> The more dangerous "fallacy" is the idea that all food is equivalent until rigorously experimented and proven otherwise. OK, so even if we accept based on no

> The more dangerous "fallacy" is the idea that all food is equivalent until rigorously experimented and proven otherwise. OK, so even if we accept based on no evidence that it isn't, why should we prefer so-called 'natural' foods. And please tell me how GMOs such as corn (maize) and apples are natural, BTW. > This is the mentality that the food industry hangs its hat on to continue producing the worst possible products that still somehow meet FDA and public approval. Appeal to 'corporations are evil' is also a rather dangerous fallacy. > The idea that eating whole foods which have traditionally been cultivated or gathered by humans is generally preferable to a manufactured alternative is not a bad or fallacious principle. Without evidence it is. This bald assertion does your side no favors. > It isn't "because nature", it's because we've been eating those things a long time with a good deal of success Not really. Look at how common deficiency disorders were, back before such horrible modern artificial nonsense such as refrigeration and food preservation. Besides, what my ancestors ate is not the same as what your ancestors ate, most likely, so which is better? Which diet should we follow? And my ancestors didn't all come from the same place, so which of my ancestors' diets should I follow?