Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-22-2013, 09:22 AM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
10,581 posts, read 9,804,974 times
Reputation: 4174

Advertisements

Haven't seen the list. Does it include what quantities of each substance, there are in these foods?

I would be interested to know how many parts per billion of XXXX are in bread or whatever, and whether the quantities are above the levels where they have been found actually harmful.

For example, there is arsenic in nearly everyone's drinking water. Oh my gawd, arsenic is a deadly poison, isn't it? Yes, it is... in sufficient quantities. But if it is present in less than 50 parts per billion, it has no effect whatsoever on humans.

Arsenic exists naturally in rocks, soil, water, plants, and animals, and it always has. Back when humans were living in caves and chasing sabertooth tigers, there was arsenic in pretty much all water and foods. Tiny quantities, of course, just like now. Not nearly enough to hurt anyone or anything.

How many of these "horrible" substances this article is whining about, exist in foods and water in quantities far lower than can possibly do any damage? And how many governments came up with knee-jerk reactions at hearing the scary names of these substances, and banned them without finding out if there was even enough to matter?

These substances have been used as (irrelevant) political footballs for years, of course. For many decades, the EPA standard for arsenic in drinking water, was 50 parts per billion (ppb). Scientists and doctors had agreed for many years, that arsenic at this level or below did no harm whatsoever to anybody, young, old, male, female etc.

In the last few days of the Clinton administration, Clinton suddenly lowered the standard for arsenic in water, from 50ppb to 10ppb. When George W. Bush took office a few days later, he soon proposed raising the standard back up to the 50ppb it had been for decades. And Democrats screamed bloody murder, insisting that Bush was obviously trying to poison all our drinking water. My God, he's trying to QUINTUPLE the amount of arsenic - a deadly poison - in our water!!!

Is this list of dreadful substances that have been "banned" by other governments, more examples of the "United States trying to poison us all", as Bush's proposal to raise the arsenic standards was?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-22-2013, 09:31 AM
 
8,063 posts, read 3,961,341 times
Reputation: 5358
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmqueen View Post
Pure comedy gold: Watching cons whine about the FDA letting too many chemicals into our food on one thread, and whining about over-regulation on another. You can't make this stuff up!

'Food safety' is decidedly a left-wing pseudoscience.
(Granted, some right-wingers will jump at the chance to attack anything 'big government')
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2013, 10:10 AM
 
3,846 posts, read 2,391,201 times
Reputation: 390
When I entered the courtroom on first day of trial, with my team carrying boxes of files, rulebooks, depositions, interrogatories, etc., among which were, inter alia, a cooler packed with ice and bottles of "Pepsi", the judge greeted me with a warm handshake coupled with a friendly vocal amenity.

I apologized for "being cotton mouth" before the trial even began, and asked if I could drink a "refreshener" during the trial, which request the judge granted, but said it would prove to be unnecessary because it was only an informal hearing.

Well suh, I drank about a Pepsi an hour throughout the three-day long trial, through intense examination, cross-examination, and other testimony (one instance where a hostile witness fled the witness stand during my examination, and ran out of the courtroom screaming, "I don't know, I don't know".

It was the opposition counsel's first real trial experience and his tongue kept getting stuck to the roof of his mouth, especially when he was badgering with twisted leading questions.

On the second day of the trial, the judge brought a plate of orange sections, and when government counsel got his tongue stuck to the roof of his mouth, slid the plate over to the tongue-struck attorney, while I continued sipping and slurping and shaking the ice in my Pepsi glass.

Everyone in the courtroom was getting thirsty, but I was the only one who came prepared, and was granted special privilege.

The government attorney was insulted by the judge's attempt at "leveling the playing field", and rejected the orange sections (cut off his orange to spite his own tongue). He was trying to prove he was professional, and the judge's "help" only embarrassed his situation worse.

Pepsi, a poisoned drink for battling poisoned testimonies.

At one recess, I eyed the judge about to dispense Pepsi from a machine. When he saw me watching him, he switched to Mountain Dew. Hey, this judge ain't nobody's b*tch.

The trial went well for me, and I won my case - but lost my case.

It wasn't the REAL THING.

Last edited by Nonarchist; 06-22-2013 at 10:18 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2013, 10:22 AM
 
Location: LEAVING CD
22,974 posts, read 27,077,639 times
Reputation: 15645
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
Kraft makes a different brand of mac & cheese to sell in European countries that have banned GMO.
And if the US version is sold a warning label is put on it.
Annies Mac and Cheese, organic and all natural versions.
http://www.annies.com/products/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2013, 11:15 AM
 
Location: Midwest
38,496 posts, read 25,882,511 times
Reputation: 10791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuselage View Post
Good thing that we don't want government to protect citizens. It's much better when industry determines what is safe, right?

After all, consumers can vote with their wallets - never mind that they are not informed enough, educated enough, or are plain lied to by industry.

Works brilliantly: We're all fat, we take more medication than any other nation, most of our kids need to take pills to be "normal," etc.

I stated in another thread that my home-made bread has seven ingredients while the one from the grocery store has 115! Why? What are they? What do they do to my body and mind?
So true! Remember when the company that makes "Pink Slime" fought against us knowing what it actually was? This company knew that if we knew, we would stop buying their crap!

‘Pink Slime’ Maker AFA Files For Bankruptcy
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2013, 11:19 AM
 
Location: Midwest
38,496 posts, read 25,882,511 times
Reputation: 10791
Quote:
Originally Posted by GCharlotte View Post
Water can prevent carpets from catching fire too. It should be removed from our food.
Hey! Have all of this you want.

Quote:
3. Brominated vegetable oil: Makes food dye stick to liquid, but also may cause birth defects and major organ damage.
8 Foods We Eat In The U.S. That Are Banned In Other Countries
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2013, 12:24 PM
 
33,387 posts, read 34,932,378 times
Reputation: 20030
Quote:
Originally Posted by theunbrainwashed View Post
I also find the great irony in your post that you support an ideology that actively encourages to shovel this toxic crap into our grocery store shelves. I do what I do, and rethink what sort of political ideology you support. because, if Ron Paul had won, you can bet it would be even worse. Let's rmeember in the good ol' days before national food regulations, Coke was mixing cocaine into Coca-Cola
the last time cocaine was put in coca-cola as an ingredient was in 1906, just before congress told coke to eliminate that particular ingredient. also the amount of cocaine in coke was quite tiny.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ahzzie View Post
Hey All American, I thought you righties wanted the government to completely stop regulating business. Sounds like, from what you are complaining about, the government isn't doing enough to keep this crap out of our food. It also sounds like you would be in favor of tighter controls by the FDA to remedy this situation. Or is it that you guys want tighter controls of things that only affect you and leave everything else to the whim of free market governance?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahzzie View Post
I agree with you MJ. I think the FDA should be disbanded and replaced with an organization that regulates these things for the good of the people, not corporations. My point, though, is that the right wingers decry any and all government regulation but here we have an avowed hyper conservative complaining that the government is not doing enough to keep these chemicals out of our food. Hypocrisy bothers me no matter if it comes from the left or right.
what us conservatives want is proper regulation and oversight, not the over regulation or under regulation that has happened in the past.

as to the FDA, what needs to happen there is a reformation of the agency. there are something like 15 different government agencies that regulate our food supply, and we dont need that many. 3 or 4 would do nicely with properly defined areas that they each cover. right now its a mishmash of government agencies that have very poorly defined jobs, and as such food manufacturers ahve to run a gauntlet of rules and regulations from various agencies as to what is legal and what is not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2013, 12:30 PM
 
25,021 posts, read 27,993,085 times
Reputation: 11790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little-Acorn View Post
Haven't seen the list. Does it include what quantities of each substance, there are in these foods?

I would be interested to know how many parts per billion of XXXX are in bread or whatever, and whether the quantities are above the levels where they have been found actually harmful.

For example, there is arsenic in nearly everyone's drinking water. Oh my gawd, arsenic is a deadly poison, isn't it? Yes, it is... in sufficient quantities. But if it is present in less than 50 parts per billion, it has no effect whatsoever on humans.

Arsenic exists naturally in rocks, soil, water, plants, and animals, and it always has. Back when humans were living in caves and chasing sabertooth tigers, there was arsenic in pretty much all water and foods. Tiny quantities, of course, just like now. Not nearly enough to hurt anyone or anything.

How many of these "horrible" substances this article is whining about, exist in foods and water in quantities far lower than can possibly do any damage? And how many governments came up with knee-jerk reactions at hearing the scary names of these substances, and banned them without finding out if there was even enough to matter?

These substances have been used as (irrelevant) political footballs for years, of course. For many decades, the EPA standard for arsenic in drinking water, was 50 parts per billion (ppb). Scientists and doctors had agreed for many years, that arsenic at this level or below did no harm whatsoever to anybody, young, old, male, female etc.

In the last few days of the Clinton administration, Clinton suddenly lowered the standard for arsenic in water, from 50ppb to 10ppb. When George W. Bush took office a few days later, he soon proposed raising the standard back up to the 50ppb it had been for decades. And Democrats screamed bloody murder, insisting that Bush was obviously trying to poison all our drinking water. My God, he's trying to QUINTUPLE the amount of arsenic - a deadly poison - in our water!!!

Is this list of dreadful substances that have been "banned" by other governments, more examples of the "United States trying to poison us all", as Bush's proposal to raise the arsenic standards was?
So what's the issue with lowering arsenic levels down to 10ppb exactly? Why would you be ok with RAISING the limit of a known toxic substance is beyond me. I don't care if it's "non-toxic" or "less lethal" at 50ppb, 10ppb would be better. How about introducing a tiny quantity of mercury in our drinking water? Oh but if we just put mercury in there under "safe" levels, it'll be ok, right? What would you rather have? Mercury-free water or water with a "safe" amount of mercury in it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2013, 01:19 PM
 
Location: On the Group W bench
5,563 posts, read 4,272,767 times
Reputation: 2127
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
And the Dems are so apathetic of what is going on they have no opinion either way.
I do. I support the FDA and object to a lot of the crap that it lets into our food. I would like MORE regulation and always have.

So that's my Dem opinion. And I doubt you have a direct line into the mind of "the Dems", so this is pure rectal speculation on your part. As opposed to the cons who I can actually SEE trying to have it both ways on this board.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2013, 03:22 PM
 
10,553 posts, read 9,671,716 times
Reputation: 4784
Quote:
Originally Posted by All American NYC View Post
List of foods readily available in US grocery stores that are BANNED in other countries for containing dangerous chemicals




I find great irony the US fights this massive war on drugs, including organic products like marijuana, but has no problem with turning a blind eye to cancer aiding agents in our food.
Ewww..thanks for posting that.

I think a good guideline is to never eat something that has poly-syllabic ingredients that sound like something from a chemistry experiment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:15 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top