4 ms·
Definitely. The issue here is that we have a chemical which is deemed dubious enough when it comes to human safety than it is banned in the EU, but food compan
by WastingMyTime89 4y ago
Definitely.
The issue here is that we have a chemical which is deemed dubious enough when it comes to human safety than it is banned in the EU, but food companies would rather keep using it above any of the safer alternatives to save cents on the dollar instead of protecting the US population.
- keneda7 4y agoI believe this comes down to the difference in the US vs EU. The US focus more on the probability of something being harmful whereas the EU focus more on the possibility of something being harmful. edit: to explain more. There is always a possibility that a meteor is going to crash through my roof and kill me this instant but the probability of that happening are very very very tiny.
- orwin 4y agoNo, the difference is that in the EU, you have to prove your product isn't harmful to use it, in the US you have to prove the product is harmful to ban it. Precautionary principle or something like this.
- floor2 4y agoI think the critical difference between US and EU here is that the regulators in EU who are supposed to protect people actually work to protect people. The regulators who are supposed to protect people in the US work to set themselves up for their next job going to work at the companies they're currently regulating.