Clean Eating as a food movement?

[spectastic]

So what you are calling "good GMO" is the type of GMO I am thinking of. What is an example of a bad GMO practice then? I admit I haven't googled this very much but mostly because when I try to look for it, I usually see arguments in the vein as "we shouldn't do it because it's not natural", which isn't really a valid reason. 

 

the example is listed with the poison in the corn is one. My point on that is for corporations, the driver for GMO is not to make the world a better place, but to make money. I work in a corporate atmosphere, so I know how it is. No matter what they say or do, it's all about the bottomline at the end of the day. If they make an investment, they expect a return. That's how they get big..

 

Here's a good article that I read just now. It talks about how by providing these technologies to African farmers, the corporations pretty much take control of what gets produced in Africa, kind of like forcing African the hand to take Monsanto as their permanent contractor, at a cost that they obviously can't afford. It also talks about pesticide resistant SUPER weeds (must be some strong weed) that resulted from the pesticide resistant corn they've been growing. I don't know enough about the topic to judge, but when they get problems like this, who do you think the farmers would go to for help? corporations.. at a hefty price? you bet. That's my view anyway.. I don't like corporations.

 

 

here's the article http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/20058-why-african-farmers-do-not-want-gmos

Edited October 9, 2014 by spectastic

[spectastic]

anything that goes into a black box and comes back out looking different is considered processed goods. That goes for freshly packaged vegetables too. That's why I referred to good processed food and bad ones.

 

hey. I'm a process engineer. I know my shit, ok?

 

 

ok, maybe there isn't a strict definition on what processed food is . But that's mine. someone else might think differently. to each your own.

Edited October 9, 2014 by spectastic

[TakeruK]

Thanks! I don't know how I read "bad" as "good" in your first post!! I interpreted the corn example as something that works most of the time and it's just a matter of perfecting the procedure so that toxins remain at low enough levels when it gets to our plates. I agree with you that it's terrible when corporations take advantage of other people (using GMOs or otherwise) in order to maximize their profits. But I see this as a problem of corporations/capitalism, not an inherent problem with GMOs itself! 

[smg]

Thanks! I don't know how I read "bad" as "good" in your first post!! I interpreted the corn example as something that works most of the time and it's just a matter of perfecting the procedure so that toxins remain at low enough levels when it gets to our plates. I agree with you that it's terrible when corporations take advantage of other people (using GMOs or otherwise) in order to maximize their profits. But I see this as a problem of corporations/capitalism, not an inherent problem with GMOs itself! 

 

I flip flop on GMOs as inherently problematic, however, capitalism plus GMOs is mos def a concern.  Monsanto suing farmers for cross pollination and gmo contamination of fields being a prime example of the profit motive gone pathological. 

[Amelorn]

"Clean eating" is "from scratch" re-branded for the upper-middle class.  With less white carbs.  

[pat_eat_clean]

Hi there,

 

We have been eating clean for the  past years without knowing of the label/definition; we were just trying to have a food that would be as nutritious as possible to support our health; for us it is more of a lifestyle than a diet;

 

I'd say that people are becoming more and more consious about what they eat and how their food may be remote from food consummed by our parents or great parents.

 

About processed food: it seems that all fod we eat is subject to some transformation, some necessary (heat) and some not only unecessary but also potentially harmful (for example additives). The issue is, the "harmful" transformations can happen at many stages between the time the food is harvested/bred until we eat it. For example containers may contain chemicals that could leak into teh food, saucepans may use aluminium which could potentially leak into teh food and cause soem health imbalances.

 

I have written a post on the cause/benefits of clean food, and hope you find it useful/informative:

http://www.howtoeatclean4life.com/clean-eating/why-should-you-eat-clean-food/

 

Hope this helps,

 

Patrick

[Chianti]

 

Also, as for GMOs, I don't really know what the big deal against them are. I don't consider them processed either. Humans have always genetically modified produce in order to achieve desired colours, looks, taste, resilience etc. Basically every single banana is genetically modified! I also think GMOs are one solution we should consider in helping feed our growing planet! 

 

You're confusing selective breeding with genetically modifying. Grafting banana trees is not the same as stripping/rebinding a banana plant's genes in a laboratory.

 

I just TAed for a course on the globalization of food/agriculture and there are no benefits to GMOs. There is also conflicting research on how harmful/benign they are. What is certain is that they do not have the higher yields that companies such as Monsanto claim and they are continually requiring more pesticides/fertilizers because "super" weeds and bugs are becoming resistant. Definitely wish there had been a class like this when I was an undergrad---it was eye opening and mind boggling!

 

We had the students read several articles by Raj Patel and Michael Pollan. If nothing else, I think all of us as consumers in this global food economy (sadly, food is little more than a commodity these days) need to read something like In Defense of Food by Pollan and watch a documentary or two such as Food Inc or Fed Up.

 

Some articles from this class:

 

Don't Ask How to Feed the Nine Billion -Mark Bitman

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/12/opinion/dont-ask-how-to-feed-the-9-billion.html?_r=0

 

The Next Breadbasket -National Geographic

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/foodfeatures/land-grab/

 

Feeding the Nine Billiob -National Geographic

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/foodfeatures/feeding-9-billion/

 

National Food Policy -Raj Patel & Michael Pollan

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-a-national-food-policy-could-save-millions-of-american-lives/2014/11/07/89c55e16-637f-11e4-836c-83bc4f26eb67_story.html

 

If you're interested in a video lecture:

 

Edible Education -Michael Pollan

 

Sorry for the dump, but I found this class to be fascinating and I had a feeling some of you might enjoy these readings! 

[Maxtini]

As a student with chemistry background, I find the paranoia against additive and preserving agent in food extremely ridiculous.

If you examine the history of human civilization, food preservation and processing is the cornerstone of human survival and advancement. The foods are processed exactly because of the need to preserve them for a long time, this enable us to conserve our food and survive through drought, famine, and disasters. Of course, there is price to be paid, but the positive outcomes of food preserving far outweigh its negatives.

The advancement of technology has extended our abilities to better preserve our food, unfortunately this was met with hostility from public, exactly because of their ignorance.

To illustrate my point, let's look at sodium chloride (table salt):
http://www.sciencelab.com/msds.php?msdsId=9927593
Sodium Chloride
Chronic Effects on Humans: MUTAGENIC EFFECTS: Mutagenic for mammalian somatic cells. Mutagenic for bacteria and/or yeast
Causes adverse reproductive effects in humans (fetotoxicity, abortion, ) by intraplacental route. May cause
adverse reproductive effects and birth defects in animals, particularly rats and mice (fetotoxicity, abortion, musculoskeletal
abnormalities, and maternal effects (effects on ovaries, fallopian tubes) by oral, intraperitoneal, intraplacental, intrauterine,
parenteral, and subcutaneous routes.

What happen when this sodium chloride is some other preserving chemicals? Everyone will go crazy and said "OMG, those greedy capitalists add harmful chemicals in their products! My unborn child would have cancer and have birth defect" etc....

Of course I am not saying all chemicals are safe. But the FDA has been very stringent in approving food preserving agents. Most preserving agents on the market are actually chemicals that you can find naturally in fresh fruits, vegetables, and other plants. Modern technologies enable us to extract or synthesize these active chemicals and put it into other food product. Since they're additives, government regulation would require company to describe the chemicals using chemical names (or other codes), which sound scary to most people.

And this is the fact that most people forget, foods are all 100% composed of chemicals themselves. This is what will happen when FDA require those selling eggs and fruits to describe their products exactly by their ingredients.

Edited December 20, 2014 by Maxtini

[Vene]

This is why I use safe, natural MSG instead of NaCl.