming that people's belief makes things happen to them. I'm simply saying that people believe things that aren't true...no need to invoke any metaphysics for that one.3 -
I thought metaphysics was a branch of philosophy and it was not what I was talking about but was referring to quantum mechanics that seems to explain the existence of the placebo effect.
https://sciencemag.org/news/2017/10/quantum-experiment-space-confirms-reality-what-you-make-it-0
This would explain the view that everything that we think of as real today was thought/spoken into existence. One drug stock crashed this week when their medicine turned out to be no more effective than the placebo effect in controlled double blind clinical trials. The placebo effect does not come from a chemical so it has to come from the mind it would seem to me. You Are The Placebo by Joe Dispenza (2014) is a good book about research into what the placebo effect seems to be about that Aaron I expect you might find interesting.7 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »In studying the placebo effect I ran into quantum mechanics so it seems we may not physically exist as I was taught many years ago. So certainty of everything just flew out the window that I was certain about a year ago.
I am now certain there is no certainty about the meaning of words.
Perhaps the placebo effect is from beyond our normal senses. I do agree with you that we can come to think our thoughts are reality when they may have never existed like many memories that we have are actually false memories that came from who knows where.
You have now entered into a Deepak Chopra level of woo.
Congratulations?7
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.2K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 895 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions