The Truth About Healthy Eating

[Gondwanaland]

I felt great when I was eating pizzas and staying out until 1 a.m (granted I was younger at that time)

I was on a pretty clean diet which included whole grains and delicious home baked pizzas with the best and freshest ingredients and nevertheless got Metabolic Syndrome (high TG, NAFLD, Rosacea etc). At some point the microbiome / liver get so degraded from meds, abx, environmental toxins, past viral & bacterial infections that we just can't get away anymore. So if possible it is best to reverse MetSyn from the top of the other issues. If healthy people suffer from it, I believe it will have an even greater impact on the people at PR.

 

[Jigsaw]

As soon as something is labeled "The Truth About.." alarm bells should go off.

Quite so. It should say, "The Truth About Getting People To Believe Blatant Lies, part 307 of an interminable series."

I got to about 4 minutes in when the nutritionist said that rapeseed oil is just as good as coconut.

Some nutritionist!

 

[arewenearlythereyet]

Wh

Whether a food is "good" or "bad" largely depends on how it affects me.

If it gives me a headache, makes me nauseous, sends me to groggy sleep, gives me puffy eyes, etc, I don't care if it's supposed to be the healthiest superfood on the planet, I'm not going to eat it.

Having said that, I'm surprised you aren't more cautious when it comes to processed foods. Do you not suffer from any chemical or food and drink sensitivities? I don't care how tightly regulated processed foods are, they are still full of pesticides, herbicides, hormones, preservatives, etc.

Value chicken and beef are chock-full of oestrogen, which is a major no-no for me because of the oestrogen breast cancer.

Whilst breast cancer may apply less to you than me, oestrogen drives prostate cancer, too.

Yeah it's this sort of blanket scaremongering that is just ridiculous ......pesticide residues are heavily regulated and tested for on a positive release basis ...so no food is not packed with pesticides. Preservatives are added so that you don't die from eating foods. Again this is also a blanket statement since many foods use cooking, temperature control, water activity, acidification or freezing to preserve them rather than additives such as potassium sorbate etc. Salt is a preservative...is this something to avoid? If you check the label you will see that not all processed food has preservatives added. So respectfully this is a gross exaggeration.

I don't have chemical sensitivities or allergies to food so luckily don't have to modify my diet too much....thanks for asking and your considered advice

 

[Jigsaw]

Yeah it's this sort of blanket scaremongering that is just ridiculous ......pesticide residues are heavily regulated and tested for on a positive release basis ...so no food is not packed with pesticides. Preservatives are added so that you don't die from eating foods. Again this is also a blanket statement since many foods use cooking, temperature control, water activity, acidification or freezing to preserve them rather than additives such as potassium sorbate etc. Salt is a preservative...is this something to avoid? If you check the label you will see that not all processed food has preservatives added. So respectfully this is a gross exaggeration.

I don't have chemical sensitivities or allergies to food so luckily don't have to modify my diet too much....thanks for asking and your considered advice

We clearly have different definitions of "processed". By processed, I mean foods that have had things (often artificial) added and or removed (often natural). And no, don't be facetious, you know very well I advocate unrefined salt use, but yes, I DO avoid NaCl table salt because of the anti-caking aluminium and general lack of the originally present minerals.

Preservatives are added so that you don't die from eating foods

Do you mean to imply that eating foods that have no preservatives will kill people? Gosh, I'd better stop eating apples and raspberries and rosemary and mint from my garden! What about fresh. or frozen, meat and fish? Do they have preservatives other than NaCl in them? I do know that it is reportedly common practice for supermarket warehouses to spray their green veg with chlorophyll to keep it looking green and fresh, when it's often anything but. I would rather use frozen broccoli because of this, or real fresh organic brocc.

It isn't blanket scaremongering to be aware of the synthetic hormone levels of the meat products widely available to us., and the impact those have on health in general and different cancers in particular. Because of my situation, I've researched oestrogen extensively since my dx in 2007, and was aware of oestrogen use in farming a long time before that. Excess oestrogen is stored in fat cells, and it makes the animals heavier, which means they fetch a better price at market than any scrawny counterpart.

Information and knowledge are the only real tools any of us have at our disposal when it comes to wanting to either be healthy or avoid specific cancers. I am not a scaremonger. All anyone can do is share knowledge. No-one is under any obligation to either accept or believe it

Have you read "The Great Food Gamble" by John Humphrys? I'll lend it to you when I see you, if you like. I would respectfully suggest you take a closer look at food production, in particular meat production, and familiarise yourself with the wide-spread use of anti-biotics, growth hormone, and oestrogen, to name but three common intensive farming practices when it comes to beef and chicken production.

 

[Mij]

I DO avoid NaCl table salt because of the anti-caking aluminium and general lack of the originally present minerals.

My understanding is that table and sea salt both contain the same nutritional value. I prefer sea salt for the reason you stated and I also prefer the taste.

 

[arewenearlythereyet]

We clearly have different definitions of "processed". By processed, I mean foods that have had things (often artificial) added and or removed (often natural). And no, don't be facetious, you know very well I advocate unrefined salt use, but yes, I DO avoid NaCl table salt because of the anti-caking aluminium and general lack of the originally present minerals.


Do you mean to imply that eating foods that have no preservatives will kill people? Gosh, I'd better stop eating apples and raspberries and rosemary and mint from my garden! What about fresh. or frozen, meat and fish? Do they have preservatives other than NaCl in them? I do onow that it is reportedly common practice for supermarket warehouses to spray their green veg with chlorophyll to keep it looking green and fresh, when it's often anything but. I would rather use frozen broccoli because of this, or real fresh organic brocc.

It isn't blanket scaremongering to be aware of the synthetic hormone levels of the meat products widely available to us., and the impact those have on health in general and different cancers in particular. Because of my situation, I've researched oestrogen extensively since my dx in 2007, and was aware of oestrogen use in farming a long time before that. Excess oestrogen is stored in fat cells, and it makes the animals heavier, which means they fetch a better price at market than any scrawny counterpart.

Information and knowledge are the only real tools any of us have at our disposal when it comes to wanting to either be healthy or avoid specific cancers. I am not a scaremonger. All anyone can do is share knowledge. No-one is under any obligation to either accept or believe it

Have you read "The Great Food Gamble" by John Humphrys? I'll lend it to you when I see you, if you like. I would respectfully suggest you take a closer look at food production, in particular meat production, and familiarise yourself with the wide-spread use of anti-biotics, growth hormone, and oestrogen, to name but three common intensive farming practices when it comes to beef and chicken production.

No I didn't imply that ....Preservation when used is designed to prevent microbial and chemical food spoilage and to prevent food poisoning so yes it is used to prevent sickness and death Freezing is also a preservation technique for the same reason?

I would suggest that additives and toxins are not the issue with processed foods and certainly not as you describe. The problem with processed foods is more about cheap food reducing the nutritional value of foods (using water ...eg ice glazes in prawns, or air.....cheap mousses, or cheap fat as in low meat content sausages and burgers etc.) There is no conspiracy though since its all on the label and you get what you pay for.

I am well familiar with food production having had a career in it for over 25 years. Your claim about chlorophyll is very strange however. I honestly don't know what source you are getting this from. Having supplied into most of the supermarkets fresh produce and supplied frozen produce also in the past I can confirm that this is something I've never heard of. I don't even know how that would even be possible from a practical point of view....copper chlorophyll in its water soluble form is extremely unstable when exposed to light....it goes brown very quickly. So even if your claim were true...why would the supermarket reduce the shelf life further by spraying copper chlorophyll in water on the produce? The main issue facing fresh produce is controlling humidity during storage not adding to it. This is also illegal if an additive of this sort is added and not declared at the point of sale. Perhaps you are confusing modified atmosphere that keeps the food fresher longer and controls ripening? There are also timing issues to do with light exposure during harvest and of course breeding that can improve the natural chlorophyll content of fresh produce. I've never heard of painting the food in the warehouse? What a strange and bizarre claim.

I honestly think you are grossly misinformed on this. Perhaps provide some substantiation for where you heard this?.

 

[Jigsaw]

My understanding is that table and sea salt both contain the same nutritional value. I prefer sea salt for the reason you stated and I also prefer the taste.

No, table salt is stripped of every mineral except sodium and chloride. Table salt is NaCl. It also gets bleached to make it that very pure-looking white, and has "flow agents" or "anti-caking agents" like aluminium added to it. Any iodine added to it after everything else has been stripped has a tendency to evaporate, and is in tiny proportions. You'd need to eat a lot of grams of table salt to get even the RDA of iodine, assuming there is any left in it after it's been open for a while. I've got a reference for this somewhere, I'll see if I can find it for you.

But you're right - I agree that unrefined salt tastes a lot bettr than table salt!

I put a thread up earlier which lists the quantities of every one of the 80-something minerals in Himalayan pink salt.

I'll copy the link over so you can see exactly what you get with Himalayan pink salt - I haven't found a spectral analysis for other unrefined salts yet, but I'll post it if I find one. It's eay to assume sea-salts and Himalayan salt are all the same, nutrient-wise, but until I see a proper analysis, I can't say one way or the other.

- Here's the link:
http://forums.phoenixrising.me/inde...alt-salt-loading-sole-general-interest.51036/

 

[Jigsaw]

No I didn't imply that ....Preservation when used is designed to prevent microbial and chemical food spoilage and to prevent food poisoning so yes it is used to prevent sickness and death Freezing is also a preservation technique for the same reason?

I would suggest that additives and toxins are not the issue with processed foods and certainly not as you describe. The problem with processed foods is more about cheap food reducing the nutritional value of foods (using water ...eg ice glazes in prawns, or air.....cheap mousses, or cheap fat as in low meat content sausages and burgers etc.) There is no conspiracy though since its all on the label and you get what you pay for.

I am well familiar with food production having had a career in it for over 25 years. Your claim about chlorophyll is very strange however. I honestly don't know what source you are getting this from. Having supplied into most of the supermarkets fresh produce and supplied frozen produce also in the past I can confirm that this is something I've never heard of. I don't even know how that would even be possible from a practical point of view....copper chlorophyll in its water soluble form is extremely unstable when exposed to light....it goes brown very quickly. So even if your claim were true...why would the supermarket reduce the shelf life further by spraying copper chlorophyll in water on the produce? The main issue facing fresh produce is controlling humidity during storage not adding to it. This is also illegal if an additive of this sort is added and not declared at the point of sale. Perhaps you are confusing modified atmosphere that keeps the food fresher longer and controls ripening? There are also timing issues to do with light exposure during harvest and of course breeding that can improve the natural chlorophyll content of fresh produce. I've never heard of painting the food in the warehouse? What a strange and bizarre claim.

I honestly think you are grossly misinformed on this. Perhaps provide some substantiation for where you heard this?.

I was told this by someone also in the food industry, and had no reason to disbelieve them.

 

[Mij]

@Jigsaw I watched a program several months ago where they analysed (in a lab) the mineral content in table vs sea salt and the difference was less than 1%.

 

[Valentijn]

Oh, and so does ignoring the "advice" about avoiding eggs, butter, fat in general, full cream milk, salt, whatever the latest fad-scare is.

Yes, cholesterol avoidance was a fad based on assumptions that turned out to be false. We absorb very little of the cholesterol we eat (it mostly goes right out the other end), and our bodies respond to the little that is absorbed by producing less of it. There should be no dietary limit based on cholesterol content, yet it's taking a while for government bureaucracies to catch up with the science.

this attitude that all food processors are on the con is just not my experience in the uk.

A great many food manufacturers will do backflips to try to hide the presence of free glutamatic acid (MSG/E621) in their foods. They've got a dozen different names for it, and I have to read the ingredients of most foods to make sure it isn't included. Approximately half of the meat products on sale at any given time in our local supermarket contain it, all potato or tortilla chips except plain salted ones, most salad dressings, most soups and mixes, most sauces and mixes. My favorite use of MSG so far is when it's put in organic products as "organic yeast extract"

Putting taste enhancers into processed food is standard practice, and it's a big pain in the ass for the minority of us who are sensitive to them. It's not a minor problem for many of us either - in my case, it means a migraine 23 hours after eating the crap. It's also implicated as a trigger of stroke-like episodes in MELAS (which I suspect I have), meaning these asshole corporations are hiding the inclusion of an ingredient which can cause brain damage to some people.

So - processed food is very annoying and inconvenient to me, and I strongly prefer unprocessed. Nearly all food processors are adding crap to their products, if you bother to read in the ingredients, and the safest way to avoid that is by eating unprocessed. Easier said than done with ME, but packaged pre-chopped veggies and meats can be a big help.

 

[arewenearlythereyet]

I was told this by someone also in the food industry, and had no reason to disbelieve them.

Well your source appears to have very little knowledge of the basics of food storage it seems. I would take whatever he/she says in the future with a pinch of Himalayan or regular table salt.

 

[arewenearlythereyet]

Yes, cholesterol avoidance was a fad based on assumptions that turned out to be false. We absorb very little of the cholesterol we eat (it mostly goes right out the other end), and our bodies respond to the little that is absorbed by producing less of it. There should be no dietary limit based on cholesterol content, yet it's taking a while for government bureaucracies to catch up with the science.


A great many food manufacturers will do backflips to try to hide the presence of free glutamatic acid (MSG/E621) in their foods. They've got a dozen different names for it, and I have to read the ingredients of most foods to make sure it isn't included. Approximately half of the meat products on sale at any given time in our local supermarket contain it, all potato or tortilla chips except plain salted ones, most salad dressings, most soups and mixes, most sauces and mixes. My favorite use of MSG so far is when it's put in organic products as "organic yeast extract"

Putting taste enhancers into processed food is standard practice, and it's a big pain in the ass for the minority of us who are sensitive to them. It's not a minor problem for many of us either - in my case, it means a migraine 23 hours after eating the crap. It's also implicated as a trigger of stroke-like episodes in MELAS (which I suspect I have), meaning these asshole corporations are hiding the inclusion of an ingredient which can cause brain damage to some people.

So - processed food is very annoying an inconvenient to me, and I strongly prefer unprocessed. Nearly all food processors are adding crap to their products, if you bother to read in the ingredients, and the safest way to avoid that is by eating unprocessed. Easier said than done with ME, but packaged pre-chopped veggies and meats can be a big help.

I don't think manufacturers are "doing back flips" hiding glutamate as you suggest....this is the sort of sensationalist conspiracy theory put out by a lot of ill informed self hacked style websites, oh and that literary milestone the daily mail.

Added Msg has to be declared by law in the EU so the choice is yours buy or not, there is no hiding it from the consumer by not declaring it as you suggest. If you find a product with added msg you believe is "hidden", Report it to trading standards or the equivalent in the Netherlands. This is illegal.

My experience is that most food manufacturers take labelling extremely seriously. For own label products the specification is drawn up by a technically trained person at the manufacturer, checked by the technical person at the retailer, amended if required, sent to a legal expert for further checking before the artwork for the label is created. It then goes through the same checks to approve the artwork. The spec systems use automated software to highlight policies and advise of compliance issues. There are specific training courses that people need to go on before they can write spedpcifications. It's very rigorous to ensure compliance to the law and takes about 13 weeks to sign off every label.

A whole raft of products in the uk had msg removed from them in the late 1990's as concerns were raised about the potential harmful effects of it (later found to be a storm in a teacup) as far as I'm aware those ingredients still remain removed. The same for HVP. There should be lots of products available without msg because it's use is still questioned and challenged during development today.

Glutamate is also used in the creation of savoury flavourings, particularly meat flavourings. It's also present in yeast extract, soy sauce etc. I don't consider these things to be "crap" because some people have an intolerance to them. Glutamate is key at creating "umami" and savoury flavour in food. The manufacturers are supplying a market. People like to eat things that are flavoured and have done so for thousands of years.

As far as free glutamate is concerned, you imply that greedy manufacturers are somehow deceiving people and "adding crap". The trouble is that ingredients are expensive (particularly flavourings) and only added unless it has a purpose and the use of added ingredients is heavily legislated for and is transparent via labelling. So you I'll see the word "flavourings" "yeast extract", "soy sauce" etc or anything else you want to avoid labelled for you. The labels also,include the main allergens in bold now to make it easier to spot.

Having said all that there are always cheap branded imported products that may try and pull a fast one. False inclusion of non declared ingredients is illegal in the eu ....and the cost of getting found out is very punitive. If ordered to remove product from shelves due to mislabelling, the costs of doing so and the fine from the retailer are extremely punitive. Depending upon the scale this can be up to half a million pounds. I assure you most manufacturers would find that difficult to swallow. They have a vested interest to get it right.

So no I strongly disagree with your claim that "nearly all food processors are adding crap"

I understand your frustration with wanting more information on this, but as you said it is a relatively rare condition and you do have plenty of alternatives to eating the 10% or so of processed food that has it in (mostly savoury). The frustration with having to check labels is not the manufacturers fault when they clearly label the ingredients for you. It's a pain because of the condition and that the legislation governing the manufacturers doesn't break down ingredients further to the molecular level you would like.

 

[Valentijn]

I don't think manufacturers are "doing back flips" hiding glutamate as you suggest....this is the sort of sensationalist conspiracy theory put out by a lot of ill informed self hacked style websites, oh and that literary milestone the daily mail.

No, it's based on reading the labels, and the known chemical structure and properties of the substances involved. Yeast extract is a huge source of MSG, and has the same properties of MSG. This isn't a bizarre conspiracy theory. Yet a great many manufacturers, knowing the widespread dislike of MSG, use the harmless sounding yeast extract as one alternative.

I don't consider these things to be "crap" because some people have an intolerance to them.

They're crap because they aim to mimic a flavor which the product naturally lacks. In the case of meats, it's added to intensify flavors which have been diluted by the use of fake fillers, low quality meats, and lack of real flavoring from herbs and spices.

People like to eat things that are flavoured and have done so for thousands of years.

I don't see the relevance. Did I claim people eat this stuff and drop dead before they can reproduce? Obviously not. But people arguably doing something for thousands of years doesn't mean it's a good idea.

And people certainly haven't been shoving MSG and yeast extract into a large variety of food products for thousands of years.

So you I'll see the word "flavourings" "yeast extract", "soy sauce" etc or anything else you want to avoid labelled for you.

So you are admitting that there are many terms used other than the most honest ones, which I also need to look for. And I still don't know if "flavorings" are safe - and how about "natural flavorings"? I have to guess, or grossly reduce my food choices to be on the safe side. Simply because some corporate assholes don't want to call it MSG or E621.

 

[arewenearlythereyet]

No, it's based on reading the labels, and the known chemical structure and properties of the substances involved. Yeast extract is a huge source of MSG, and has the same properties of MSG. This isn't a bizarre conspiracy theory. Yet a great many manufacturers, knowing the widespread dislike of MSG, use the harmless sounding yeast extract as one alternative.

They're crap because they aim to mimic a flavor which the product naturally lacks. In the case of meats, it's added to intensify flavors which have been diluted by the use of fake fillers, low quality meats, and lack of real flavoring from herbs and spices.

I don't see the relevance. Did I claim people eat this stuff and drop dead before they can reproduce? Obviously not. But people arguably doing something for thousands of years doesn't mean it's a good idea.

And people certainly haven't been shoving MSG and yeast extract into a large variety of food products for thousands of years.

So you are admitting that there are many terms used other than the most honest ones, which I also need to look for. And I still don't know if "flavorings" are safe - and how about "natural flavorings"? I have to guess, or grossly reduce my food choices to be on the safe side. Simply because some corporate assholes don't want to call it MSG or E621.

My point is there isn't a widespread dislike of Umami flavour ....people love it. People have been using all sorts of flavourings to enhance their food for thousands of years. The origins of soy sauce is also quite old I seem to recall. The glutamate in yeast extract is classed as natural origin which is why it has a "cleaner label". Are you saying that manufacturers shouldn't use yeast extract at all? Just because it has glutamate in it doesn't mean that its wrong. I concede your point on just because we have been doing it for 1000's of years doesn't make it right though. I guess this boils down to a matter of informed choice.

Soy sauce and yeast extract like all foods have a multitude of constituents that you could break down to the small molecular level. However you wouldn't be able to break down ad infinitum without having a label bigger than the package. So this is a balancing thing from a legislation point of view vs the confusion that is created by breaking things down to a molecular level. Its like breaking down the amounts of sugars and flavanoids in wine. At some point you have to stop labeling from a practical point of view. Most labeling is based on enforcing legislation.

Most flavourings added in EU food nowadays are natural flavourings,not artificial or nature identical. The main exception is sugar confectionery where the high boiling point is problematic for natural flavour degradation.

To clarify your point on Meats...what meats are you referring to ? Meat products are very highly regulated from breed, slaughter, processing and packaging and are certainly labelled very clearly. Fresh meat cant be labelled as such if it has added flavourings or fillers (whatever they are). I'm not sure what meats you are referring to but my general rule of thumb is that anything with a gravy or sauce, coating or marinade can have flavouring added to it.

I am unaware of any fresh meat that has meat style flavourings added to it to enhance flavour or these fake fillers you are talking about. Cured meats have smoking and spices etc? That has nothing to do with it lacking flavour...its about adding flavour to make a meat product more appealing...like making a stew at home? The only area that may need enhancing is anything that has been canned or other retorted products. This again is due to the high temperatures involved. So canned meat products and soups sometimes add enhancers. There is an Australian company I'm aware of that retorts meat products in pouches that are ambient stable (lamb shanks in mint sauce etc). This cant be labelled as fresh meat since it is an added value long life meat product. Reformed meat is a whole other thing. But again this is labelled very clearly.

With regards to "honest labeling" I'm not sure what you are getting at. Perhaps describe what you would like to see rather than just come up with blaming these fictitious corporations. There are very few very large food manufacturers if you look at the split of number of suppliers supplying supermarkets in Europe and the number of products they list. This is different in the USA where branded companies are far more dominant. Europe is different mainly due to it being a bit older with a lot of different cultures that have developed different food traditions over a smaller geographic area. Europe has a much larger "own label" proportion of food sales than the USA. There is therefore far more diversity in the supply chain meaning more independently owned and specialist suppliers (i.e. smaller not big corporations).

My advice (for what its worth) to make it easier is to avoid brands and buy own label, trust the label declaration and avoid savoury products that have the word Flavouring in the ingredients list. There is no obligation for suppliers to state natural or artificial on the label unless they have a claim on pack, but if you buy own label you can clarify their policy via the customer help line. Queries from customers get channeled back to the technical person responsible for the product specification and they can confirm details that are not presented on pack. Branded companies don't do this so much !

Meat flavors are quite different to other flavourings in that many are reacted together in a lot of cases using amino acids (I'm simplifying this a lot). Sweet flavours are mainly mixtures of more aromatic chemicals (natural). It is complex. A strawberry flavour could have as many as 200 individual components. When you drill down a lot of these they are derived from natural extracts etc. (vanilla beans, menthol, etc etc). Hopefully that explains a bit why labeling all 200 would be impractical. That is why specific allergens are called out (e.g. celery extract used in a flavouring).

The same could be applied to legislation for added ingredients with glutamate in them, however glutamic acid is an amino acid and naturally present in many many foods, so proving it was added or naturally present may be problematic from an analytical point of view. At the moment though there is no legislation for declaring naturally occurring glutamate.

I have quite a bit of resources available to me in terms of retailer policies EU law etc. PM me if you want any more specific help working out any of the legal label side of things.

 

[Jigsaw]

@Jigsaw I watched a program several months ago where they analysed (in a lab) the mineral content in table vs sea salt and the difference was less than 1%.

That 1%, if that's a true figure, will probably be all the other minerals that are stll present in unrefined salts. You can "prove" all manner of "facts" if you try hard enough and use the right criteria. If you look at the figures I've reported at the start of this thread, unrefined salt is still predominantly sodium and chloride. Table salt is only sodium and chloride, plus anti-caking agents and possibly iodine.

Nature puts things together for a reason. I personally prefer unadulterated unrefined salt with no anti-caking agents and a full complement of naturally occuring minerals

 

[Jigsaw]

That is how I eat, unfortunately healthy food is toxic to me (not to mention industrialized stuff) I am looking into taking phenol enzymes based on the good effects I got from anti-glycation supplement (to unbound carbohydrate from phenols)

Hi @Gondwanaland

- What do you mean, "healthy food is toxic to me"? Do you mean you have food intolerances?

 

[Gondwanaland]

Hi @Gondwanaland

- What do you mean, "healthy food is toxic to me"? Do you mean you have food intolerances?

Yes, phenols (mainly salicycilates), oxalates, you name it

 

[arewenearlythereyet]

That 1%, if that's a true figure, will probably be all the other minerals that are stll present in unrefined salts. You can "prove" all manner of "facts" if you try hard enough and use the right criteria. If you look at the figures I've reported at the start of this thread, unrefined salt is still predominantly sodium and chloride. Table salt is only sodium and chloride, plus anti-caking agents and possibly iodine.

Nature puts things together for a reason. I personally prefer unadulterated unrefined salt with no anti-caking agents and a full complement of naturally occuring minerals

You could argue that some naturally occurring minerals should be avoided of course.....one persons refined is another persons purified and one persons contaminated is another persons unadulterated. it's not like mining salt is particularly part of the "natural" food chain is it?

And before you ask ...yes I am being facetious

 

[Jigsaw]

My point is there isn't a widespread dislike of Umami flavour ....people love it. People have been using all sorts of flavourings to enhance their food for thousands of years. The origins of soy sauce is also quite old I seem to recall. The glutamate in yeast extract is classed as natural origin which is why it has a "cleaner label". Are you saying that manufacturers shouldn't use yeast extract at all? Just because it has glutamate in it doesn't mean that its wrong. I concede your point on just because we have been doing it for 1000's of years doesn't make it right though. I guess this boils down to a matter of informed choice.

Soy sauce and yeast extract like all foods have a multitude of constituents that you could break down to the small molecular level. However you wouldn't be able to break down ad infinitum without having a label bigger than the package. So this is a balancing thing from a legislation point of view vs the confusion that is created by breaking things down to a molecular level. Its like breaking down the amounts of sugars and flavanoids in wine. At some point you have to stop labeling from a practical point of view. Most labeling is based on enforcing legislation.

Most flavourings added in EU food nowadays are natural flavourings,not artificial or nature identical. The main exception is sugar confectionery where the high boiling point is problematic for natural flavour degradation.

To clarify your point on Meats...what meats are you referring to ? Meat products are very highly regulated from breed, slaughter, processing and packaging and are certainly labelled very clearly. Fresh meat cant be labelled as such if it has added flavourings or fillers (whatever they are). I'm not sure what meats you are referring to but my general rule of thumb is that anything with a gravy or sauce, coating or marinade can have flavouring added to it.

I am unaware of any fresh meat that has meat style flavourings added to it to enhance flavour or these fake fillers you are talking about. Cured meats have smoking and spices etc? That has nothing to do with it lacking flavour...its about adding flavour to make a meat product more appealing...like making a stew at home? The only area that may need enhancing is anything that has been canned or other retorted products. This again is due to the high temperatures involved. So canned meat products and soups sometimes add enhancers. There is an Australian company I'm aware of that retorts meat products in pouches that are ambient stable (lamb shanks in mint sauce etc). This cant be labelled as fresh meat since it is an added value long life meat product. Reformed meat is a whole other thing. But again this is labelled very clearly.

With regards to "honest labeling" I'm not sure what you are getting at. Perhaps describe what you would like to see rather than just come up with blaming these fictitious corporations. There are very few very large food manufacturers if you look at the split of number of suppliers supplying supermarkets in Europe and the number of products they list. This is different in the USA where branded companies are far more dominant. Europe is different mainly due to it being a bit older with a lot of different cultures that have developed different food traditions over a smaller geographic area. Europe has a much larger "own label" proportion of food sales than the USA. There is therefore far more diversity in the supply chain meaning more independently owned and specialist suppliers (i.e. smaller not big corporations).

My advice (for what its worth) to make it easier is to avoid brands and buy own label, trust the label declaration and avoid savoury products that have the word Flavouring in the ingredients list. There is no obligation for suppliers to state natural or artificial on the label unless they have a claim on pack, but if you buy own label you can clarify their policy via the customer help line. Queries from customers get channeled back to the technical person responsible for the product specification and they can confirm details that are not presented on pack. Branded companies don't do this so much !

Meat flavors are quite different to other flavourings in that many are reacted together in a lot of cases using amino acids (I'm simplifying this a lot). Sweet flavours are mainly mixtures of more aromatic chemicals (natural). It is complex. A strawberry flavour could have as many as 200 individual components. When you drill down a lot of these they are derived from natural extracts etc. (vanilla beans, menthol, etc etc). Hopefully that explains a bit why labeling all 200 would be impractical. That is why specific allergens are called out (e.g. celery extract used in a flavouring).

The same could be applied to legislation for added ingredients with glutamate in them, however glutamic acid is an amino acid and naturally present in many many foods, so proving it was added or naturally present may be problematic from an analytical point of view. At the moment though there is no legislation for declaring naturally occurring glutamate.

I have quite a bit of resources available to me in terms of retailer policies EU law etc. PM me if you want any more specific help working out any of the legal label side of things.

@Valentijn @arewenearlythereyet

The simple fact is that additives etc in commercially produced foods cause some of us very real health difficulties. I share Valentijn's migraine reaction, and migraines are horrendous. As I said in an earlier post in this thread, if a food makes me feel ill, I class that as a "bad" food for me.

The way I've always looked at it is that people who are sensitive to these additives are like putting a canary down a mine to test for toxic gas - just because other people don't appear to have a reaction to these substances doesn't necessarily mean that those substances aren't having a negative impact on everyone's health. Sensitive people /canaries simply show it sooner and more dramatically than non-sensitive individuals.

There is also the fact that a lot of us are already hypersensitive to naturally occuring substances, like glutamate, histamine, sulfur, gluten, casein, etc, etc, ad nauseam. In my personal experience, while I'm still experiencing horrible reactions to natural substances in their correct proportions (i.e., in the proprtions that they are found in the natural food-form), anything that exacerbates my reactions tends to be an additive. It can be "natural" to the main product, or a chemically produced hybrid of different additives that aren't natural to that product, but are deemed necessary for flavour, appearance, or for their preservative qualities. It's academic. The fact is that I react badly to them, and I'm not the only one.

Apparently, @arewenearlythereyet, you don't experience the same sort of sensitivities that @Valentijn and myself, and many others with CFS/ME experience. Is it possible that you are so quick to dismiss our concerns because of this?

 

[arewenearlythereyet]

@Valentijn @arewenearlythereyet

The simple fact is that additives etc in commercially produced foods cause some of us very real health difficulties. I share Valentijn's migraine reaction, and migraines are horrendous. As I said in an earlier post in this thread, if a food makes me feel ill, I class that as a "bad" food for me.

The way I've always looked at it is that people who are sensitive to these additives are like putting a canary down a mine to test for toxic gas - just because other people don't appear to have a reaction to these substances doesn't necessarily mean that those substances aren't having a negative impact on everyone's health. Sensitive people /canaries simply show it sooner and more dramatically than non-sensitive individuals.

There is also the fact that a lot of us are already hypersensitive to naturally occuring substances, like glutamate, histamine, sulfur, gluten, casein, etc, etc, ad nauseam. In my personal experience, while I'm still experiencing horrible reactions to natural substances in their correct proportions (i.e., in the proprtions that they are found in the natural food-form), anything that exacerbates my reactions tends to be an additive. It can be "natural" to the main product, or a chemically produced hybrid of different additives that aren't natural to that product, but are deemed necessary for flavour, appearance, or for their preservative qualities. It's academic. The fact is that I react badly to them, and I'm not the only one.

Apparently, @arewenearlythereyet, you don't experience the same sort of sensitivities that @Valentijn and myself, and many others with CFS/ME experience. Is it possible that you are so quick to dismiss our concerns because of this?

Red herring alert !

I have not been commenting on people's reactions to foods. I am commenting on comments made that manufacturers are deliberately trying to mislead consumers.

perhaps stick to the subject matter rather than try and interpret my emotions (which you seem to be way of beam btw) My only motivation here is to offer an experienced point of view of the food industry that counters some of the other comments made on this thread regarding the manufacture and labelling of products. I am not commenting on other peoples Illnesses in this regard.