8 ms·

What Foods Are Banned in Europe but Not Banned in the U.S.?

71 points by NinjaX 8y ago

freedomben 8y ago
Anytime we talk about "banning" something I prefer a very conservative approach (conservative as in let's not ban things unless we are really sure). We are constantly learning new things that upend what we used to accept as science regarding nutrition and how the human body works. I think we do ourselves a disservice sometimes by banning things that we don't understand (and sometimes we think we understand but really don't). That said, there is something wrong with our food. We have had an explosion in auto-immune disorders over the last few decades that is accelerating. Allergies to common foods are increasing rapidly as well. An allergist that I see has recently starting adding citrus tests to her test panel, because citrus is suddenly (and for unknown reasons) becoming a big problem. I don't know what's wrong, but I do hope we figure it out.
- adamnemecek 8y ago
  How is it a disservice?
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - freedomben 8y ago
    Do you think the Cannabis ban was a disservice?
- orf 8y ago
  Why is it a disservice to demand we are sure something won't harm us before we build and industry around it? Can you name any specific items that you feel it was a disservice to ban, and say why?
  - kortilla 8y ago
    Many of these food tech choices are the difference between more starvation and high enough yield to feed poor people. If we farmed the way we did 100 years ago, there would be mass starvation. The yield just isn’t there. The FDA faces the same ethical dilemma every time they decide on new drugs. A slow approval process is literally letting people suffer and die in exchange for trials with more certainty. The old FDA food guidelines that shape what schools are allowed to feed children are a perfect example of the stupidity of legislating based on poorly understood food science. “Carbs are good, fats are bad!” Low sodium guidelines because “salt kills people!” also turned out to be pretty stupid in retrospect.
    - ilikehurdles 8y ago
      If the cause of starvation were under-production, I’d sympathize with this argument. But given the amount of food waste in Western countries, I’d say the real issue is one of distribution or access. Producers make production efficient not in order to feed the poor, but to increase margin by lowering the costs of production. Growth hormones exist to make the agriculturist more money, they don’t help feed a war torn country. If the priority of these systems were solving hunger, we’d disincentive meat and dairy production and incentivize high nutritious vegetarian production. When we’re dumping corn into salmon feed, sugars, and vehicle fuel, I can’t fall for the idea that food is constrained by supply.
      - kortilla 8y ago
        The cause of starvation is lack of food available at a given price point. Producers make production efficient to capture more of the market at the lower price points on the demand curve. There aren’t enough rich people to pay for thick margins at a large scale in the food industry. The only ones with large margins are the organic farmers selling to rich people. Growth hormones exist to make chicken much faster, which means much cheaper chicken for consumers and to make the chicken raisers more money. If it weren’t cheaper, people wouldn’t buy more of it and it likely wouldn’t be worth the investment. Here’s a thought exercise, why do you think sellers of factory chickens outsell free range chickens by orders of magnitude? If the only difference was margin and not price, nobody would buy the factory stuff.
- Nasrudith 8y ago
  How do you know that it is food related in itself? It is a common area of anxiety but I don't think much has stood up to statistical scrutiny - otherwise they'd start to see far more significant differences from differing lifestyles and diets. There are many possible culprits from gut bacteria to hygiene hypothesis of an overactive immune system going after anything that remotely looks the part due to having evolved in filthier environments and being evolutionary "calibrated" to be overactive by default because parasites immunosuppress.
  - freedomben 8y ago
    > How do you know that it is food related in itself? I don't know that for sure. It's simply my suspicion as a mostly layperson that has spent years researching and experimenting on myself through various diets, everything from SAD (Standard American Diet) to Paleo, AIP, Carnivore, Keto, etc. I notice a huge difference in the way I feel based on how I'm eating.
- DRW_ 8y ago
  >Anytime we talk about "banning" something I prefer a very conservative approach (conservative as in let's not ban things unless we are really sure). We are constantly learning new things that upend what we used to accept as science regarding nutrition and how the human body works. I think we do ourselves a disservice sometimes by banning things that we don't understand (and sometimes we think we understand but really don't). If you aren't sure, then I don't think I get the logic on the default being "okay, feed it to your kids!". Surely it makes more sense to be cautious about the things we ingest..
  - freedomben 8y ago
    > Surely it makes more sense to be cautious about the things we ingest.. Completely agree > If you aren't sure, then I don't think I get the logic on the default being "okay, feed it to your kids!". False dichotomy. I don't think the choices are either "ban it" or "okay, feed it to your kids!" There's a middle ground there that I think makes more sense.
    - skh 8y ago
      What’s the middle ground you are referrring to? Don’t feed it to kids but feed to adults? If you don’t know something is safe for consumption then it shoulnd’t be sold, right?
      - freedomben 8y ago
        Getting into specific policy prescriptions is tempting the fate of Godwin's Law, but I don't believe it's wise or even possible to regulate every single molecule that gets sold for consumption. Constant evaluation, testing, and liability for people/companies that knowingly use dangerous or harmful ingredients can go a long way here. In fact often times it's the only way broader datasets can be gathered. The market provides a strong incentive here as well not to poison your customers. I also think that education, including warnings on packages, and then letting adults make their own decisions, is a good way to go. One state that I know of recently banned a pest control chemical because some idiot sprayed his dog's food bowl with it. The dog later died. The state's knee jerk response of banning it is counter-productive IMHO. I've been using it for DIY pest control for many years and it is one of the most effective I know of, and when used as directed is perfectly safe (don't spray anything that will be ingested with it, such as dog food bowls, gardens, etc).
- CorvusCrypto 8y ago
  >Allergies to common foods are increasing rapidly as well Is there a list of stats for incidence of food allergies? It seems many friends I know (in EU) have food allergies to things like cucumber, hazel, peanuts, also gluten (celiax or something). One person I know has Crohn's disease. I would be curious to see the stats in both US and EU to see if it's really linked to a region's food. Or if it's just that common diets across the world are causing it. Edit: or a third possibility is that rates haven't changed at all and it could be increase in either reporting or population making it seem like it's more commom now than before.
  - freedomben 8y ago
    The stats that I've seen were at my allergist's office, so unfortunately I don't have a link. I'll definitely look for one tho. What you say is very interesting. Cucumber (like citrus) was also not something that people really had allergies to until recently (or possibly your third possibility kicks in here). Peanuts and gluten have skyrocketed recently too. Maybe off topic, but I read an interesting theory regarding the use of GMOs to explain this. The logic went basically like this: Plants were genetically modified to be resistant to herbicides -> farmers began spraying fields indiscriminately, knowing that the plants they cared about wouldn't die, but the weeds would, therefore producing bumper crops much more regularly -> This led to one of two possibilities: 1. the chemicals are being consumed in unsafe quantities by humans now when they eat those plants or 2. the mutations that hardened the plants changed their protein structure such that they are less digestible, which leads to intestinal damage, which promotes intestinal permeability, which leads to food allergies to foods not previously a problem.
- ghthor 8y ago
  I wonder if the citrus is that the land were the groves are farmed has been saturated year after year with pesticides. In addition the fruit is less dense in nutrients, less nutrients in the soil, might lead to the plants trying to use the pesticides in the place of standard nutrients? Very wild hypothesis
madengr 8y ago
Well it could be worse. Ever look at the label on a food product imported from China? For instance, dried noodles or Old Lady sauce? Here is how to make an artificial egg: https://youtu.be/bcgH6fgedoA https://youtu.be/bcgH6fgedoA
- simplecomplex 8y ago
  That’s a hoax. China does not have a problem with fake eggs made from plastic. Chicken and eggs are a staple of Chinese diet, and both incredibly cheap and plentiful throughout the country.
adamnemecek 8y ago
This is such a great example of market not regulating itself due to information asymmetry.
chrisseaton 8y ago
And of course some foods are banned in the US but not Europe.
- nugator 8y ago
  Do you have any examples? (Genuinely interested)
  - chrisseaton 8y ago
    Haggis, is one example. They don't like the sheep lung used in it, apparently.
    - adventured 8y ago
      Haggis is not illegal in the US. It's illegal to import it eg from the UK. You can make and sell haggis domestically in the US.
      - chrisseaton 8y ago
        > You can make and sell haggis domestically in the US I don't know if you're an expert in Haggis, so maybe you know more than me, but this FAQ says otherwise. http://www.scottishhaggis.com/index.php/frequently-asked-questions/ http://www.scottishhaggis.com/index.php/frequently-asked-que... > the USDA does not allow sheep lungs to be used in manufacture
        eesmith 8y ago
        The text before your quote is "since we cannot import haggis to the US our haggis for the US market is made in Bangor Maine" and the text immediately after is "all haggis made in the US except our haggis links is in an artificial casing". In other words, you pointed to a source which confirms that it is possible to make and sell haggis domestically in the US.
        8y ago
nugator 8y ago
As a European I'm interested in knowing what most Americans thinks about this (their food has additives that is forbidden in Europe). Is there a feeling of Europeans being too cautious or would you like to have the same rules?
- lj3 8y ago
  I would love to if the US had the same food quality laws that European countries have. By HN standards, I'm a right wing nutcase and am in favor of as small a government as we can stand, but our food is killing us. Bread has sugar in it. If you want bread without sugar in it, you must either pay more for the organic stuff or make it yourself. If you want bread without any additives or preservatives at all, you must buy your wheat from outside the country. Wheat in the US is fortified with iron and vitamin B by law.
  - Markoff 8y ago
    pretty sure sugar it's basic ingredient to make bread even in Europe to help yeast in warm water by my small experience with baking bread and going through tons of recipes also what's wrong with iron and vitamin?
  - tptacek 8y ago
    "Bread with sugar in it" isn't banned in Europe.
    - RyJones 8y ago
      Indeed. It's everywhere.
    - kyriakos 8y ago
      I believe the difference is that you can buy bread without sugar without resorting to overpriced organic bread.
  - kortilla 8y ago
    So do you propose that bread with sugar be banned?
guidedlight 8y ago
Interestingly, Kinder Surprise chocolate eggs are banned in the US but sold almost everywhere else. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinder_Surprise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinder_Surprise
- jacquesm 8y ago
  After 30 billion of them sold you'd think that if they were really dangerous we'd have noticed by now.
loopycode 8y ago
MSG it such a shame it's found everywhere. IT'S A health hazard.
- simplecomplex 8y ago
  MSG is not a health hazard. That’s a myth unfounded by science, often associated with the placebo “Chinese restaurant syndrome”. MSG occurs naturally in all sorts of things, seaweed, celery, meats, etc.
- PretzelPirate 8y ago
  Is it really? Most of the things I’ve read say that there isn’t any evidence showing it causes long-lasting problems. Are there studies that show consumption (not injections) of MSG cause health issues beyond what sodium causes?
- rubatuga 8y ago
  Your comment is a health hazard. Monsodium glutamate is simply the salt form of the glutamate amino acid (Glu), an amino acid found in virtually every protein or meat that you eat.
- donatj 8y ago
  That’s untrue. It’s safe and delicious.
tpush 8y ago
So, none of the things banned or severely restricted by the EU are actually proven to be harmful. I'm not sure if I prefer the more liberal approach by the US or the more conservative one by the EU. In general I'm in favor of only banning things when they're proven to cause harm, so innovation is not stifled because of some nonsense hysteria. Since this is concerning my health though, I'm really unsure.
wcoenen 8y ago
The article mentions growth hormones. Although banned throughout the EU in 1988, they are likely still used illegally. Notably, the "hormone maffia" murdered Belgian inspector Karel Van Noppen in 1995. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Karel_Van_Noppen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Karel_Van_Noppen
mariuolo 8y ago
They left out chlorinated chicken.
dwyer 8y ago
Anything with e. coli I presume.
yellowapple 8y ago
Wait, what's the problem with Red 40? Besides it being bug-juice, if course.
knbknb 8y ago
In Europe, the food industry can legally apply lots of food-altering measures from a large bag of tricks. To name a few: Foaming up stuff, adding water to add weight; using cheap low quality substitutes; removing bitter ingredients from decaying fruit by "steam-cleaning"; enzymes in the bread dough ... In 2018 or 2017 they removed the import ban for high fructose corn syrup from the USA into the EU. Now HFCS making its way into many supermarket products.
- amai 8y ago
  Please cite your sources.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
Fnoord 8y ago
M&Ms use natural colouring in EU, but artificial in US, even though the artificial ones are deemed more safe. Thank you, E-number hysteria.

71 points by NinjaX 8y ago

Anytime we talk about "banning" something I prefer a very conservative approach (conservative as in let's not ban things unless we are really sure). We are constantly learning new things that upend what we used to accept as science regarding nutrition and how the human body works. I think we do ourselves a disservice sometimes by banning things that we don't understand (and sometimes we think we understand but really don't). That said, there is something wrong with our food. We have had an explosion in auto-immune disorders over the last few decades that is accelerating. Allergies to common foods are increasing rapidly as well. An allergist that I see has recently starting adding citrus tests to her test panel, because citrus is suddenly (and for unknown reasons) becoming a big problem. I don't know what's wrong, but I do hope we figure it out.

adamnemecek 8y ago
How is it a disservice?
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- freedomben 8y ago
  Do you think the Cannabis ban was a disservice?
orf 8y ago
Why is it a disservice to demand we are sure something won't harm us before we build and industry around it? Can you name any specific items that you feel it was a disservice to ban, and say why?
- kortilla 8y ago
  Many of these food tech choices are the difference between more starvation and high enough yield to feed poor people. If we farmed the way we did 100 years ago, there would be mass starvation. The yield just isn’t there. The FDA faces the same ethical dilemma every time they decide on new drugs. A slow approval process is literally letting people suffer and die in exchange for trials with more certainty. The old FDA food guidelines that shape what schools are allowed to feed children are a perfect example of the stupidity of legislating based on poorly understood food science. “Carbs are good, fats are bad!” Low sodium guidelines because “salt kills people!” also turned out to be pretty stupid in retrospect.
  - ilikehurdles 8y ago
    If the cause of starvation were under-production, I’d sympathize with this argument. But given the amount of food waste in Western countries, I’d say the real issue is one of distribution or access. Producers make production efficient not in order to feed the poor, but to increase margin by lowering the costs of production. Growth hormones exist to make the agriculturist more money, they don’t help feed a war torn country. If the priority of these systems were solving hunger, we’d disincentive meat and dairy production and incentivize high nutritious vegetarian production. When we’re dumping corn into salmon feed, sugars, and vehicle fuel, I can’t fall for the idea that food is constrained by supply.
    - kortilla 8y ago
      The cause of starvation is lack of food available at a given price point. Producers make production efficient to capture more of the market at the lower price points on the demand curve. There aren’t enough rich people to pay for thick margins at a large scale in the food industry. The only ones with large margins are the organic farmers selling to rich people. Growth hormones exist to make chicken much faster, which means much cheaper chicken for consumers and to make the chicken raisers more money. If it weren’t cheaper, people wouldn’t buy more of it and it likely wouldn’t be worth the investment. Here’s a thought exercise, why do you think sellers of factory chickens outsell free range chickens by orders of magnitude? If the only difference was margin and not price, nobody would buy the factory stuff.
Nasrudith 8y ago
How do you know that it is food related in itself? It is a common area of anxiety but I don't think much has stood up to statistical scrutiny - otherwise they'd start to see far more significant differences from differing lifestyles and diets. There are many possible culprits from gut bacteria to hygiene hypothesis of an overactive immune system going after anything that remotely looks the part due to having evolved in filthier environments and being evolutionary "calibrated" to be overactive by default because parasites immunosuppress.
- freedomben 8y ago
  > How do you know that it is food related in itself? I don't know that for sure. It's simply my suspicion as a mostly layperson that has spent years researching and experimenting on myself through various diets, everything from SAD (Standard American Diet) to Paleo, AIP, Carnivore, Keto, etc. I notice a huge difference in the way I feel based on how I'm eating.
DRW_ 8y ago
>Anytime we talk about "banning" something I prefer a very conservative approach (conservative as in let's not ban things unless we are really sure). We are constantly learning new things that upend what we used to accept as science regarding nutrition and how the human body works. I think we do ourselves a disservice sometimes by banning things that we don't understand (and sometimes we think we understand but really don't). If you aren't sure, then I don't think I get the logic on the default being "okay, feed it to your kids!". Surely it makes more sense to be cautious about the things we ingest..
- freedomben 8y ago
  > Surely it makes more sense to be cautious about the things we ingest.. Completely agree > If you aren't sure, then I don't think I get the logic on the default being "okay, feed it to your kids!". False dichotomy. I don't think the choices are either "ban it" or "okay, feed it to your kids!" There's a middle ground there that I think makes more sense.
  - skh 8y ago
    What’s the middle ground you are referrring to? Don’t feed it to kids but feed to adults? If you don’t know something is safe for consumption then it shoulnd’t be sold, right?
    - freedomben 8y ago
      Getting into specific policy prescriptions is tempting the fate of Godwin's Law, but I don't believe it's wise or even possible to regulate every single molecule that gets sold for consumption. Constant evaluation, testing, and liability for people/companies that knowingly use dangerous or harmful ingredients can go a long way here. In fact often times it's the only way broader datasets can be gathered. The market provides a strong incentive here as well not to poison your customers. I also think that education, including warnings on packages, and then letting adults make their own decisions, is a good way to go. One state that I know of recently banned a pest control chemical because some idiot sprayed his dog's food bowl with it. The dog later died. The state's knee jerk response of banning it is counter-productive IMHO. I've been using it for DIY pest control for many years and it is one of the most effective I know of, and when used as directed is perfectly safe (don't spray anything that will be ingested with it, such as dog food bowls, gardens, etc).
CorvusCrypto 8y ago
>Allergies to common foods are increasing rapidly as well Is there a list of stats for incidence of food allergies? It seems many friends I know (in EU) have food allergies to things like cucumber, hazel, peanuts, also gluten (celiax or something). One person I know has Crohn's disease. I would be curious to see the stats in both US and EU to see if it's really linked to a region's food. Or if it's just that common diets across the world are causing it. Edit: or a third possibility is that rates haven't changed at all and it could be increase in either reporting or population making it seem like it's more commom now than before.
- freedomben 8y ago
  The stats that I've seen were at my allergist's office, so unfortunately I don't have a link. I'll definitely look for one tho. What you say is very interesting. Cucumber (like citrus) was also not something that people really had allergies to until recently (or possibly your third possibility kicks in here). Peanuts and gluten have skyrocketed recently too. Maybe off topic, but I read an interesting theory regarding the use of GMOs to explain this. The logic went basically like this: Plants were genetically modified to be resistant to herbicides -> farmers began spraying fields indiscriminately, knowing that the plants they cared about wouldn't die, but the weeds would, therefore producing bumper crops much more regularly -> This led to one of two possibilities: 1. the chemicals are being consumed in unsafe quantities by humans now when they eat those plants or 2. the mutations that hardened the plants changed their protein structure such that they are less digestible, which leads to intestinal damage, which promotes intestinal permeability, which leads to food allergies to foods not previously a problem.
ghthor 8y ago
I wonder if the citrus is that the land were the groves are farmed has been saturated year after year with pesticides. In addition the fruit is less dense in nutrients, less nutrients in the soil, might lead to the plants trying to use the pesticides in the place of standard nutrients? Very wild hypothesis

madengr 8y ago

Well it could be worse. Ever look at the label on a food product imported from China? For instance, dried noodles or Old Lady sauce? Here is how to make an artificial egg: https://youtu.be/bcgH6fgedoA https://youtu.be/bcgH6fgedoA

simplecomplex 8y ago
That’s a hoax. China does not have a problem with fake eggs made from plastic. Chicken and eggs are a staple of Chinese diet, and both incredibly cheap and plentiful throughout the country.

adamnemecek 8y ago

This is such a great example of market not regulating itself due to information asymmetry.

chrisseaton 8y ago

And of course some foods are banned in the US but not Europe.

nugator 8y ago
Do you have any examples? (Genuinely interested)
- chrisseaton 8y ago
  Haggis, is one example. They don't like the sheep lung used in it, apparently.
  - adventured 8y ago
    Haggis is not illegal in the US. It's illegal to import it eg from the UK. You can make and sell haggis domestically in the US.
    - chrisseaton 8y ago
      > You can make and sell haggis domestically in the US I don't know if you're an expert in Haggis, so maybe you know more than me, but this FAQ says otherwise. http://www.scottishhaggis.com/index.php/frequently-asked-questions/ http://www.scottishhaggis.com/index.php/frequently-asked-que... > the USDA does not allow sheep lungs to be used in manufacture
      - eesmith 8y ago
        The text before your quote is "since we cannot import haggis to the US our haggis for the US market is made in Bangor Maine" and the text immediately after is "all haggis made in the US except our haggis links is in an artificial casing". In other words, you pointed to a source which confirms that it is possible to make and sell haggis domestically in the US.
        8y ago

nugator 8y ago

As a European I'm interested in knowing what most Americans thinks about this (their food has additives that is forbidden in Europe). Is there a feeling of Europeans being too cautious or would you like to have the same rules?

lj3 8y ago
I would love to if the US had the same food quality laws that European countries have. By HN standards, I'm a right wing nutcase and am in favor of as small a government as we can stand, but our food is killing us. Bread has sugar in it. If you want bread without sugar in it, you must either pay more for the organic stuff or make it yourself. If you want bread without any additives or preservatives at all, you must buy your wheat from outside the country. Wheat in the US is fortified with iron and vitamin B by law.
- Markoff 8y ago
  pretty sure sugar it's basic ingredient to make bread even in Europe to help yeast in warm water by my small experience with baking bread and going through tons of recipes also what's wrong with iron and vitamin?
- tptacek 8y ago
  "Bread with sugar in it" isn't banned in Europe.
  - RyJones 8y ago
    Indeed. It's everywhere.
  - kyriakos 8y ago
    I believe the difference is that you can buy bread without sugar without resorting to overpriced organic bread.
- kortilla 8y ago
  So do you propose that bread with sugar be banned?

guidedlight 8y ago

Interestingly, Kinder Surprise chocolate eggs are banned in the US but sold almost everywhere else. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinder_Surprise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinder_Surprise

jacquesm 8y ago
After 30 billion of them sold you'd think that if they were really dangerous we'd have noticed by now.

loopycode 8y ago

MSG it such a shame it's found everywhere. IT'S A health hazard.

simplecomplex 8y ago
MSG is not a health hazard. That’s a myth unfounded by science, often associated with the placebo “Chinese restaurant syndrome”. MSG occurs naturally in all sorts of things, seaweed, celery, meats, etc.
PretzelPirate 8y ago
Is it really? Most of the things I’ve read say that there isn’t any evidence showing it causes long-lasting problems. Are there studies that show consumption (not injections) of MSG cause health issues beyond what sodium causes?
rubatuga 8y ago
Your comment is a health hazard. Monsodium glutamate is simply the salt form of the glutamate amino acid (Glu), an amino acid found in virtually every protein or meat that you eat.
donatj 8y ago
That’s untrue. It’s safe and delicious.

tpush 8y ago

So, none of the things banned or severely restricted by the EU are actually proven to be harmful. I'm not sure if I prefer the more liberal approach by the US or the more conservative one by the EU. In general I'm in favor of only banning things when they're proven to cause harm, so innovation is not stifled because of some nonsense hysteria. Since this is concerning my health though, I'm really unsure.

wcoenen 8y ago

The article mentions growth hormones. Although banned throughout the EU in 1988, they are likely still used illegally. Notably, the "hormone maffia" murdered Belgian inspector Karel Van Noppen in 1995. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Karel_Van_Noppen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Karel_Van_Noppen

mariuolo 8y ago

They left out chlorinated chicken.

dwyer 8y ago

Anything with e. coli I presume.

yellowapple 8y ago

Wait, what's the problem with Red 40? Besides it being bug-juice, if course.

knbknb 8y ago

In Europe, the food industry can legally apply lots of food-altering measures from a large bag of tricks. To name a few: Foaming up stuff, adding water to add weight; using cheap low quality substitutes; removing bitter ingredients from decaying fruit by "steam-cleaning"; enzymes in the bread dough ... In 2018 or 2017 they removed the import ban for high fructose corn syrup from the USA into the EU. Now HFCS making its way into many supermarket products.

amai 8y ago
Please cite your sources.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

Fnoord 8y ago

M&Ms use natural colouring in EU, but artificial in US, even though the artificial ones are deemed more safe. Thank you, E-number hysteria.