5 ms·

This sort of over-zealous thinking is why I bought a loaf of bread last week that came with a warning stating it "contains chemicals known to the state of Calif

This sort of over-zealous thinking is why I bought a loaf of bread last week that came with a warning stating it "contains chemicals known to the state of California to cause cancer". BREAD. In case anyone is wondering it's because of acrylamide.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
bialpio 4y ago
I'm not sure if I understand what the problem is here. Would you rather not have this information available? It allows you to look up the info about the chemical and decide for yourself if you're ok with it.
- zokier 4y ago
  Putting warnings on everything teaches people just to ignore the warnings, which is net-negative effect.
  - bialpio 4y ago
    But at what level of increased cancer risk do you draw the line? 2x higher risk? 5 / 100 000 higher incidence? Whatever you pick, it won't be the risk level that is acceptable to everyone (as the pandemic shows, people have different tolerance to risk). I think I prefer a world where the consumer is given more information, ideally with sufficient context to make an informed choice.
    - assttoasstmgr 4y ago
      > I think I prefer a world where the consumer is given more information, ideally with sufficient context to make an informed choice. So a bag of potato chips should come with a Safety Data Sheet? Maybe a big red tag attached to persimmons in the produce department warning you they can cause bezoars? I prefer a world where that's considered insane. The human race has made it this far without this degree of coddling. And no, I'm not suggesting we go back to the days of steak and cigarette sandwiches but people should be entrusted to make reasonable decisions without the need for scare tactics.
      - bialpio 4y ago
        > So a bag of potato chips should come with a Safety Data Sheet? Or a QR code w/ link to SDS for those who care. > Maybe a big red tag attached to persimmons in the produce department warning you they can cause bezoars? Great idea! I have not known about unripened persimmons causing bezoars, thank you! > The human race has made it this far without this degree of coddling. And no, I'm not suggesting we go back to the days of steak and cigarette sandwiches but people should be entrusted to make reasonable decisions without the need for scare tactics. Why put warnings on cigarettes / alcohol at all then? Why isn't that "too much coddling"? Human race will survive even if we go back to using leaded gasoline and asbestos (after all, it survived a period when that was common), so if that's the only goal you have, I think we're already there and the warnings are not reducing our chances. > (...) people should be entrusted to make reasonable decisions without the need for scare tactics. And how do you make sure that they do? What's reasonable for you is not the same as what's reasonable for me. What you think may be common knowledge may not be as common for others (TIL about persimmons).
- ben_w 4y ago
  From what I understand, there are penalties for failing to display that message when such substances are present, but no penalties for displaying it when they aren’t, so even if you see it it may just be covering backsides rather than actually useful.
  - bialpio 4y ago
    But then aren't you at a disadvantage when you display such a warning and your competitor doesn't? Reminds me of https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15 https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dict...
    - ben_w 4y ago
      Yes, perhaps. Out of curiosity I’ve locked up the list. It includes: “alcoholic beverages”, “bitumen”, “leather dust”, “testosterone”, “unleaded gasoline”, “wood dust”, and I can also recognise several medicines on the list. I wonder if it’s even possible to avoid all these things?
geysersam 4y ago
That's ridiculous. If it is seriously dangerous, ban it. Don't condition people into ignoring warning labels.
bornfreddy 4y ago
And... you still bought and ate it? It's BREAD, why would there be something called acrylamide in it? Good job California!
- assttoasstmgr 4y ago
  "Although researchers are still unsure of the precise mechanisms by which acrylamide forms in foods, many believe it is a byproduct of the Maillard reaction. In fried or baked goods, acrylamide may be produced by the reaction between asparagine and reducing sugars (fructose, glucose, etc.) or reactive carbonyls at temperatures above 120 °C (248 °F)." [1] And that is why California is an object of mockery by the rest of the world. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrylamide#Occurrence_in_food_and_associated_health_risks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrylamide#Occurrence_in_food_...
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - bialpio 4y ago
    Keep reading the wiki article for proof that the concern is not CA-specific. "On April 24, 2002, the Swedish National Food Administration announced that acrylamide can be found in baked and fried starchy foods, such as potato chips, breads, and cookies. Concern was raised mainly because of the probable carcinogenic effects of acrylamide." "In 2016, the UK Food Standards Agency launched a campaign called "Go for Gold", warning of the possible cancer risk associated with cooking potatoes and other starchy foods at high temperatures." "From this, they [WHO & FAO of UN] concluded acrylamide levels in food were safe in terms of neuropathy, but raised concerns over human carcinogenicity based on known carcinogenicity in laboratory animals." The summary report for FAO/WHO consultations on acrylamide is available at http://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/67372 http://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/67372: "Risk communication The Consultation would encourage transparent and open risk assessment and risk management processes and recognises the importance of involving interested parties (consumer, industry, retail etc.) in this process at some stages. Risk communication policy could facilitate the crucial communication process between risk assessor and risk manager and among all parties involved."
ben_w 4y ago
I’d be concerned if the bread actually contained any acrylamide. """It is highly toxic, likely to be carcinogenic,[6] but its main derivative polyacrylamide is nontoxic. The possibility that this innocuous bulk chemical contains traces of its hazardous precursor has long attracted attention.""" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrylamide https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrylamide I note another comment saying this has indeed been found in various foods, typically when heated for long periods over 120 C. I don’t think bread gets that hot (when it does it’s called toast).
- assttoasstmgr 4y ago
  > I don’t think bread gets that hot. It does when they bake it. Bread is baked at an average of 200C. How do you think the crust forms?!
  - ben_w 4y ago
    Fair point. I clearly need to call this an early night.
  - mrob 4y ago
    It's also possible to cook bread at lower temperatures, e.g. by steaming. I prefer bread cooked this way because of the lack of crust.
mensetmanusman 4y ago
I imagine some people believe that right when you cross the invisible California border, your face starts melting as all the CA-only cancers start initiating.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

bialpio 4y ago

I'm not sure if I understand what the problem is here. Would you rather not have this information available? It allows you to look up the info about the chemical and decide for yourself if you're ok with it.

zokier 4y ago
Putting warnings on everything teaches people just to ignore the warnings, which is net-negative effect.
- bialpio 4y ago
  But at what level of increased cancer risk do you draw the line? 2x higher risk? 5 / 100 000 higher incidence? Whatever you pick, it won't be the risk level that is acceptable to everyone (as the pandemic shows, people have different tolerance to risk). I think I prefer a world where the consumer is given more information, ideally with sufficient context to make an informed choice.
  - assttoasstmgr 4y ago
    > I think I prefer a world where the consumer is given more information, ideally with sufficient context to make an informed choice. So a bag of potato chips should come with a Safety Data Sheet? Maybe a big red tag attached to persimmons in the produce department warning you they can cause bezoars? I prefer a world where that's considered insane. The human race has made it this far without this degree of coddling. And no, I'm not suggesting we go back to the days of steak and cigarette sandwiches but people should be entrusted to make reasonable decisions without the need for scare tactics.
    - bialpio 4y ago
      > So a bag of potato chips should come with a Safety Data Sheet? Or a QR code w/ link to SDS for those who care. > Maybe a big red tag attached to persimmons in the produce department warning you they can cause bezoars? Great idea! I have not known about unripened persimmons causing bezoars, thank you! > The human race has made it this far without this degree of coddling. And no, I'm not suggesting we go back to the days of steak and cigarette sandwiches but people should be entrusted to make reasonable decisions without the need for scare tactics. Why put warnings on cigarettes / alcohol at all then? Why isn't that "too much coddling"? Human race will survive even if we go back to using leaded gasoline and asbestos (after all, it survived a period when that was common), so if that's the only goal you have, I think we're already there and the warnings are not reducing our chances. > (...) people should be entrusted to make reasonable decisions without the need for scare tactics. And how do you make sure that they do? What's reasonable for you is not the same as what's reasonable for me. What you think may be common knowledge may not be as common for others (TIL about persimmons).
ben_w 4y ago
From what I understand, there are penalties for failing to display that message when such substances are present, but no penalties for displaying it when they aren’t, so even if you see it it may just be covering backsides rather than actually useful.
- bialpio 4y ago
  But then aren't you at a disadvantage when you display such a warning and your competitor doesn't? Reminds me of https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15 https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dict...
  - ben_w 4y ago
    Yes, perhaps. Out of curiosity I’ve locked up the list. It includes: “alcoholic beverages”, “bitumen”, “leather dust”, “testosterone”, “unleaded gasoline”, “wood dust”, and I can also recognise several medicines on the list. I wonder if it’s even possible to avoid all these things?

geysersam 4y ago

That's ridiculous. If it is seriously dangerous, ban it. Don't condition people into ignoring warning labels.

bornfreddy 4y ago

And... you still bought and ate it? It's BREAD, why would there be something called acrylamide in it? Good job California!

assttoasstmgr 4y ago
"Although researchers are still unsure of the precise mechanisms by which acrylamide forms in foods, many believe it is a byproduct of the Maillard reaction. In fried or baked goods, acrylamide may be produced by the reaction between asparagine and reducing sugars (fructose, glucose, etc.) or reactive carbonyls at temperatures above 120 °C (248 °F)." [1] And that is why California is an object of mockery by the rest of the world. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrylamide#Occurrence_in_food_and_associated_health_risks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrylamide#Occurrence_in_food_...
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- bialpio 4y ago
  Keep reading the wiki article for proof that the concern is not CA-specific. "On April 24, 2002, the Swedish National Food Administration announced that acrylamide can be found in baked and fried starchy foods, such as potato chips, breads, and cookies. Concern was raised mainly because of the probable carcinogenic effects of acrylamide." "In 2016, the UK Food Standards Agency launched a campaign called "Go for Gold", warning of the possible cancer risk associated with cooking potatoes and other starchy foods at high temperatures." "From this, they [WHO & FAO of UN] concluded acrylamide levels in food were safe in terms of neuropathy, but raised concerns over human carcinogenicity based on known carcinogenicity in laboratory animals." The summary report for FAO/WHO consultations on acrylamide is available at http://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/67372 http://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/67372: "Risk communication The Consultation would encourage transparent and open risk assessment and risk management processes and recognises the importance of involving interested parties (consumer, industry, retail etc.) in this process at some stages. Risk communication policy could facilitate the crucial communication process between risk assessor and risk manager and among all parties involved."

ben_w 4y ago

I’d be concerned if the bread actually contained any acrylamide. """It is highly toxic, likely to be carcinogenic,[6] but its main derivative polyacrylamide is nontoxic. The possibility that this innocuous bulk chemical contains traces of its hazardous precursor has long attracted attention.""" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrylamide https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrylamide I note another comment saying this has indeed been found in various foods, typically when heated for long periods over 120 C. I don’t think bread gets that hot (when it does it’s called toast).

assttoasstmgr 4y ago
> I don’t think bread gets that hot. It does when they bake it. Bread is baked at an average of 200C. How do you think the crust forms?!
- ben_w 4y ago
  Fair point. I clearly need to call this an early night.
- mrob 4y ago
  It's also possible to cook bread at lower temperatures, e.g. by steaming. I prefer bread cooked this way because of the lack of crust.

mensetmanusman 4y ago

I imagine some people believe that right when you cross the invisible California border, your face starts melting as all the CA-only cancers start initiating.