28th June 2017, 2:15 PM
"Natural" does not have a real definition on food or product labels -- and yes this is an issue, "natural" is really a term which the FDA should regulate much more strictly -- but "organic" does have a meaning. Certified organic food is made without artificial chemical fertilizers or pesticides and such, and reducing the use of those is important for a whole lot of reasons, for human health yes but also for the planet. Pesticides are doing so much damage to humans, bees, insects, and all other life... Monsanto is horrible. And antibiotics (either given to animals we eat or what have you) are worse; those really should not be used anytime it is not necessary, since all that does is help create more drug-resistant bacteria, which is a growing problem worldwide. Sure, just buying organic does not solve those problems as I'm sure not all organic products are actually great either, but this is why I read all the ingredients on food labels before buying them, I want to know what's in things, and avoid things with questionable ingredients when I can.
As for the other stuff you say, sure, you do need to consider who you listen to, sure. But even if you do just look at science it's it difficult with food, though, because there are constantly studies being released that contradict each other. How should anyone know which ones to believe? This causes a lot of cynicism, like, 'everything causes cancer so just eat whatever', but eating healthier is important despite that because even if studies constantly contradict eachother, some things are known. And on that note, gluten... that's one fad diet I would never, ever get on board with unless I actually had celiac disease, because I love carbs! Bread, crackers, pasta, rice... the carb part is usually the central element of most of my meals, more so than the protein. I have crackers for lunch every day, either with cheese and hummus or peanut butter and honey (I don't like PB on bread, only crackers... and I don't like jelly. As always my lists of foods I like and dislike are long!), for example.
As for sugar itself though, science definitely has been targeting it more and more over recent years, and it seems that there is good reason for that. As the amount of sugar in the American diet has steadily grown over the past decades average weight has increased. The low-fat craze of the '90s was well-intentioned, but it caused lots of foods to add even more sugar in to compensate for the removed fat, and that did more harm than good; fat is hardly good for you, but sugar does seem to be worse. I've never been a real sugar addict, but I have done some things to cut back -- I completely stopped drinking soda several years ago (I never drank a lot of it, not like some people, but I don't drink any anymore), etc. I am still an ice cream addict though, I go through a couple of icecream containers every few weeks. Ah well... otherwise I try to get things with the least added sugar you can, though -- pasta sauces and breads that don't add sugar, etc. On that note, I like that new food label (option? slowly being phased in thing? I'm not clear) that separates sugar and added sugars, and puts a 50-grams-a-day percentage on the added sugars part. That's a great idea which, if put on all food labels, hopefully will cut sugar instakes -- seeing most 20-ounce sodas having more than a days' worth of sugar in them could make people take notice. Of course on the other hand if this just gets more people to drink diet soda that wouldn't be a huge improvement, as those are loaded with unpleasant chemicals and have questionable impacts on the body from what little I remember of seeing some stuff about that, but maybe they're slightly better than sugar? Really though, don't drink either...
As for the other stuff you say, sure, you do need to consider who you listen to, sure. But even if you do just look at science it's it difficult with food, though, because there are constantly studies being released that contradict each other. How should anyone know which ones to believe? This causes a lot of cynicism, like, 'everything causes cancer so just eat whatever', but eating healthier is important despite that because even if studies constantly contradict eachother, some things are known. And on that note, gluten... that's one fad diet I would never, ever get on board with unless I actually had celiac disease, because I love carbs! Bread, crackers, pasta, rice... the carb part is usually the central element of most of my meals, more so than the protein. I have crackers for lunch every day, either with cheese and hummus or peanut butter and honey (I don't like PB on bread, only crackers... and I don't like jelly. As always my lists of foods I like and dislike are long!), for example.
As for sugar itself though, science definitely has been targeting it more and more over recent years, and it seems that there is good reason for that. As the amount of sugar in the American diet has steadily grown over the past decades average weight has increased. The low-fat craze of the '90s was well-intentioned, but it caused lots of foods to add even more sugar in to compensate for the removed fat, and that did more harm than good; fat is hardly good for you, but sugar does seem to be worse. I've never been a real sugar addict, but I have done some things to cut back -- I completely stopped drinking soda several years ago (I never drank a lot of it, not like some people, but I don't drink any anymore), etc. I am still an ice cream addict though, I go through a couple of icecream containers every few weeks. Ah well... otherwise I try to get things with the least added sugar you can, though -- pasta sauces and breads that don't add sugar, etc. On that note, I like that new food label (option? slowly being phased in thing? I'm not clear) that separates sugar and added sugars, and puts a 50-grams-a-day percentage on the added sugars part. That's a great idea which, if put on all food labels, hopefully will cut sugar instakes -- seeing most 20-ounce sodas having more than a days' worth of sugar in them could make people take notice. Of course on the other hand if this just gets more people to drink diet soda that wouldn't be a huge improvement, as those are loaded with unpleasant chemicals and have questionable impacts on the body from what little I remember of seeing some stuff about that, but maybe they're slightly better than sugar? Really though, don't drink either...
![[Image: logo_bos_79x76.jpg]](https://www.tendocity.net/logo_bos_79x76.jpg){kind=logo}