Whole Foods: the Temple of Pseudoscience.

Can you give an example of a food that has a claim on it not substantiated by science?

The multigrain bread label would have included the ingredient list, likely the first one would have been white flour.

Homeopathic products include ingredient lists. What's the difference? If it doesn't have to say 90% white flour, what difference does it make?

Off the top of my head, no, can't give you a food claim that is not substantiated by science as I stopped paying attention to claims and advertising a long time ago. Given a little time, I'm sure I could come up with all sorts of misleading statements on food products. As you said, the FDA will tell the worst offenders to remove some of their statements. But only those that are in overt violation. Implication is everything.

And when someone on here posts an article about super palatable foods, they are attacked as wanting to surrender all personal responsibility to someone else and live in a nanny state. Food labels can say "Can be part of a healthy diet" and all sins are forgiven because it's up to the consumer to know what a healthy diet is. Read this:

When you said you "completely disagreed" I thought you would have a specific example. But apparently you don't look for claims and advertising anymore?

Packaged food has an ingredient list, a nutrition label, and unless you can come up with an example, I still don't think that they put false health claims on the label.

Edit to add, I saw your Cheerio example.

Oats have been shown to reduce risk of heart disease.
And, I think there be studies that show hugs might also reduce risk of heart attacks.

And selling that product makes you a mystical drug pusher's holy pilgrimage site.

Statements like this make it difficult to have this conversation with you. It's clear - and has been explicitly stated to you over and over - that it's not simply selling homeopathic products that differentiates Whole Foods from, say, Shop Rite.

Your use of language such as this makes me want to simply not respond to you. You're not an argumentative troll like some others, so having to respond to this sort of sentence just makes me.. tired. If you want to engage on an honest intellectual level I am happy to do so, but I am becoming increasingly convinced you are less interested in understanding and honest debate than simply winning.

When you said you "completely disagreed" I thought you would have a specific example. But apparently you don't look for claims and advertising anymore?

Packaged food has an ingredient list, a nutrition label, and unless you can come up with an example, I still don't think that they put false health claims on the label.

Edit to add, I saw your Cheerio example.

Oats have been shown to reduce risk of heart disease.

Wonderful pomegranates provide a number of important nutrients including vitamin K, potassium and a variety of pomegranate polyphenols, making them an important part of a healthy and balanced diet.

Statements like this make it difficult to have this conversation with you. It's clear - and has been explicitly stated to you over and over - that it's not simply selling homeopathic products that differentiates Whole Foods from, say, Shop Rite.

Your use of language such as this makes me want to simply not respond to you. You're not an argumentative troll like some others, so having to respond to this sort of sentence just makes me.. tired. If you want to engage on an honest intellectual level I am happy to do so, but I am becoming increasingly convinced you are less interested in understanding and honest debate than simply winning.

Well, I think this bone has been chewed to death and should be quietly buried.

I think it's good to discuss the degree to which educated, relatively wealthy, and relatively left-leaning segments of society happily embrace pseudoscience and anti-science. I personally think Whole Foods embodies a lot of that: high prices, homeopathic products, featuring of products such as Master Cleanse with in-store demonstrations, warning signs that bread slicers are used for "conventional" bread, etc.

It's one thing to just sell homeopathic products. It's another to sell them while also having literal warning signs that bread slicers are used for non-organic bread in the aisle next to the Master Cleanse pitchman.

Whole Foods has built its brand and reputation on specifically appealing and pandering to this market.

Well, I think this bone has been chewed to death and should be quietly buried.

Oh, I don't know.

I think spurious health claims abound and it's good to discuss the deceptive, unethical or plain misguided practices that many companies use (yes, I am looking at WF here as well) to increase their profits and market share.

"May help reduce cholesterol as part of a balanced diet" (rather than just a balanced diet in itself), "half the saturated fat of ordinary yogurt" (lets not mention the huge amounts of sugar) etc.

honestly anything that has to go out of its way to shout "I'M HEALTHY!" probably isn't...

Yes, I think in many cases you are right.

I think it must be bewildering for many people to know if they are making valid choices towards their health given so much conflicting information or viewpoints out there.

I think that is an important theme of that article bearing the above in mind. People will place their trust in somewhere like WF to supply them items which are healthy rather than research all the science for themselves because in all honesty that would be exhausting. And where there is trust there is potential exploitation.

That is why we need open discussion and simpler nutrition frameworks in reality.