E numbers freak me out. Not just good old E621 (MSG), but the majority of numbered food additives. I understand there's a regulatory body that
tests these substances in order to ascertain what levels are “safe” for
consumption and that's how they get their little number in the first place. I've read Steven Gates book "on E numbers, is your food really going to kill you? The truth about E numbers", it makes for an interesting read and a significant amount of this post is based on the facts he presents, although I am sure he will disagree with my own personal conclusion.
I don't think it's some big government conspiracy. I do think the food we eat today contains on average a greater abundance of food additives compared to what we were eating 20-30 years ago and sometimes, the only way we discover our mistakes is through the passing of time. It makes me wonder what we will think about certain food additives in 30 years time....
Steven Gates makes the valid point that we shouldn't be afraid of E numbers, instead we should try and understand them, for example some additives we would all recognise such as sodium bicarbonate also has an e-number, E500. But if it is naturally occurring, why don't they just use it's real name? What sane person is going to try and memorise all 319 E numbers and remember which are naturally occurring and which ones are synthetically produced? I don't give a shit that 20 E numbers are naturally created by the human body. Too much of anything can kill a person, even if our own bodies can produce it naturally. I understand that MSG is a naturally occurring compound, but in high concentrations it makes me feel ill, I don't care if there isn't a scientific study that proves it. Call me crazy, but I'd rather consume it at the natural levels, it naturally forms at... in nature.
I know we are told not to fear E numbers because there is no current scientific evidence to suggest they are being consumed at harmful levels, but the thing is…. Science is always evolving, opinions and theories change with time as new evidence comes to light. Doesn't the very fact that some E numbers have been removed from the market (E103 and E105) demonstrate this?
As far as I can tell Steven Gates gives almost all E numbers the green light except for his mildly cautionary warning concerning additives with numbers between and including E210 - E228, which under the the category "should I be afraid of it" he writes, "possibly, if you are prone to allergies or you are on steroid asthma medication." Possibly? seriously? That sounds like some seriously accurate science now doesn't it?
Why is it that allergies have emerged as a major public health problem in developed countries during the twentieth century and not in the underdeveloped countries? Why is it that children being born to parents with no prior history, suffering from life threatening asthma and food allergies? I’m not saying that there is a definitive link between consuming foods with abundant E numbers and a rise in allergies in developed countries, but the fact is that scientists don't know what's causing it. What if it's influenced by what the mother eats during pregnancy? Or by what the man ate during puberty? My mind explodes with the almost infinite possible causes and I believe it's going to take science a long time to figure it out.
If I have a choice, if I want to buy a product like mayonnaise, miso paste or soy milk and especially with foods like butter and yogurt (you would think they are simple to make), if one product has a bunch of numbers in the ingredients list and one doesn’t, I choose the one without the numbers or the least amount of additives. In some foods I'm led to believe they are unavoidable. But if the food scientists keep talking about what are "safe levels of consumption" I'm thinking keeping my levels as low as possible is the way to go.
Follow the Michael Pollan philosophy, “eat food, not too much, mostly plants”.
I don't think it's some big government conspiracy. I do think the food we eat today contains on average a greater abundance of food additives compared to what we were eating 20-30 years ago and sometimes, the only way we discover our mistakes is through the passing of time. It makes me wonder what we will think about certain food additives in 30 years time....
Steven Gates makes the valid point that we shouldn't be afraid of E numbers, instead we should try and understand them, for example some additives we would all recognise such as sodium bicarbonate also has an e-number, E500. But if it is naturally occurring, why don't they just use it's real name? What sane person is going to try and memorise all 319 E numbers and remember which are naturally occurring and which ones are synthetically produced? I don't give a shit that 20 E numbers are naturally created by the human body. Too much of anything can kill a person, even if our own bodies can produce it naturally. I understand that MSG is a naturally occurring compound, but in high concentrations it makes me feel ill, I don't care if there isn't a scientific study that proves it. Call me crazy, but I'd rather consume it at the natural levels, it naturally forms at... in nature.
I know we are told not to fear E numbers because there is no current scientific evidence to suggest they are being consumed at harmful levels, but the thing is…. Science is always evolving, opinions and theories change with time as new evidence comes to light. Doesn't the very fact that some E numbers have been removed from the market (E103 and E105) demonstrate this?
As far as I can tell Steven Gates gives almost all E numbers the green light except for his mildly cautionary warning concerning additives with numbers between and including E210 - E228, which under the the category "should I be afraid of it" he writes, "possibly, if you are prone to allergies or you are on steroid asthma medication." Possibly? seriously? That sounds like some seriously accurate science now doesn't it?
Why is it that allergies have emerged as a major public health problem in developed countries during the twentieth century and not in the underdeveloped countries? Why is it that children being born to parents with no prior history, suffering from life threatening asthma and food allergies? I’m not saying that there is a definitive link between consuming foods with abundant E numbers and a rise in allergies in developed countries, but the fact is that scientists don't know what's causing it. What if it's influenced by what the mother eats during pregnancy? Or by what the man ate during puberty? My mind explodes with the almost infinite possible causes and I believe it's going to take science a long time to figure it out.
If I have a choice, if I want to buy a product like mayonnaise, miso paste or soy milk and especially with foods like butter and yogurt (you would think they are simple to make), if one product has a bunch of numbers in the ingredients list and one doesn’t, I choose the one without the numbers or the least amount of additives. In some foods I'm led to believe they are unavoidable. But if the food scientists keep talking about what are "safe levels of consumption" I'm thinking keeping my levels as low as possible is the way to go.
Follow the Michael Pollan philosophy, “eat food, not too much, mostly plants”.
No comments:
Post a Comment