Why Does The Media Have A Blindspot On Food Science? -- The Guardian
Recent claims about the safety of certain supermarket foods highlights the lack of awareness that the media has when it comes to food science. Robin Bisson takes a look
http://www.theguardian.com/science/head-quarters/2015/mar/03/why-does-the-media-have-a-blindspot-on-food-science
"Last week the news told us to be scared of our salad. The story came from food journalist Joanna Blythman, who had a lengthy feature article in the Guardians weekend magazine that took readers around a food manufacturers trade show, informing us of the unearthly sounding gunk lurking unseen, and sometimes not on the label, in our favourite convenience foods.
The article is peppered with unnatural sounding products: Glucono-Delta-Lactone, potato protein isolate, texturised soy protein, monosodium glutamate, phosphoric acid, acetone, L-cysteine, glutamate, carrageenan, acetylated distarch adipate, gelatine, lipases, proteases, permeates
The list goes on, and the yuck factor is definitively invoked who wants their salads sloshed with chemicals or their meat gassed? But on closer inspection, its not too clear why we should be disgusted.
Many people equate chemical with bad, and natural with good. But as chemists are at pains to point out, natural things are made up of chemicals too and not all of them are good for you. Deadly nightshade anyone? Potatoes are in the nightshade family, and eating too many green potatoes might deliver you a toxic dose of solanine. Even the humble apple has a complex chemical makeup, including such exotic compounds as 5-hydroxymethylfurfural. So while hijacking the professional language of chemists and food technologists may sound scary, its not enough to put me off my salad quite yet.
But Blythman is suggesting it is the chemicals added to foods that we should be concerned about. On the face of it, it seems reasonable to approach these additives with a raised eyebrow. And thats exactly what food toxicologists do. They work out the lowest amount of a substance that can be eaten at which there is any negative biological effect, and then set thresholds around 100-fold lower for acceptable levels in food.
..."
-----------------------------------------
A very strong, enlightening piece on an issue that is becoming a very real problem, IMO. Please give the whole piece a read.
Thanks, and cheers!