3 ms·

Yes but which ones in the food supply is your complaint with?

by quasque 13y ago

unclebucknasty 13y ago
To ensure that this doesn't devolve further into pedantic details about specific chemicals, let me move back to the overarching point and ask you a question: Is it your assertion that there are no chemical additives in the food supply that are harmful?
- quasque 13y ago
  Which ones are you stating are harmful? It's not pedantic to ask if you have any good examples of the chemicals you are complaining about. Derailing the conversation with complaints of pedantry is, however, rather unhelpful.
  - unclebucknasty 13y ago
    >It's not pedantic to ask if you have any good examples of the chemicals you are complaining about. Sure it is when it's not the point. If you're really stuck there, then just re-read my comment without the word "chemical". You'll find no impact on my point. So, if you disagree with my actual assertion (which seems to be the case, judging from your other comments on the topic), then you might address them, if you weren't being pedantic. >Derailing the conversation with complaints of pedantry is, however, rather unhelpful. Actually, I am complaining about others derailing the conversation with pedantry. Important difference. But, I see that you are unwilling to answer the simple on-topic question that would address all of this; that being, are you asserting that there are no harmful chemicals in the food supply? Carry on with the downvotes and faux discussion.
    - quasque 13y ago
      I'm not asserting that there are no harmful chemicals at all in the food supply, just asking you which ones you consider the most problematic and widespread throughout our food network. (I didn't downvote anything in this thread, by the way.)
      - unclebucknasty 13y ago
        >I'm not asserting that there are no harmful chemicals at all in the food supply Good enough. We can stop there. This is a discussion about Soylent and its potential benefits/risks. That it seeks to avoid chemical additives is one potential benefit that I posited in the comment that spawned this fork. This is the only reason the word "chemical" entered the discussion. In all honesty, I am not really interested in enumerating a list of problematic food additives. Perhaps you'd like to post another submission?
        quasque 13y ago
        If you're talking about unintentional contamination during manufacturing (for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melamine#Melamine_poisoning_by_tainted_food http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melamine#Melamine_poisoning_by_...), Soylent would not necessarily protect against that. Though one would hope they have sufficiently adequate quality control practices to spot any such contamination before it reaches customers.
        unclebucknasty 13y ago
        You are correct. That is an exceedingly insightful point that I hadn't considered. This is exactly why I appreciate HN. Thanks for sharing.
    - maxerickson 13y ago
      Let's assert something else. The wide majority of food additives do not have large negative effects. A few of them may have relatively large effects that are poorly understood. (It's important to specify the negative aspect; mineral and vitamin fortification both have pretty big positive effects, in countries with legal requirements for fortification, things like rickets are a bizarre anomaly.)

Yes but which ones in the food supply is your complaint with?

by quasque 13y ago

Yes but which ones in the food supply is your complaint with?

To ensure that this doesn't devolve further into pedantic details about specific chemicals, let me move back to the overarching point and ask you a question: Is it your assertion that there are no chemical additives in the food supply that are harmful?

quasque 13y ago
Which ones are you stating are harmful? It's not pedantic to ask if you have any good examples of the chemicals you are complaining about. Derailing the conversation with complaints of pedantry is, however, rather unhelpful.
- unclebucknasty 13y ago
  >It's not pedantic to ask if you have any good examples of the chemicals you are complaining about. Sure it is when it's not the point. If you're really stuck there, then just re-read my comment without the word "chemical". You'll find no impact on my point. So, if you disagree with my actual assertion (which seems to be the case, judging from your other comments on the topic), then you might address them, if you weren't being pedantic. >Derailing the conversation with complaints of pedantry is, however, rather unhelpful. Actually, I am complaining about others derailing the conversation with pedantry. Important difference. But, I see that you are unwilling to answer the simple on-topic question that would address all of this; that being, are you asserting that there are no harmful chemicals in the food supply? Carry on with the downvotes and faux discussion.
  - quasque 13y ago
    I'm not asserting that there are no harmful chemicals at all in the food supply, just asking you which ones you consider the most problematic and widespread throughout our food network. (I didn't downvote anything in this thread, by the way.)
    - unclebucknasty 13y ago
      >I'm not asserting that there are no harmful chemicals at all in the food supply Good enough. We can stop there. This is a discussion about Soylent and its potential benefits/risks. That it seeks to avoid chemical additives is one potential benefit that I posited in the comment that spawned this fork. This is the only reason the word "chemical" entered the discussion. In all honesty, I am not really interested in enumerating a list of problematic food additives. Perhaps you'd like to post another submission?
      - quasque 13y ago
        If you're talking about unintentional contamination during manufacturing (for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melamine#Melamine_poisoning_by_tainted_food http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melamine#Melamine_poisoning_by_...), Soylent would not necessarily protect against that. Though one would hope they have sufficiently adequate quality control practices to spot any such contamination before it reaches customers.
        unclebucknasty 13y ago
        You are correct. That is an exceedingly insightful point that I hadn't considered. This is exactly why I appreciate HN. Thanks for sharing.
  - maxerickson 13y ago
    Let's assert something else. The wide majority of food additives do not have large negative effects. A few of them may have relatively large effects that are poorly understood. (It's important to specify the negative aspect; mineral and vitamin fortification both have pretty big positive effects, in countries with legal requirements for fortification, things like rickets are a bizarre anomaly.)