"Natural Flavor" ingredient exposed?

Tarin626

There is nothing Natural in natural flavour - its a masking name manufacturers are allowed to use to hide the chemical mix they use to preserve and make food taste they way it does.

Read the book Fast Food Nation for an acurate explanation of what exactly a "natural flavour" is. It's pretty scary stuff :-(

escloflowneCHANGED

It's fact for me. If it's not fact for you, then that's where you share your facts. But don't you dare push your facts on me as my facts are not the same.

Stop using the word fact if you don't know what it means.

Seriously! You need a dictionary!

Agreed. Or I need other people to stop being pedantic. You knew what I meant, why can't you just accept me for who I am? I have.

No I really didn't, you say fact like it's an opinion...It's a fact you have no clue what you are talking about!

EccentricDad

Science does not contradict itself. Studies sometimes do. And then the scientists find the confounding factors, peer review and come to a consensus.

So is coffee good for you or bad for you then? Science (or rather scientific studies for you pedants out there) has had proven both that it is good and bad for you. Considering you are a only interested in scientific discussion and not theoretical, what is your argument on the matter and which scientific study do you align with?

firstsip

It's fact for me. If it's not fact for you, then that's where you share your facts. But don't you dare push your facts on me as my facts are not the same.

Stop using the word fact if you don't know what it means.

Seriously! You need a dictionary!

Agreed. Or I need other people to stop being pedantic. You knew what I meant, why can't you just accept me for who I am? I have.

Clearly no one knew what you meant. That's what words are for: to effectively communicate. I think you should refrain from trying to communicate online so much since you have a very hard time saying what you "mean to say." Or perhaps you should accept yourself for who you are... but strive to improve? Isn't that what this whole site is for? Improving oneself?

You can improve your mind, your rhetoric, etc., too.

UsedToBeHusky

All foods have varying qualities of nutrition. There is no such thing as an 'empty calories'. The closest possible consumable with 'empty calories' is alcohol... which coincidentally is addictive.

You are trolling. You started debate and then took offense when others disagreed with you. Now you are pretending that you have somehow done us a service by intentionally picking a fight.

The true test of character is how others perceive you and not how you perceive yourself.

Then I hope you perceive me as a person who makes decisions emotionally and enjoys discussions about controversial topics without involving his opinion being judged. I allow everyone to think for themselves, why can't I deserve the same respect?

I find it funny that you keep making the claim that you are an 'emotional' thinker. Emotional and rational are polar opposites. If you are an emotional thinker, then you are not a rational thinker, and therefore, your point loses validity. Pointing out to you that your point has no validity is not a personal attack. You have claimed this article as representation of your own system of beliefs, then tell us to attack the article and not you for your system of beliefs.

Well... the article is ignorant... what does that say about your system of beliefs? Am I being passive-aggressive now by pointing out something without directly saying it? Sure. Is that offensive? Maybe to you, but the truth hurts when we aren't open-minded enough to accept the possibilities.

The person I most feel for is your wife. If my husband were to go on the internet and publicly ostracize me for my food choices in front of a group of random strangers, I certainly would not consider myself to be in a good, positive, mature relationship. Best of luck to ya! I'm done with this.

ChrisRS87

EccentricDad

No I really didn't, you say fact like it's an opinion...It's a fact you have no clue what you are talking about!

Not, it's a belief that I have no idea what I am talking about. In my experience (experiencing is fact to me) I am not believing wrongly. But in your experience, I can understand why you would think I am.

bunchesonothing

Science does not contradict itself. Studies sometimes do. And then the scientists find the confounding factors, peer review and come to a consensus.

So is coffee good for you or bad for you then? Science (or rather scientific studies for you pedants out there) has had proven both that it is good and bad for you. Considering you are a only interested in scientific discussion and not theoretical, what is your argument on the matter and which scientific study do you align with?

That something can have both positives and negatives(not black and white) is not a surprise to me.

WendyTerry420

Science does not contradict itself. Studies sometimes do. And then the scientists find the confounding factors, peer review and come to a consensus.

So is coffee good for you or bad for you then? Science (or rather scientific studies for you pedants out there) has had proven both that it is good and bad for you. Considering you are a only interested in scientific discussion and not theoretical, what is your argument on the matter and which scientific study do you align with?

:laugh:

BrettPGH

We're not being pedants. We're not angry because you're using the wrong form of "your" or something. You are using words completely wrong and trying to use them to illustrate a point.

You can't say fact when you mean opinion. They aren't interchangeable.

You can't try and have an intelligent debate about food and nutrition if your attitude is going to be "I don't need to use scientific studies. Articles from biased websites work fine. I like what they say. It makes me happy on an emotional level."

If YOU want to do that for YOU that's perfectly cool! Go right ahead and have fun.

But stop saying that everyone who disagrees with your "feelings" on eating is attacking you!

CarmenSRT

A fact is truth....undeniable. Like "water is wet". That is a fact. If you choose to believe that water is dry, that may be your "belief" but it does not make it "fact".

I am a man of a very small vocabulary. I speak in hopes that people will understand what I'm trying to say instead of pedantically tell me I spoke wrong. Thank you for letting me know, the point I was trying to make with the word "belief" in the place of fact is still valid.

Sir, you ARE entitled to your own OPINIONS and BELIEFS. You are NOT entitled to your own FACTS. That is the issue people have with your position.

I gave up a while ago trying to argue with folks who base an argument on beliefs. Beliefs are not arrived at using facts and logic. Facts and logic won't dislodge them. It's an exercise in futility.

bunchesonothing

:laugh:

That is awesome!

rml_16

It's sad that the naysayers think you must be depriving yourself or eating nothing but gruel if you don't eat processed food. There is so much delicious food out there that doesn't require weird-tasting manufactured flavors to make it good.

Clearly, you missed the thread yesterday where he said any women who want to be skinny and eat a low-cal diet MUST give up flavorful food.

EccentricDad

It's fact for me. If it's not fact for you, then that's where you share your facts. But don't you dare push your facts on me as my facts are not the same.

Stop using the word fact if you don't know what it means.

Seriously! You need a dictionary!

Agreed. Or I need other people to stop being pedantic. You knew what I meant, why can't you just accept me for who I am? I have.

No I really didn't, you say fact like it's an opinion...It's a fact you have no clue what you are talking about!

And it's my belief that you are obsessed with making people feel bad for making decisions without getting all the scientific research first. But no matter how much you criticize me, I will not change. You can't change anyone but yourself. And since you are secure in your opinions/beliefs and so am I, where does that put us? A stalemate. Now are you going to weigh in on the article? Or are you going to leave because I'm done arguing with you?

firstsip

Science does not contradict itself. Studies sometimes do. And then the scientists find the confounding factors, peer review and come to a consensus.

So is coffee good for you or bad for you then? Science (or rather scientific studies for you pedants out there) has had proven both that it is good and bad for you. Considering you are a only interested in scientific discussion and not theoretical, what is your argument on the matter and which scientific study do you align with?

Typical "burden of proof" argument.

You posited something with one source... that leaves it up to you to prove it.

You bring up coffee: NAME your sources that you say contradict. People famously use the "coffee" and "egg" debates to try and discredit science... not realizing that the studies aren't published at the same time. More research is done, and science puts out those new findings. Science is not stable; it is constantly progressing.

I think a more apt response to show how being UNSCIENTIFIC is harmful are in the "singular" studies: your flavor article, for example. Or the famous "autism" linked to vaccines study, which was done by ONE scientist and has been disproven over and over. Now we have an increase in diseases that had long been dormant, because a 15+ year old study was put out, people believe it without ever looking to see the follow up, to check the sources, etc.

Legitimate science is based in being "valid" and "verifiable." Claims that are posited are only done so if there is valid evidence. Valid and verifiable evidence is that which can be repeated and repeat the same or similar results.

EccentricDad

It's sad that the naysayers think you must be depriving yourself or eating nothing but gruel if you don't eat processed food. There is so much delicious food out there that doesn't require weird-tasting manufactured flavors to make it good.

Clearly, you missed the thread yesterday where he said any women who want to be skinny and eat a low-cal diet MUST give up flavorful food.

Did anyone ask me what I meant by that? No. Did anyone just take it literally and interpret it any way they wanted to? Yes. And here in this thread I am being criticized for doing the same exact thing when I hyper-vigilantly perceive attacks.

EccentricDad

A fact is truth....undeniable. Like "water is wet". That is a fact. If you choose to believe that water is dry, that may be your "belief" but it does not make it "fact".

I am a man of a very small vocabulary. I speak in hopes that people will understand what I'm trying to say instead of pedantically tell me I spoke wrong. Thank you for letting me know, the point I was trying to make with the word "belief" in the place of fact is still valid.

Sir, you ARE entitled to your own OPINIONS and BELIEFS. You are NOT entitled to your own FACTS. That is the issue people have with your position.

I gave up a while ago trying to argue with folks who base an argument on beliefs. Beliefs are not arrived at using facts and logic. Facts and logic won't dislodge them. It's an exercise in futility.

But the point is, we are entitled in this world to believe what we want. I don't give churchgoers a hard time for their belief despite knowing that scientifically they are wasting their time because "he" doesn't exist. But the point is, we are allowed to believe what we want as facts, aren't we?

ilovedeadlifts

ED, you've post a lot of threads lately. Most of which lead to people saying you're full of it.........
It's not always the same people in each thread.


so please see if you can come up with what the common factor is in all of your threads.

Krizzle4Rizzle

Mr. ED I can see you are clearly upset...

EccentricDad

Typical "burden of proof" argument.

You posited something with one source... that leaves it up to you to prove it.

You bring up coffee: NAME your sources that you say contradict. People famously use the "coffee" and "egg" debates to try and discredit science... not realizing that the studies aren't published at the same time. More research is done, and science puts out those new findings. Science is not stable; it is constantly progressing.

I think a more apt response to show how being UNSCIENTIFIC is harmful are in the "singular" studies: your flavor article, for example. Or the famous "autism" linked to vaccines study, which was done by ONE scientist and has been disproven over and over. Now we have an increase in diseases that had long been dormant, because a 15+ year old study was put out, people believe it without ever looking to see the follow up, to check the sources, etc.

Legitimate science is based in being "valid" and "verifiable." Claims that are posited are only done so if there is valid evidence. Valid and verifiable evidence is that which can be repeated and repeat the same or similar results.

So what you mean to say is, you haven't made an opinion on the matter because the science gods haven't made up their opinion on the matter yet. What is YOUR opinion on the matter? Is coffee good or bad for you? All I'm asking is for you to have your own opinion, even if it isn't scientifically or politically correct.