6 ms·
I understand that these dumb decisions are mostly profit motivated. But nobody stops to think that the reaction abroad may be: do not eat anything produced at U
by estebarb 1y ago
I understand that these dumb decisions are mostly profit motivated. But nobody stops to think that the reaction abroad may be: do not eat anything produced at USA?
- sedawkgrep 1y agoIf you view all this through the lens of the goal of administration being to weaken the US both internally and as a world power, it all comes much more clearly into focus. Then it can be seen as no longer a disparate collection of seemingly random political, social, and economic moves, but rather as a directed, intentional movement.
- cluckindan 1y agoThat is already a prevailing opinion
- Insanity 1y agoIn EU we by and large don’t eat what America produces though. The same products like Doritos etc will have different ingredients in EU compared to US. US typically gets the cheaper and worse option (less safe). Same for American coke w/ Cane Sugar instead of actual sugar. Americans will regularly consume chemicals that are potentially carcinogenic and banned in EU. EDIT: I meant high fructose corn syrup, not cane sugar. My bad!
- PartiallyTyped 1y agoDoritos even have different ingredients between EU countries. I have tested this in Denmark, Poland, Cyprus, Ireland and Germany.
- ReptileMan 1y agoThat is mostly because the same brand made for Eastern europe tastes like shit compared to the stuff for western. Worst offenders are nutella and coca cola. but there are many others.
- PartiallyTyped 1y agoIndeed, Doritos in Poland tasted garbage compared to those in Denmark, Ireland, and Germany.
- randycupertino 1y agoThat's pretty interesting. Were there different flavors in each country as well? My friend brought me some paprika pringles from iceland and they were delicious. So good that we ordered them online but the online versions shipped terribly and were delivered as pringles dust. I used it to bread chicken which still was pretty good. But if you are in iceland get the paprika pringles!
- recursive 1y agoWhere does actual sugar come from?
- Implicated 1y agoDef not sugar canes :D
- overfeed 1y agoPerhaps they are strictly traditionalist and only accept beet sugar, and none of that new-world cane stuff that doesn't grow well in European climes ./s In all likelihood, they meant to say corn syrup.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- Implicated 1y ago> Same for American coke w/ Cane Sugar instead of actual sugar. I think you meant high fructose corn syrup instead of cane sugar (which is real sugar)
- vixen99 1y agoExactly. To remind us - it's the fructose which is a metabolic problem in amounts over a certain value - worth checking out why. Cane sugar and beet sugar both contain sucrose which is one glucose linked to one fructose molecule so you get half the fructose.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- SpicyLemonZest 1y agoYou don’t get half because nobody’s sweetening things with 100% fructose. The most common HFCS compositions are 42% and 55% fructose.
- Insanity 1y agoWoops, my bad, you are right!
- natebc 1y ago> Same for American coke w/ Cane Sugar instead of actual sugar. American Coke is sweetened with Corn Syrup. Maybe it's just me being a dumb American probably fooled by some green washing but isn't Cane Sugar better? What's "actual sugar" in the EU?
- supportengineer 1y agoI think they meant to say corn syrup.
- DoctorOetker 1y agono opinion on the rest, but at least in western europe, "normal" white sugar derives from sugar beets.
- joemaniaci 1y agoFun fact: high fructose corn syrup has almost the same sugar content as honey.
- Workaccount2 1y agoCane sugar and corn syrup are both just sugar. Your health isn't going to be any better drinking cane sugar coke than corn syrup coke. The reason corn syrup is demonized is because it is cheap, enabling lots of foods to pack sugar without much cost. The health concerns remain consistent across all forms of sugar.
- throwaway5752 1y agoIncorrect. There is more fructose in HFCS used in Coke, HFCS 55. Fructose is metabolized in the liver, and stored as fat there. Glucose is directly metabolized by cells throughout the body. Also there is no single reason that HFCS is demonized, there are multiple good reasons why it is harmful in the US. It is also not a singular cause to all US diet related pathologies. Staying on topic, the chemicals the EPA will no longer enforce the laws for pollution for are demonstrably harmful. The EPA has unilaterally decided not to do its job because it doesn't care about the health of the citizens of the US.
- Workaccount2 1y agoCorn syrup is 55% fructose and sugar is 50%. Functionally they are the same. Even if coke was made with organic wild honey, it would still be awful for you.
- MaxRegret 1y agoIt turns out the acidic environment in most beverages inverts the sucrose in cane sugar to form a 50:50 mix of fructose and glucose. In the end, the fructose/glucose ratio in cane-sugar-sweetened drinks becomes similar to high-fructose corn syrup, which is about 55:42. And the reaction is quick: about half the sucrose gets inverted in about three weeks. [1] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NY66qpMFOYo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NY66qpMFOYo
- traceroute66 1y ago> The reason corn syrup is demonized is because it is cheap, enabling lots of foods to pack sugar without much cost. This ! The OP made a bad point using coke as an example. The actual point is the HFCS and the fact that HFCS is used extensively in the US, often in places you would not expect it. In bread products for example its common to find HFCS in it in the US. The Europeans rarely put any form of sugar in their bread doughs unless they are explicitly baking a sweet product. And even then, the concentration is lower.
- scarface_74 1y agoI was with you until you said cane sugar vs corn syrup. What do you think the actual benefits or drawbacks of one over the other is?
- traceroute66 1y ago> In EU we by and large don’t eat what America produces though. The trouble is you do still find US products, and they should be avoided like the plague. US-grown nuts for example. Pesticides galore.....
- Insanity 1y agoThat’s fair, but alternatives are usually pretty easy to find.
- joemaniaci 1y agoI'm American and I've decided at least with cookware that I'm only buying European made products. I don't have a choice with ingredients but at least I can buy European pots and pans knowing it's more regulated.
- throw-qqqqq 1y ago> US typically gets the cheaper and worse option (less safe) Yes. EU has the precautionary principle: you may market the product after documenting its safety. In the US, it’s often the other way around: you can market the product unless/until someone can show it to be unsafe. This is often a point of conflict e.g. when negotiating free trade agreements between US and EU, as the US often sees this as a technical barrier to trade and protectionism.
- nielsbot 1y agoI think there’s a deep fundamental psychosis of the right wing to get the world back to “survival of the fittest”. If you die of PFAs, poverty, other pollution, well then that’s just bad luck for you. They just don’t believe in a society that cares for the weak and needy.
- hollerith 1y ago>They just don’t believe in a society that cares for the weak and needy. There is some truth to that, but I don't think that explains their position on PFAS because too much PFAS will disable even a strong healthy person. In this particular, it's more that they think that the harm is being exaggerated and that the actual, non-exaggerated degree of harm does not justify putting restrictions on business and commerce.
- shigawire 1y ago>that they think that the harm is being exaggerated and that the actual, non-exaggerated degree of harm does not justify putting restrictions on business and commerce I struggle to find a topic where they don't think this. It seems the burden of "proof" is too high. They don't believe in risks to health, the environment, climate, or even functional democracy itself. They think all are fake and profit is more important.
- hollerith 1y agoWhat you say is true in general, but there are execeptions: for example, the Republicans judge the harm done by heroin, fentanyl, amphetamine and cocaine to be very high -- probably higher than the average estimate of the harm as judged by the Democrats. Ditto street crime.
- nielsbot 1y agoMy understanding (without data, sorry) is that the conservative position blames drug addiction on bad choices and evil, rather than circumstances. As well the focus is on authoritarian policing as opposed to “harm reduction”. These are generalities, sure
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- forgotoldacc 1y agoI'm an American who's been living outside the US for a very long time. I always check where food is from at the grocery store before I buy it. Whenever possible, the US is one of a few countries where I avoid almost all ingredients. When it comes to meat, it's a 100% absolute refusal to purchase. The quality is so different that the taste is immediately obvious, and it's not good.
- hedora 1y agoYeah, but we’re doing great at avoiding mad cow disease recalls. Every time a sample comes up positive, we cut the sample percentage by an order of magnitude. Problem solved. See also: Tainted meat from Boar’s Head. We also have the “nitrate free” and “uncured” labels, which means the nitrate (pink curing salt) is called “celery salt” in the ingredient list, and the manufacturer is exempt from federal caps on the amount they added. (Celery salt is the same exact chemical, but with a different production process.)
- Krssst 1y agoThey can force foreign countries into importing by threatening tariffs. Though I guess they cannot force-feed it to international consumers in the end.