Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

ADDITIVES -- LOOK BEFORE YOU EAT!

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

ADDITI. VES -- LOOK BEFORE YOU EAT!

 

http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/additiv.html

---

Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

Fran Lebowitz

 

I would like to take this opportunity to reassure anyone worried by the

recent publicity, that all permitted additives are safe.

Peggy Fenner, Minister of State for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food

(MAFF), 1985

If that is the MAFF view, we have a government department guilty of

criminal complacency.

Barry Sheerman MP

 

Everything that exists is a chemical.

 

All foods are chemicals.

 

All foods are safe.

 

Food additives are chemicals.

 

Therefore, all additives are safe.

Popular myth

 

You walk into a supermarket. On the delicatessen counter there are some

sausages whose label reads: 'not less than 100% meat'; in other words,

there is nothing in them other than meat. But it also reads: 'contains

herbs, preservative and colour' so, quite obviously, it must be less

than 100% meat . It works like this. Say you have 5 lbs of raw meat, but

after cooking it, its weight has dropped to 4 lbs. The law allows you to

make up that other lb. with a cheap filler. You now have 5 lbs of the

mixture and, because it weighs the same as the original meat, you can

call it 100% meat!

 

Asking my butcher the same question elicited a different answer. He told

me that it did not mean that the whole product is 100% meat, merely that

the meat that is in it is 100% meat. My local Trading Standards

Department confirmed that the supermarket manager's answer was the

correct one. These two answers show that even the trade is not sure what

the law means. But either way, it is a fraud -- and it's legal.

 

Once upon a time, most of the population lived close to the land. They

either had a few poultry or a pig and grew their own food, or they

bought it from a neighbour whom they knew. Then came the shift from the

land to living in towns and food for the urban populations was brought

in from specialist businesses.

 

The consumer didn't know the producer, and if there was a choice, he

tended to buy the cheaper product. Producers, to compete, had to find

ways to cut costs; but unscrupulous ones had already found ways to

reduce costs to enhance their profit margins.

 

To reduce the production costs of a loaf of bread, bakers fraudulently

added such things as chalk, sawdust, and pipe clay. Used tea-leaves were

collected from hotels, taken to factories and 'recycled'.

 

The once-used leaves were dried carefully with other dried leaves from

the hedgerows added, and then coloured with anything which came to hand

so that they looked new.

 

From staples such as bread, cheese and beer, to the more upmarket wines

and coffee, all were adulterated. The situation became so bad that it

became almost impossible to buy real, pure food. The populations of the

towns were so far removed from the producers that they could do nothing

about it.

 

In 1820 an analytical chemist, Frederick Accum, wrote a book which

became a best-seller. Entitled Treatise on the Adulterations of Food and

Culinary Poisons , and with the skull and crossbones on the cover, the

book told of the widespread fraud in food manufacture. It heralded the

start of a campaign by Accum, together with the editor of the Lancet ,

Thomas Wakley and a number of others, which went on for over half a

century, in an attempt to get government to legislate against such

fraud.

 

Governments dithered while the manufacturers claimed that what they put

in their products enhanced the taste or made it last longer or that was

the way the public liked it or if they didn't, it would have to be too

expensive for people to buy.

 

But Accum and his fellow campaigners won finally when legislation was

enacted in 1875 in the form of the Sale of Food and Drugs Act which made

it illegal to sell food which was not 'of the nature, substance or

quality of the article demanded'.

 

Based on the 1875 act, the 1984 the Food Act added strength to it by

making it an offence to 'add any substance to food, use any substance as

an ingredient in the preparation of food, abstract any constituent from

food, or subject food to any other process or treatment, so as to render

the food injurious to health'.

 

Manufacturers and retailers had to comply with the Trades Descriptions

Act food labelling regulations and it was an offence to sell any food

which was not of the nature, substance or quality demanded.

 

Unfortunately compositional standards and minimum meat contents

regulations for a large range of meat products were removed at the same

time. Despite improvements in labelling, Trading Standards Officers

found that the meat content of 22 products had dropped dramatically from

an average of forty-six percent to thiry-one. One chicken in gravy

product fell from a fairly respectable seventy-five percent meat, to

only forty-five percent meat.

 

In 1990 a new Food Safety Act (FSA) became law, revoking certain aspects

of the 1984 Act. It was an important statement of government policy and

was billed as the answer to the problems which have been discussed. This

Act, which is criminal rather than civil law, covers fair trading as

well as safety. Under the FSA, food has to be what YOU, the consumer,

expect and want it to be. In line with the 1875 act, it is an offence to

sell 'any food which is not of the nature or substance or quality

demanded'. (Sect.14). It is also an offence to give a false or

misleading description of a food on labels or advertising (Sect 15).

 

If food is 'injurious to health', it is an offence under Sect. 7, and

the responsibility for safety is put on the producer or seller in a

new'due diligence' clause (Sect.21). This means that they have to show

that they did everything in their power to ensure that a food was

alright; and that if something went wrong, it was outside their control.

This due diligence clause was potentially good news for consumers as it

should have encouraged food traders to review their standards and

improve them, particularly as both producers and sellers of food have to

ensure not only that food is safe in the short-term but also in the

long-term (Sect. 7.2). Consumers can use this against producers of

products with known long-term health problems.

 

To aid the consumer, Government legislation demands that packaged food

should be packed and labelled with lists of ingredients and certain

nutritional data.

 

But how helpful is this really?

 

Before the information on a label is of use, it must be intelligible to

the reader. If you don't know how the decipher the codes, and I suspect

many people don't, then they are of no use at all.

 

How often do you walk into a supermarket, pick up the packaged item of

food that you are considering buying and read the ingredients on the

label?

 

More importantly, if you do read them, are you thinking food or are you

thinking chemistry. What are all those E numbers and chemicals? what are

they for? and why are they in there? Would you, for example, buy a

product whose label declared that its ingredients were:

 

Raspberry Flavour Jelly Crystals: Sugar, Gelling Agents (Carrageen,

Dipotassium Phosphate, Potassium Chloride), Adipic Acid, Acidity

Regulator (Cream of Tartar), Flavourings, Thickener

(Carboxymethylcellulose), Artificial sweetener (Sodium Saccharine),

Colour (Betanin).

 

Raspberry Flavour Custard Powder: Cornflower, Flavourings, Colour

(Cochineal).

 

Trifle Topping Mix: Vegetable Oil (Hydrogenated), Sugar, Emulsifiers

(Propylene Glycol Monostearate, Lecithin), Modified Starch, Whey Powder,

Lactose, Caseinate, Thickener (Carboxymethylcellulose), Flavourings,

Colour (Beta-Carotene).

 

Sponge Fingers. (There are no ingredients listed for these.)

 

Decorations: with Colour (Cochineal--dried beetles). (Again, no

ingredients.)

 

 

 

A lot of people would -- and do. Those are the ingredients of a

well-known Raspberry Flavour Trifle Mix. If we look at these ingredients

in more detail, some appear to be foods -- but are they?

 

Sugar and Lactose are nutritionally poor, highly refined sweeteners

which cause obesity, tooth decay and diabetes.

 

Vegetable Oil (Hydrogenated) can be any vegetable oil, there is no way

to tell which, but the word, Hydrogenated, tells that it has been

hardened artificially and that it is a saturated fat laced with

trans-fats.

 

Trans fats are known to be the major dietary cause of heart disease.

 

Whey Powder is a cheap waste product used widely as a filler.

 

Modified Starch ; There is no way, from the packet label, to tell what

this is. But generally it is a cheap cereal filler, to bulk the product

out. Starch is a very useful bulking agent but, untreated, it is

difficult to use. So scientists have devised ways of treating it with

acids, alkalis and oxidising agents to make it more soluble, or heat

resistant, or to give it a variety of textures. Like sugar, these

modified starches are high in empty calories with little or no

nutritional value.

 

The rest of the ingredients are largely chemicals with varying degrees

of toxicity from none to such symptoms as hyperactivity,

hypersensitivity, allergic reaction and even cancer. When grandma made

trifles, she didn't use chemicals, her jelly contained fruit, she made

custard from eggs and milk, and the topping was whipped real cream.

 

Through stories which occasionally appear in the media, people are

becoming aware that some food additives are harmful: the yellow

colouring, tartrazine (E102), for example has been shown to cause

hyperactivity in children. But toxicity is only part of the additive

problem. They are also there to make as big a profit for the

manufacturers as possible. In many cases, those chemicals are there to

defraud. And it's all legal.

 

The current trend for high-in-polyunsaturates margarines, followed by

ever lower fat, low-fat spreads is a perfect example both of toxicity

and fraud. Their toxicity and cancer-causing properties are well known

but in modern margarines, with the current government backed propaganda

to reduce fat intake, we also have the perfect climate for fraud.

 

Mix the polyunsaturated margarine with cheap, nutrient-poor waste

products such as skimmed milk or whey powder, or make an emulsion of it

with plain water, and you have a low-fat spread. They even whip it up

with air and call it something like 'lite'.

 

It couldn't be cheaper to produce and, since its price competes with

that of butter, it can be sold at a vast profit. The public is buying

rubbish and paying the earth for it.

I can think of no reason why anyone would want a low-fat spread, but if

you do, why not merely spread butter thinner? That would be cheaper and

it's a heck of a lot healthier than any margarine.

 

Modern margarines are not the only forms of food fraud by a long way.

 

Many brilliant (and well paid) minds are inventing new foods all the

time.

 

They hydrogenate fats; modify starches, then thin or thicken them to

give a range of textures; they add emulsifiers, thickeners,

preservatives and antioxidants to stop them going rancid,

artificial flavours because they have no taste or the taste is pretty

foul, colourings to make them more appealing, artificial sweeteners

(several of which are known to cause cancer), waxes, oils, bleaching

agents and improvers.

 

Some of these additives are there to make the gunge acceptable to the

buying public. Some is there so that it runs through the machines more

easily. The food content is generally so poor that what you buy in most

cases is an appetising-looking product which is lacking in real

nutrients. In many cases you get no real food at all.

 

Lemonade doesn't contain lemons -- even the flavour doesn't come from

lemons; cheese and onion flavour crisps contain no cheese and no onion.

 

The food scientists can synthesise just about anything; and the ad-men

can sell it. And if they tell you it has added vitamins and minerals,

you are more likely to buy it -- so they do. If it were real food,

however, it wouldn't need to have vitamins and minerals added.

 

Then there's that great con where they get you to buy a product -- and

you have to add your own food. One classic is the fruit pie mix. They

start with a homely name: 'Grandma's Traditional Cherry Pie Mix', put it

in a package with an appealing picture, advertise it on commercial

television and it will sell like the proverbial hot cakes. When you buy

it and look at the ingredients and instructions, you will read something

like: 'Cherry flavour pie mix -- just add sugar, milk and eggs'.

 

What you have bought is a mix of chemicals -- you have to add the real

food yourself.

 

There are a few clues if you know what to look for. In the trifle

example above, we see the words 'Raspberry Flavour'. The clue is in the

word 'flavour'. The law allows the word 'flavour' to be used when all

that flavour is artificial. If it says 'Raspberry Flavoured Trifle',

however, there must be some real raspberry in it -- although there may

not be much. If the label proclaims 'Raspberry Trifle' then there will

be more fruit, although again there may not be much.

 

When artificial flavours are used, the manufacturers have some 6,000 to

choose from; but you won't know what they are because they are not

subject to any regulation and they won't be specified on the product's

label. And don't be fooled if the label tells you that the product

contains natural flavours. These will have come from a laboratory too.

 

Artificial flavours are used to disguise the taste of poor quality

products. Smoked bacon is comparatively expensive to produce, but dye

ordinary bacon and use an artificial smoky flavour and you can make more

profit.

 

And that is only part of the fraud. Bacon spits in a frying pan because

of the amount of water in it. Water is also added to many other meat and

fish products. The packet may say how much extra has been added -- but

it lies.

 

Manufacturers are allowed to add a certain amount of water without

declaring the fact. The amount of water they declare does not include

the amount allowed; so if the label says 'with 15% added water', it

really means 'with 15% added water on top off the amount I am allowed to

add without telling you'.

 

People are demanding leaner meat so the fat is cut off it -- but it

isn't thrown away. Manufacturers don't throw a potential source of

profit away.

 

Once fat is cut off, it has little value, so it is used as a cheap

filler, stuck together with additives to bulk out other products. We

aren't eating less fat, it is merely being sold to us in a different,

and more expensive, form.

 

Even though additives have to be listed on product labels, those labels

may only tell half the story, for enzymes used in the processing of the

product do not have to be listed.

 

Enzymes are used to tenderise meat, to clean milk contaminated with

antibiotics, to make modified starches and in the baking and brewing

industries.

 

Some of these enzymes are made from plant or animal tissue but most are

made by microbial fermentation.

 

Naturally the industry says that they are safe but there have been a

number of reports of allergic reactions to them in workers in the

industry. The government's Food Additives and Contaminants Committee

published a report on enzymes in 1982.

 

It recommended that enzymes should be regulated and that many should be

placed in 'group B' because their safety had not been proven.

 

Another example of where additives are not labelled is in the case of

cheese that is 'suitable for vegetarians'. The rennet traditionally used

to curdle milk in the cheese making process is made from animal

products.

 

So it is unacceptable to vegetarians.

 

Many cheeses today are made suitable for vegetarians by using a form

synthesised vegetable rennet. In most British cheeses this is

genetically modified soya.

 

European labelling laws require that products containing genetically

modified materials shall carry that information on their labels. Cheese

'suitable for vegetarians', however, rarely does because it is not an

'ingredient' but a part of the process of cheese making.

 

Additives in food are not only used to defraud -- to make cheap

substitutes for real food at a profit, they do it in a way that can have

a profound effect on your health. Not just because many are toxic but

because real food is replaced with cheaper ingredients and the fact

disguised.

Healthy, additive-free organic butter is not a great profit maker, but

chemical-laden, unhealthy, low-fat spreads are. By replacing real food

with artificial we risk various forms of malnutrition and deficiency

diseases, a situation which is particularly worrying in the most

vulnerable section of our society: the young.

 

For children, the consequences are potentially catastrophic.

 

We have had legislation designed to protect the consumer for over a

century and it has had almost no effect on the amount we are conned by

the food industry. How do they get away with it? Well, government is

advised by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Foods (MAFF)

various committees. Many of the members of those MAFF committees are

members of the food industry

 

.. It is the food industry that advises government and shapes policy. If

the food industry wants something, it gets it. Consumers appear to have

very little voice in the matter.

 

The next time you shop in your supermarket, look at the labels. If the

first, and thus the largest, ingredient is water, or if you can't find

any food among the additives on the label, don't buy it. If we all get

together and don't buy a product, the manufacturers will soon get the

message and change. Write to your MP as well. If enough of us do that,

we might get somewhere.

 

References:

Study by Shropshire Trading Standards Department on meat content of meat

products, pre and post 1984 Meat Products Regulations , 1986, Shropshire

County Council.

 

Millstone E. Food Additives . Penguin, London, 1986.

 

Aruoma OI, Halliwell B. Free Radicals and Food Additives. Taylor and

Francis, London, 1991

 

Last updated 17 January 1999

 

 

 

For more on food additives, particularly aspartame, see

http://www.readthelabel.org.uk

=====================================================================

The Link Between Monosodium Glutamate (MSG) and Obesity

---

 

 

7/15/05 Author: Dani Veracity Source: NewsTarget.com

 

If fried snack chips had a warning printed right on the bag that said,

" Warning: these chips will make you obese, " would you still buy them?

Would you still eat them? Well, in a sense, you do see that warning on

chips; just read the ingredient list. Research suggests that monosodium

glutamate causes obesity, making unhealthy snacks even unhealthier than

you may have suspected. I'm sure you already know that tortilla and

potato chips aren't health foods, right? They're made with fried fats,

they almost always harbor hidden toxic chemicals (acrylamides), and if

they're flavored, they usually contain monosodium glutamate (MSG). This

is basically a recipe for obesity.

 

But how does MSG cause obesity? Like aspartame, MSG is an excitotoxin, a

substance that overexcites neurons to the point of cell damage and,

eventually, cell death. Humans lack a blood-brain barrier in the

hypothalamus, which allows excitotoxins to enter the brain and cause

damage, according to Dr. Russell L. Blaylock in his book Excitotoxins.

According to animal studies, MSG creates a lesion in the hypothalamus

that correlates with abnormal development, including obesity, short

stature and sexual reproduction problems.

 

Based on this evidence, Dr. Blaylock makes an interesting point about

the American obesity epidemic, especially among young people: " One can

only wonder if the large number of people having difficulty with obesity

in the United States is related to early exposure to food additive

excitotoxins, since this obesity is one of the most consistent features

of the syndrome. One characteristic of the obesity induced by

excitotoxins is that it doesn't appear to depend on food intake. This

could explain why some people cannot diet away their obesity. " As an

increasing number of elementary school students bring snack-size bags of

chips to school in their lunch boxes, the MSG-obesity link demands

parental caution.

 

Instead of passively watching modern society become obese and then

commenting on it, we need to change it at the start. That begins with

you, the consumer. By avoiding foods with MSG, you are not only

protecting your health and your family's health, you are also protecting

society's health by not supporting companies that use MSG. Use your

buying power to show that you don't accept manufactured foods that use

MSG or any of the other hidden forms of MSG such as yeast extract,

hydrolyzed vegetable proteins and autolyzed proteins.

 

The experts speak on MSG and obesity:

Olney, J.W. " Brain Lesions, Obesity, and Other Disturbances in Mice

Treated with Monosodium glutamate. " Sci. 165(1969): 719-271. Humans also

lack a blood-brain barrier in the hypothalamus, even as adults. It is

for this reason that Dr. Olney and other neuroscientists are so

concerned about the widespread and heavy use of excitotoxins, such as

MSG, hydrolyzed vegetable protein, and cysteine, as food additives. In

his experiments Dr. Olney found that high-dose exposure to MSG caused

hypoplasia of the adenohypophysis of the pituitary and of the gonads, in

conjunction with low hypothalamic, pituitary, and plasma levels of LH,

growth hormone, and prolactin. When doses below toxic levels for

hypothalamic cells were used, he found a rapid elevation of LH and a

depression of the pulsatile output of growth hormone. In essence, these

excitotoxins can cause severe pathophysiological changes in the central

endocrine control system. Many of these dysfunctional changes can occur

with subtoxic doses of MSG. One can speculate that chronic exposure to

these neurotoxins could cause significant alterations in the function of

the hypothalamus, including its non-endocrine portions.

Excitotoxins by Russell L Blaylock MD, page 263

 

Early exposure in life to high doses of glutamate, or the other

excitotoxins, could theoretically produce a whole array of disorders

much later in life, such as obesity, impaired growth, endocrine

problems, sleep difficulties, emotional problems including episodic

anger, and sexual psycho-pathology.

Excitotoxins by Russell L Blaylock MD, page 89

 

The stress-induced abnormalities in blood-brain barrier permeability

suggest differing MSG effects dependent on existing states of relaxation

or stresses. The suggestive evidence for MSG-induced neuroendocrine

effects is substantial, coupled with the observation of increased

obesity in children.

In Bad Taste by George R Schwartz MD, page 39

 

With this enormous consumption of foods laced with MSG additives, it is

no wonder that we have an obesity problem in this country, especially

when you combine the hypothalamic lesion caused by MSG to the high-fat

and -carbohydrate diets of young people. Of particular concern is the

suggestion that MSG ingested by pregnant women may actually cause this

lesion in children while they are still in the womb.

Health And Nutrition (see related ebook on nutrition) Secrets by Russell

L Blaylock MD, page 180

 

This also means that, while pregnant, mothers of diabetic children also

consumed very large amounts of these excitotoxin-containing foods. Also,

many parents feed their babies table food from an early age—food often

laced with large amounts of MSG. In addition, large numbers of babies

are also fed formula, and many formulas are known to be high in

excitotoxins such as caseinate. I have already cited studies showing

that gross obesity is frequently linked to excessive MSG consumption in

test animals.

Health And Nutrition Secrets by Russell L Blaylock MD, page 182

 

Particularly disturbing is the later obesity after MSG exposure during

the neonatal and infant period even after only a short or limited

exposure.

In Bad Taste by George R Schwartz MD, page 22

 

With all of these endocrine malfunctions you would expect these mice to

develop abnormally, and they do. Consistently, the animals exposed to

MSG were found to be short, grossly obese, and had difficulty with

sexual reproduction. One can only wonder if the large number of people

having difficulty with obesity in the United States is related to early

exposure to food additive excitotoxins since this obesity is one of the

most consistent features of the syndrome. One characteristic of the

obesity induced by excitotoxins is that it doesn't appear to depend on

food intake. This could explain why some people cannot diet away their

obesity. It is ironic that so many people drink soft drinks sweetened

with NutraSweet® when aspartate can produce the exact same lesions as

glutamate, resulting in gross obesity. The actual extent of MSG induced

obesity in the human population is unknown.

Excitotoxins by Russell L Blaylock MD, page 81

 

The obesity effect of MSG in animals requires evaluation since

unexplained obesity is increasing in our population, along with

hypertension and diabetes. MSG-induced obesity in animals may carry

long-term significance for humans.

In Bad Taste by George R Schwartz MD, page 22

 

Since his early observation, other studies have confirmed that MSG

causes gross obesity in animals. At an international neuroscience

meeting, Dr. Olney was asked if he thought the reason Americans were so

obese was, in fact, due to their high consumption of MSG additives. The

question was never answered, but since that conference in the 1970s,

America has undergone this virtual epidemic of gross obesity, especially

among its youth.

Health And Nutrition Secrets by Russell L Blaylock MD, page 180

 

This MSG-induced obesity was characterized by a preference for

carbohydrates and an aversion for more nutritious foods, just as we are

now witnessing in our youth. Also, excess weight was extremely difficult

to exercise off or diet off in these experimental animals.

Health And Nutrition Secrets by Russell L Blaylock MD, page 182

 

 

http://www.newstarget.com/009379.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...