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?

24

Replies

  • Gisel2015
    Gisel2015 Posts: 4,186 Member
    Gisel2015 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.

    @janejellyroll already responded to your comment and with a lot of common sense. I will not make an additional comment because I know that I would start a very heated discussion that could derail the original posting.



  • tbright1965
    tbright1965 Posts: 852 Member
    It's almost as dumb as "Only shop on the perimeter of the grocery store".

    Our wine/beer aisle is on the perimeter of my grocery store.

    Seems like a green light to me :)
  • Gisel2015
    Gisel2015 Posts: 4,186 Member
    Gisel2015 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.

    Because you have self control!
  • tbright1965
    tbright1965 Posts: 852 Member
    edited October 2018
    Gisel2015 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.

    It would probably be helpful to be careful (I would say "mindful") in all aisles. I mean, produce is generally considered to be key to a healthy diet, but when I'm in the produce aisle in my particular grocery store I also see foods like caramel dip, pre-made mashed potatoes, full-fat salad dressings, and hummus. Nothing wrong with these foods, but they're calorie-dense and it would be ridiculous to say I can be less mindful of that because of the particular location of the store I'm standing in.

    Why wouldn't it be a better rule of thumb to be mindful in all aisles instead of just in the middle of the store?

    Oh, I don't disagree. The facts on the ground are as you say. There is all sorts of "danger" in the store.

    I would hope that people are not taking the rule that because the caramel apple wrappers are in the perimeter, they are "good to go."

    You know, the spirit of the rule sort of thing.

    Heck, I'm Libertarian, you do you. That's why I say if what I do helps you, use it. If not, do your own thing.

    What works for me is a cart full of fresh meat, poultry, eggs, a bit of dairy, fresh fruits or veggies. Lots of color in the cart. Less stuff in boxes or cans. I'll pick the frozen fajita veggies out of convenience for my omelette. But I'm not going to grab the pre-sauced veggie steamables. But I will get the 100 calorie pre-measured ice cream cups ;)

    But that's what, 5% of my 2000 calories/day?

    I don't need a bag of corn chips to mindlessly munch in front of the TV or at my desk at home.

    It's just a starting point. Really not much different from something like the food pyramid or other visualization tool that starts the conversation or thought process about what the fork we eat.

    One will find the bulk of their colorful diet in the perimeter of the store. That doesn't mean there will not be unhealthy things there too, or that they should never sally forth in the center of the market.
  • Lounmoun
    Lounmoun Posts: 8,423 Member
    It's almost as dumb as "Only shop on the perimeter of the grocery store".

    The perimeter of my local store is produce, deli, bakery (bread, cake), packaged snack cakes (twinkies) and brownies, raw meat, frozen prepared chicken strips and burger patties, lunchables, lunchmeat, cheese, bagels, milk, juice, usually snack food like crackers, chips, cookies or cereal that they want to push, eggs, other dairy products, water, alcohol, cookie dough, bread dough, and again chips and snack food, seasonal baking items, holiday cupcakes or cookies.
    Every non-perishable basic ingredient is located on an inner aisle in my store. There are no bulk bins along a wall. Flour, rice, beans, lentils, oatmeal, olive oil, spices, nuts, vinegar, shelf stable milk substitutes, etc are not on the perimeter. It is like this in most every grocery store I have been in. Some stores have a special "health food" section but the perimeter rule would skip most of that stuff too.

    I think these rules just confuse people about what is a healthy diet because taken at face value they have nothing to do with meeting your nutritional needs at all. You can't say only eat things you can pronounce or only shop the perimeter of the store and then come back when someone says what about dried lentils or oats and say well, obviously we all understood that I meant just be mindful in the whole store and buy food with less carbs/sugar, salt, food colorings or whatever you particularly think is a bad ingredient. If you want to encourage people to eat a less processed diet why not just say try to eat a mostly whole foods/fresh foods diet? It seems simple enough to fit any food buying situation.
  • garystrickland357
    garystrickland357 Posts: 598 Member
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Should you be able to pronounce the names of product ingredients?

    Yes adults should be able to pronounce words...learn some damn chemistry already general population, geez.

    I always appreciate and chuckle at your occasional bluntness.
  • RAinWA
    RAinWA Posts: 1,980 Member
    Johnd2000 wrote: »
    Completely off the point, but I often take pleasure mispronouncing words deliberately, when talking to subject experts. It’s a habit I picked up from my Dad, who once asked a Dr for his “hobgoblin count”.

    Glad I'm not the only one! My physical therapist asked where the tear on my rotator cuff was - I told her it was dorsal. She went to write it down and then exclaimed "no it isn't!"
  • cerise_noir
    cerise_noir Posts: 5,468 Member
    It's almost as dumb as "Only shop on the perimeter of the grocery store".
    That’s where the ice cream, candy and booze lives... :drinker:
  • hesn92
    hesn92 Posts: 5,966 Member
    edited November 2018
    Johnd2000 wrote: »
    Completely off the point, but I often take pleasure mispronouncing words deliberately, when talking to subject experts. It’s a habit I picked up from my Dad, who once asked a Dr for his “hobgoblin count”.

    my husband does that. It annoys me. He pronounces jalapeno "gel-opp-uh-no" and he pronounces paprika "pa-parka"

    On that note, he thinks it's stupid that words are not pronounced in the way they look like they should (such as thyme) and he will just say it with the "th" sound even though he knows it's wrong.
  • amandaeve
    amandaeve Posts: 723 Member
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    I mean just a quick primer on how to pronounce "chemical-sounding" names.

    Chemical names are derived from a collection of descriptive prefixes and suffixes that are often latin or greek derived. Our language is latin/greek derived so much of the pronounciation is the same. The reason chemical names look so strange is in our language latin prefixes are attached to some root where a lot of chemical names are just a bunch of prefixes and suffixes strung together.

    So using your examples

    ergocalciferol. Ergo-calci-fer-ol. Ergo as in...well...ergo in latin for work. Calci- as in calcium. Fer as in ferrous, as in iron, -ol as in acohol as in an -OH group.

    So from the name I can guess this compound has something to do with iron and calcium and probably has an alcohol group and I know how to pronounce it it Ergo-calci-fer-ol...even though i have never seen that name before because I know how to pronounce ergo, calcium, ferrous and alcohol so I just string those together ergo-calci-fer-ol

    That is the thing with chemical names, they are actually more descriptive than standard names like Apple. Apple doesn't tell you anything unless you know what an apple is already. But Ergocalciferol tells me whatever it is has something to do with iron calcium and likely has an alcohol group in it. So if i basically just interpreted the name it would be something that works with iron and calcium and is an alcohol (ie it has an -OH group on it somewhere).

    cholecalciferol

    Chole- as in cholesterol
    Calci- as in calcium
    fer- as in ferrous
    ol as in alchol. So if you can say cholesterol, calcium, ferrous and alcohol you can say chole-calci-fer-ol

    nicotinamide riboside

    Nicotin- as in nicotine
    -amide as in, well, amide...that one is a chemical term

    Ribo- as in ribose
    -ide is a chemistry suffix to name the negative ion such as chloride (Cl-) or hydroxide (OH-)

    So Nicotin-amide Ribos-ide

    dihydrogen monoxide

    Di- as in the latin for two
    Hydrogen, as in hydrogen
    Mon- as in the latin for one
    Ox - as in oxygen
    -ide is a chemistry suffix

    So Di-hydrogen Mon-ox-ide

    Each of these names tells you something about either what it is made of or what it does.

    -ide also has meaning; usually 2 different elements in the compound.

    Off topic sort of: As a chemistry major in college, I took great pleasure in reading shampoo labels when visiting friends (any label, really) and trying to build the molecular structures in my head. That was before this 'clean' movement so most people thought I was really weird.
  • mph323
    mph323 Posts: 3,565 Member
    I think the bottom-line stupidity of "don't eat it if you can't pronounce it" is that most people have their phones with them when they shop. If you can't pronounce it or don't know what it is, look it up, for pete's sake! Most of us aren't going to know the definition and pronunciation of words we don't use in everyday life, but we all know how to type the word into google and educate ourselves. People could get away with making up a woo rule like that in the days where you'd have to carry around a dictionary to look things up, but there's just no excuse in 2018.
  • tbright1965
    tbright1965 Posts: 852 Member
    mph323 wrote: »
    I think the bottom-line stupidity of "don't eat it if you can't pronounce it" is that most people have their phones with them when they shop. If you can't pronounce it or don't know what it is, look it up, for pete's sake! Most of us aren't going to know the definition and pronunciation of words we don't use in everyday life, but we all know how to type the word into google and educate ourselves. People could get away with making up a woo rule like that in the days where you'd have to carry around a dictionary to look things up, but there's just no excuse in 2018.

    I find myself saying this about a lot of things.

    I see someone whinging on TV about getting ripped off at the car dealer. Didn't they spend some time reviewing car buying or financing tips to learn that paying $1k for pin strips and fuzzy dice was a bad idea. Or that they might want to see if they can get a better interest rate/terms from a bank not being sold by the dealer? Or what others were paying for the new car they are looking at.

    It's hard to feel sorry for people who don't even take 30 seconds to do a bit of research.

    (But I have enjoyed the look on the guy/gal in the finance office when they give the doom and gloom scenarios about what might happen if you don't get the extended warranty. I suggest that perhaps buying the car isn't such a good idea if they have to offer extended warranties as part of the sale. Or that I could put that sort of money into repairing or upgrading my existing car with new wheels or a bluetooth head unit and not have to spend $30k on a new one....)

    It's not just food ingredients, it's a whole host of things.

    But then again, people think ACV is going to cure them.

    Hope sells.

    It may not work, at least not on it's own, but it sure sells.
  • Aaron_K123
    Aaron_K123 Posts: 7,122 Member
    edited November 2018
    amandaeve wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    I mean just a quick primer on how to pronounce "chemical-sounding" names.

    Chemical names are derived from a collection of descriptive prefixes and suffixes that are often latin or greek derived. Our language is latin/greek derived so much of the pronounciation is the same. The reason chemical names look so strange is in our language latin prefixes are attached to some root where a lot of chemical names are just a bunch of prefixes and suffixes strung together.

    So using your examples

    ergocalciferol. Ergo-calci-fer-ol. Ergo as in...well...ergo in latin for work. Calci- as in calcium. Fer as in ferrous, as in iron, -ol as in acohol as in an -OH group.

    So from the name I can guess this compound has something to do with iron and calcium and probably has an alcohol group and I know how to pronounce it it Ergo-calci-fer-ol...even though i have never seen that name before because I know how to pronounce ergo, calcium, ferrous and alcohol so I just string those together ergo-calci-fer-ol

    That is the thing with chemical names, they are actually more descriptive than standard names like Apple. Apple doesn't tell you anything unless you know what an apple is already. But Ergocalciferol tells me whatever it is has something to do with iron calcium and likely has an alcohol group in it. So if i basically just interpreted the name it would be something that works with iron and calcium and is an alcohol (ie it has an -OH group on it somewhere).

    cholecalciferol

    Chole- as in cholesterol
    Calci- as in calcium
    fer- as in ferrous
    ol as in alchol. So if you can say cholesterol, calcium, ferrous and alcohol you can say chole-calci-fer-ol

    nicotinamide riboside

    Nicotin- as in nicotine
    -amide as in, well, amide...that one is a chemical term

    Ribo- as in ribose
    -ide is a chemistry suffix to name the negative ion such as chloride (Cl-) or hydroxide (OH-)

    So Nicotin-amide Ribos-ide

    dihydrogen monoxide

    Di- as in the latin for two
    Hydrogen, as in hydrogen
    Mon- as in the latin for one
    Ox - as in oxygen
    -ide is a chemistry suffix

    So Di-hydrogen Mon-ox-ide

    Each of these names tells you something about either what it is made of or what it does.

    -ide also has meaning; usually 2 different elements in the compound.

    Off topic sort of: As a chemistry major in college, I took great pleasure in reading shampoo labels when visiting friends (any label, really) and trying to build the molecular structures in my head. That was before this 'clean' movement so most people thought I was really weird.

    Now they probably just assume you are a shill.

    My background is biology not chemistry, I just happen to have the basics in chemistry. If I butchered anything above my apologies. I guess I knew that about -ide but wasn't sure how that related to -amide....because I am not sure what the "am" part would reference. I mean I know what an amide is...but I never thought of it as being an -am-ide. I guess come to think of it though am-monia, am-ine, am-ino...all have nitrogen, so i'd guess am- refers to nitrogen?
  • jenilla1
    jenilla1 Posts: 11,118 Member
    I can pronounce all that crap. I've taken plenty of chem classes and I'm a proficient reader with a strong phonics background. Even if I don't know what something is, I can sound it out properly following basic rules of the language. Because I can "speak" the ingredients properly, does it make it safer for me to eat certain things than it is for someone who is less educated and can't pronounce the ingredients? I guess an illiterate person has to starve to death.

    I don't see how being able to read/pronounce words has any bearing on the safety of a product. The definition of a word is more important than the spelling. If there's a harmless (or even beneficial) chemical compound with a complicated name in my protein bar, I don't care. If there's something toxic in there I don't care how easy it is to say (take lead, for example) I'm not having it. Who cares if you can say it or not? If you don't know what something is, you have access to all kinds of information online - look it up.
  • amandaeve
    amandaeve Posts: 723 Member
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    amandaeve wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    I mean just a quick primer on how to pronounce "chemical-sounding" names.

    Chemical names are derived from a collection of descriptive prefixes and suffixes that are often latin or greek derived. Our language is latin/greek derived so much of the pronounciation is the same. The reason chemical names look so strange is in our language latin prefixes are attached to some root where a lot of chemical names are just a bunch of prefixes and suffixes strung together.

    So using your examples

    ergocalciferol. Ergo-calci-fer-ol. Ergo as in...well...ergo in latin for work. Calci- as in calcium. Fer as in ferrous, as in iron, -ol as in acohol as in an -OH group.

    So from the name I can guess this compound has something to do with iron and calcium and probably has an alcohol group and I know how to pronounce it it Ergo-calci-fer-ol...even though i have never seen that name before because I know how to pronounce ergo, calcium, ferrous and alcohol so I just string those together ergo-calci-fer-ol

    That is the thing with chemical names, they are actually more descriptive than standard names like Apple. Apple doesn't tell you anything unless you know what an apple is already. But Ergocalciferol tells me whatever it is has something to do with iron calcium and likely has an alcohol group in it. So if i basically just interpreted the name it would be something that works with iron and calcium and is an alcohol (ie it has an -OH group on it somewhere).

    cholecalciferol

    Chole- as in cholesterol
    Calci- as in calcium
    fer- as in ferrous
    ol as in alchol. So if you can say cholesterol, calcium, ferrous and alcohol you can say chole-calci-fer-ol

    nicotinamide riboside

    Nicotin- as in nicotine
    -amide as in, well, amide...that one is a chemical term

    Ribo- as in ribose
    -ide is a chemistry suffix to name the negative ion such as chloride (Cl-) or hydroxide (OH-)

    So Nicotin-amide Ribos-ide

    dihydrogen monoxide

    Di- as in the latin for two
    Hydrogen, as in hydrogen
    Mon- as in the latin for one
    Ox - as in oxygen
    -ide is a chemistry suffix

    So Di-hydrogen Mon-ox-ide

    Each of these names tells you something about either what it is made of or what it does.

    -ide also has meaning; usually 2 different elements in the compound.

    Off topic sort of: As a chemistry major in college, I took great pleasure in reading shampoo labels when visiting friends (any label, really) and trying to build the molecular structures in my head. That was before this 'clean' movement so most people thought I was really weird.

    Now they probably just assume you are a shill.

    My background is biology not chemistry, I just happen to have the basics in chemistry. If I butchered anything above my apologies. I guess I knew that about -ide but wasn't sure how that related to -amide....because I am not sure what the "am" part would reference. I mean I know what an amide is...but I never thought of it as being an -am-ide. I guess come to think of it though am-monia, am-ine, am-ino...all have nitrogen, so i'd guess am- refers to nitrogen?

    Well, I can't claim you butchered anything...I studied 20 years ago and I haven't used it since. I've forgotten much and am likely worse than the average lay person because I think I know things. In fact, I might be wrong already, because I think -ide in amide identifies the ion. I should step back anyway, as NO one ever said "dihydrogen monoxide" back then. I don't know where that ever came from. I'm sure there are more chem savvy people on this forum than me....maybe they'll comment....
  • paperpudding
    paperpudding Posts: 9,282 Member
    My response always to the 'don't eat if you can't pronounce it' mantra is to ask what happens if I have a lisp and I can't pronounce spinach - I shouldn't eat it????
    What if I have a disability and I can't speak at all and therefore can't pronounce anything - what do I eat????

    That is a rhetorical question, of course - but I think demonstrates how silly such a rule is.
  • lynn_glenmont
    lynn_glenmont Posts: 10,093 Member
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Companies today just do the same thing with laws and convolution, including sometimes trying to hide what ingredients are present with words that are hard to comprehend, or conversely, with words that are easy to comprehend but give the wrong impression. (they do not use technical words AND simplistic ones in the same product for no reason, you know?)

    No..they really don't. Don't confuse the lay-public's ignorance of chemistry with attempts at misdirection or confusion. The ingredients listed on boxes are the names of those ingredients, they don't have other names and there isn't some sort of misdirection. Maltodextrine is maltodextrine...that is what it is called....if you don't know what that is I am not sure why the company that posts it as an ingredient is to blame for your lack of knowledge. I'm not claiming that everyone should know everything about everything that would be ridiculous...but to act like if you don't know something it is because of some sinister plot is a bit ridiculous too.

    If there's a widely understood word for something (e.g., water), and manufacturers intentionally use a different word or phrase relatively few people understand (e.g., dihydrogen monoxide), yeah, I'm pretty sure they're intentionally trying to confuse.

    My favorite example of this, although not a chemical name, is labels that list "evaporated cane juice" as an ingredient. Because they don't want consumers to know the food product has sugar in it.