8 Foods In The US That Are Banned Elsewhere [Pic+]

Submitted by: Squrlz4Sale 3 years ago

The American FDA--lapdog of chemical corporations and Big Agra.
There are 40 comments:
Male 2,711
@Runemang
Please cite your sources.

From all accounts, Olestra IS banned in Canada (Canadian ban adds to woes for P&G`s olestra) and pretty much everywhere else except the good ol` USA.

As for "pulled voluntarily," Proctor & Gamble boasts that "More than one million servings of foods with olestra are eaten every day" so not much pulling going on, eh?

And your claim of "never a sinclge case of it" [sic">, even Frito-Lay admits it, albeit only in internal memos.
0
Reply
Male 2,675
#2) point of fact - it`s not "banned" no, but it`s also not used anymore (pulled voluntarily by the company). The "anal leakage" thing became such a HUUUUUUUGE public laughingstock for the company (though supposedly there was never a sinclge case of it actually happening), they pulled it. It`s now used as an industrial lubricant. lol.
0
Reply
Male 757
I am so glad many of these are banned in Canada.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
randomxnp: Yes, even drinking too much water can kill you. It`s called Water intoxication or dilutional hyponatremia. It results in an imbalance in electrolytes which disturbs brain function.

It`s rare, but it shows that even too much of a good thing can be harmful.
0
Reply
Female 112
If I roll my eyes any harder, they`re going to pop out. Shock journalism failed this author.
0
Reply
Male 2,859
Small quantities of arsenic help you build up a tolerance.
0
Reply
Male 1,293
"Someone is drinking 8 liters of effind soda every day. There`s bound to be problems there no matter what`s in that drink"

Indeed drinking 8 litres of water a day can do a lot of harm unless sweating profusely.
0
Reply
Male 1,293
Or the rest of the world in thrall to the pseudo science of the linear-no-threshold model of toxicity.

e.g. "..arsenic is POISON, which will kill you if you ingest enough." and is completely harmless at the doses in even a huge serving of chicken.

These "associations" with cancer, birth defects or whatever are shown by studies where small animals, usually mice, are exposed to vast doses. Those studies have no predictive power whatever for the effect on humans at the doses taken in even by people obsessed with that food type.
0
Reply
Male 352
But at least they stepped right up to the plate and banned those Kinder Surprise death traps.
0
Reply
Male 546
Phew, at least cocaine isn`t on that list. Now I can breath easy.
0
Reply
Female 1,467
Eating things that won`t kill you actually really easy as a consumer. Just read the label and if you don`t know what it does, don`t buy it. It won`t be a hardship it`ll actually be a case of, tl;db (too long; didn`t buy): got to second set of brackets within brackets, decided to make own pasta. fyi: Guar Gum is awesome!
0
Reply
Male 1,162
At first I was like.. "wut?" then I read it and was like.. "oh god.. how can this happen?" then I -really- read it..(The man had uncontrollable spasms and muscle failure after drinking 8 liters of soda every day.)
.. "Well no ****." Im not sherlock but I think I see the problem. Someone is drinking 8 liters of effind soda every day. There`s bound to be problems there no matter what`s in that drink.
0
Reply
Male 2,841
Everything that you will ever enjoy in life will kill you.
0
Reply
Female 1,141
Hmmm...now I want a bagel.
0
Reply
Female 4,349
I have one very strict shopping rule......If it`s made in America, dont buy it. And the fact that is not banned,as I`m sure some of these things are not in NZ, does not mean we use them.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
There`s a big difference between something that is "Linked" with a particular malady and actually being a source or cause to that malady.

You can link virtually any two things together, but that DOES NOT mean that one CAUSES the other to happen.

For instance, Gather data on house fires in any city. Then correlate the number of fire engines at each fire and the damage done at each fire. Report that there is significant relationship between the number of fire engines and the amount of damage. Conclude that fire engines cause the damage.

Yes, It`s that simple and gets that absurd sometimes. So don`t believe all the "Linked To" baloney floating around out there.

Saccharin packets had a cancer warning label on them for over 40 years, until the year 2001 when the warnings were repealed because it was found that the rats they were testing saccharin on have proteins in their urine that humans don`t, thus causing them to get cancer.
0
Reply
Male 2,357
@Squrlz

Also, I`m not opposed to state or even multi-state agencies performing the same function; I`m merely against the federal government doing so.

Actually, many of the problems that occur due to the federal governments involvement would be at least partially alleviated if done by the states. Namely, consumers would still have options rather than dictates. After all, it`s working that way for gay marriage, isn`t it?
0
Reply
Male 2,357
@Squrlz

It`s Not Just Me Who Thinks So...

He does a good job explaining why it`s far easier to see the good done than the harm.

As for your assertion about "Victorian" US, that was a long time ago. Third party testing was not as capable and cheap as it is now. Furthermore, it wasn`t possible to implement accreditations across the nation the way it is now.

While the FDA may have been needed a hundred years ago, to suggest that we would magically revert to an era of consumer ignorance is absurd.
0
Reply
Female 4,086
here`s a news flash for y`all: WE`RE ALL GOING TO DIE SOMEDAY.

go ahead, open the floodgates. i never read responses to my posts anyay.
0
Reply
Male 6,227
@ QueenZira: Your comment prodded me to check Wikipedia. According to the article there, companies started removing olestra from their products in the 1990s because consumers got tired of... you know... stained underwear. But as of 2013, two products still contain it: Lay`s Light potato chips and Pringles Light potato crisps. So for consumers who want to experience anal leakage for themselves, there`s still time! =^.^=
0
Reply
Male 6,227
@ HumanAction:

[quote]Many notable economists have done studies suggesting that the FDA has done far more harm than good.[/quote]
It amazes me to hear that assertion. After all, there is no need to *speculate* as to what life would be like without an FDA: just go back in history prior to the passage of the Pure Food and Drugs Act of 1906. Having spent a lot of my academic life researching and reading about Victorian America, I can tell you that adulterated foods were rampant then: formaldehyde and borax, for example, were commonly added to canned meats to extend their shelf life. Carcasses of domestic animals were routinely thrown in with cattle at slaughterhouses. A holdover from that era is the Quaker gentleman on the box of today`s Quaker Oats: Quakers had a reputation for being honest, so the name and image were chosen to gain the trust of the consumer.

My only regrets about the FDA and EPA are that they aren`t better funded.
0
Reply
Male 3,412
Expanding on the inefficiencies of the EPA:

A block away from my house, there is an abandoned strip mine. I`m not sure how long it`s been abandoned, but it has been for at the very least, 10 years.

Since it had been abandoned, trees, shrubbery, and all sorts of plants had been growing. I`m talking full on forest.

The EPA decided to cut down all the trees, clear out all the plants, put a fence around the area, and a sign that reads that the EPA is helping us...

Helping us how? The only thing I can see what they could`ve done was de-sulfur the area. But why tear down a mini forest? If things were growing, why not keep it as is. If it hasn`t been hurting anything for the decade and a half that it`s been abandoned, why touch it?

... /rant
0
Reply
Male 2,357
[quote]I have heard lots of republicans say they want the EPA, FDA, and other bureaucracies that "hurt the free market".[/quote]
Many notable economists have done studies suggesting that the FDA has done far more harm than good. We get so caught up on the successes (like banning Thalidomide) that we forget the lives lost due to good drugs being banned. Milton Friedman has an excellent video on the harm the FDA has done.

As for the EPA, I work very closely with two national laboratories that focus on industrial hygiene. Everyone I`ve talked to there says that 3rd party regulations (accreditations) are far more successful and stricter than the EPA. For example, the EPA says a chemical can only be dumped in some PPM. So, companies bring in water, dilute the chemical to the acceptable PPM, and dump the same amount anyway. They also say that the EPA is way too slow to react.
0
Reply
Female 2,228
Heck I know places in Chicago that`ll give you foie gras on your `dawgs. (Fusion foodies, gotta love `em).

But Olestra? I`m pretty sure we got rid of that in the early `90s, I could be wrong but I doubt it.
0
Reply
Male 1,284
by the way the absinthe you drink is not real absinthe so yes it is banned
0
Reply
Male 6,227
I`m glad this was well-received. I thought there was a good chance that it would kick off a debate or two since some of the remarks regarding the substances are alarmist, I`ll admit.

Overall, I thought the article serves to make an important point: In Europe, if an artificial food additive is *possibly* harmful and serves only a cosmetic purpose, most countries will ban it. In the U.S., *possibly* harmful ingredients are typically allowed, even if their use is only for cosmetic purposes. Why the difference? I`m not sure what`s happening abroad, but it`s pretty clear that the U.S. FDA`s strings are pulled by the corporations.

Another thing I liked about the piece was that it contains links should you want to research more about a food additive and make your own decision as to whether you want to avoid it or not.
0
Reply
Male 1,284
im all for the coca in my cola
0
Reply
Male 3,445
@Rodin: Absinthe is no longer banned here.

Foie gras is not banned in the US. The traditional practice (force feeding the bird to enlarge the liver) is banned in California. Technically, I`m not sure I would call that a "natural food" anyway.
0
Reply
Male 7,907
Andrew1555

"HolyGod has an elementary understanding of the free market."

I was being incredibly sarcastic. I have heard lots of republicans say they want the EPA, FDA, and other bureaucracies that "hurt the free market". It just boggles my mind.
0
Reply
Male 892
Piperfawn - Well now the Americans can experience a real wiener.
0
Reply
Female 7,833
Some of that looks nasty- I had no idea your food was coloured with those dyes though- I wondered why some of it was so bright!
0
Reply
Male 5,005
Rodin i think that recently the embargo for italians sausages (prosciutto,salame,mortadella,coppa,spek and so on) is expired in U.S.
0
Reply
Male 2,578
As for China.
0
Reply
Male 2,578
HolyGod has an elementary understanding of the free market. If you let them regulate themselves, the market is not free. There is no way to protect against monopolies and price gauging and a number of other things. The government`s role is to create an environment for the free market to operate (i.e. uphold the, you know, rule of law). People like you love to use the word "regulations" as a catch all term to describe what is inherently good and needed for society. This is beyond dumb. Some regulations are good, some are bad. That`s not even a bold thing to say, it`s just obvious. And obviously protecting consumers is mandated by the constitution, so I don`t know why you`re getting your panties in a bunch about this. But then again, you are a weirdo.
0
Reply
Male 1,803
Potassium Bromate is banned in China but allowed in the US...(!)

In my opinion, anything to do with food that`s banned in China but allowed in your local supermarket by definition should automatically deserve closer investigating re whether it`s safe or not. I mean, China doesn`t exactly have the strictest food safety laws in the world (exploding water melons, tainted baby milk, etc etc), so I`d look at anything they have banned that I can still get hold of without knowing...
0
Reply
Male 892
Some natural foods that are banned in the US:

Foie Gras
Unpasturized Cheese
Casu Marzu
True Proscuitto
Absinthe
Oaxacan Pork

0
Reply
Male 37,888

@ HolyGod - if we allowed food corporations to regulate themselves, we`d still have cocaine in coca cola.

So....sure! Let`s do what HolyGod said.
0
Reply
Male 7,907
Let`s just get rid of the FDA all together and let corporations regulate themselves. That is what is best for the free market.
0
Reply
Female 3,696
and yet they can`t have Kinder eggs because their kids are too stupid not to eat the plastic egg inside...XD We don`t want you to die instantly! Just nice and slow...
0
Reply
Male 6,227
Link: 8 Foods In The US That Are Banned Elsewhere [Pic+] [Rate Link] - The American FDA--lapdog of chemical corporations and Big Agra.
0
Reply