5 ms·

I remember there was a controversy when it came to the public's attention that there was cellulose (wood) in many popular brands of bread. Personally I see not

by Drakim 11y ago

I remember there was a controversy when it came to the public's attention that there was cellulose (wood) in many popular brands of bread. Personally I see nothing wrong with it, in fact, it seems like a pretty clever "food hack". We have sugar substitutes, so why not this?

rplnt 11y ago
I remember controversy about recycling cardboard into noodles. I might see something wrong about that. Not sure if it was hoax or not though. edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_cardboard_bun_hoax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_cardboard_bun_hoax
- BuildTheRobots 11y ago
  iirc, they were also adding melamine to dog and baby food because it looks just like real protean when lab tested.
creshal 11y ago
I guess the problem is association with war-time practices of cutting flour with sawdust and other measures to "cheat" on consumers – and generally the feeling of getting cheated. Sugar substitutes are demanded by the public (and usually advertised if present), while this is just yet another additive nobody knew about.
awakeasleep 11y ago
The issue is that there are plenty of people who rely on the food energy contained in those carbs. This was an enormous problem during the American industrial revolution, where already food-insecure families were buying products covertly made from "Potato flour", the insoluble fiber left once all nutrition was dissolved from potatoes. "Potato flour" was added to everything from sausage to bread as a filler and substitue for more expensive ingredients. This resulted in the poor watching their children and families starve despite seeming to eat regular full meals. In a perfect world, there would be a net benefit from the choice to eat a non-nutritive carb substitute if that choice was made clear by strict labeling standards. However, in our imperfect world, infrastructure that can produce food based on non-nutritive fiber has historically been used to rip off the most needy. In a world with actual fake egg and "gutter oil" problems, creating industrial processes to shape cellulose into something that looks like food is going to have severe negative effects for a lot of people.
- jrockway 11y ago
  I think times have changed. The poor in the US are not starving to death; they're eating too many calories.
  - TomGullen 11y ago
    > 3.8 million households were unable at times during the year to provide adequate, nutritious food for their children (2013) http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/us_hunger_facts.htm http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/us_hunger_facts.ht...
    - Shivetya 11y ago
      Well it would help if the government agency which manages the SNAP program were held more accountable for their work. Enrollment tripled but costs quadrupled or more. Like all large assistance programs. Participation rates don't align very well with poverty or unemployment numbers on a state by state look, meaning the system is obviously throwing money away. also the USDA's own site has some nice graphs on the subject, but I cannot find the questions being asked. http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the-us/frequency-of-food-insecurity.aspx http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/foo...
      - greeneggs 11y ago
        "Participation rates don't align very well with poverty or unemployment numbers on a state by state look, meaning the system is obviously throwing money away." Sorry, can you explain your logic here? Enrollment is handled by the states, and procedures in different states are very different. (There are also federal funding incentives for states to reduce enrollment.) You would expect different states to have very different participation rates.
- saiya-jin 11y ago
  in fact, for US, this might help with obesity epidemics, since IIRC cellulose is that mighty "fiber" that is so good for our digestion, slow release of sugars from food etc. as others write, US, especially its poor, have exactly opposite problem as you describe
masklinn 11y ago
> I remember there was a controversy when it came to the public's attention that there was cellulose (wood) in many popular brands of bread. > Personally I see nothing wrong with it, in fact, it seems like a pretty clever "food hack". We have sugar substitutes, so why not this? There's nothing wrong with it when it's advertised as what it is. There's everything wrong with it when it's used to covertly bulk up food and make more money because you're selling 50% wood pulp 50% bread for the price of 100% bread to people expecting the caloric intake of bread.
- jjoonathan 11y ago
  > people expecting [and relying on] the caloric intake of bread. What fraction of consumers are we talking about here?

by Drakim 11y ago

rplnt 11y ago

I remember controversy about recycling cardboard into noodles. I might see something wrong about that. Not sure if it was hoax or not though. edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_cardboard_bun_hoax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_cardboard_bun_hoax

BuildTheRobots 11y ago
iirc, they were also adding melamine to dog and baby food because it looks just like real protean when lab tested.

creshal 11y ago

I guess the problem is association with war-time practices of cutting flour with sawdust and other measures to "cheat" on consumers – and generally the feeling of getting cheated. Sugar substitutes are demanded by the public (and usually advertised if present), while this is just yet another additive nobody knew about.

awakeasleep 11y ago

The issue is that there are plenty of people who rely on the food energy contained in those carbs. This was an enormous problem during the American industrial revolution, where already food-insecure families were buying products covertly made from "Potato flour", the insoluble fiber left once all nutrition was dissolved from potatoes. "Potato flour" was added to everything from sausage to bread as a filler and substitue for more expensive ingredients. This resulted in the poor watching their children and families starve despite seeming to eat regular full meals. In a perfect world, there would be a net benefit from the choice to eat a non-nutritive carb substitute if that choice was made clear by strict labeling standards. However, in our imperfect world, infrastructure that can produce food based on non-nutritive fiber has historically been used to rip off the most needy. In a world with actual fake egg and "gutter oil" problems, creating industrial processes to shape cellulose into something that looks like food is going to have severe negative effects for a lot of people.

jrockway 11y ago
I think times have changed. The poor in the US are not starving to death; they're eating too many calories.
- TomGullen 11y ago
  > 3.8 million households were unable at times during the year to provide adequate, nutritious food for their children (2013) http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/us_hunger_facts.htm http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/us_hunger_facts.ht...
  - Shivetya 11y ago
    Well it would help if the government agency which manages the SNAP program were held more accountable for their work. Enrollment tripled but costs quadrupled or more. Like all large assistance programs. Participation rates don't align very well with poverty or unemployment numbers on a state by state look, meaning the system is obviously throwing money away. also the USDA's own site has some nice graphs on the subject, but I cannot find the questions being asked. http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the-us/frequency-of-food-insecurity.aspx http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/foo...
    - greeneggs 11y ago
      "Participation rates don't align very well with poverty or unemployment numbers on a state by state look, meaning the system is obviously throwing money away." Sorry, can you explain your logic here? Enrollment is handled by the states, and procedures in different states are very different. (There are also federal funding incentives for states to reduce enrollment.) You would expect different states to have very different participation rates.
saiya-jin 11y ago
in fact, for US, this might help with obesity epidemics, since IIRC cellulose is that mighty "fiber" that is so good for our digestion, slow release of sugars from food etc. as others write, US, especially its poor, have exactly opposite problem as you describe

masklinn 11y ago

> I remember there was a controversy when it came to the public's attention that there was cellulose (wood) in many popular brands of bread. > Personally I see nothing wrong with it, in fact, it seems like a pretty clever "food hack". We have sugar substitutes, so why not this? There's nothing wrong with it when it's advertised as what it is. There's everything wrong with it when it's used to covertly bulk up food and make more money because you're selling 50% wood pulp 50% bread for the price of 100% bread to people expecting the caloric intake of bread.

jjoonathan 11y ago
> people expecting [and relying on] the caloric intake of bread. What fraction of consumers are we talking about here?