5,580
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 10:
Line 10: + + + + + + +
Talk:Food additives and addiction (view source)
Revision as of 04:30, November 24, 2008
, 04:30, November 24, 2008no edit summary
HelpJazz, I have added quotes about MSG's addictiveness. I am not using scare tactics and I resent you calling me a liberal (the irony of whose mouth that's coming from). If MSG is so addictive and is behind the obesity epidemic which liberals are so keen to ignore in favor of "world poverty" (see: [[Obesity#World issues on Hunger vs. Obesity|here]]), then scientists and the FDA have a moral responsibility to make Americans aware of its addictive power. Depending on how addictive it is, it may need regulation, like the removal of cocaine from Coca-Cola (or do you consider that a scare tactic too?). Again, I will stress that there is a BIG difference between any sort of regulation of addictive or toxic substances (such as cocaine, the toxic additives China has put in its products, etc) and the liberal desire to regulate unhealthy components of food (like trans fats, sugars, butter). If liberals had free reign we'd all be eating boiled hemp and washing it down with seaweed puree. -[[User:Foxtrot|Foxtrot]] 22:05, 23 November 2008 (EST)
HelpJazz, I have added quotes about MSG's addictiveness. I am not using scare tactics and I resent you calling me a liberal (the irony of whose mouth that's coming from). If MSG is so addictive and is behind the obesity epidemic which liberals are so keen to ignore in favor of "world poverty" (see: [[Obesity#World issues on Hunger vs. Obesity|here]]), then scientists and the FDA have a moral responsibility to make Americans aware of its addictive power. Depending on how addictive it is, it may need regulation, like the removal of cocaine from Coca-Cola (or do you consider that a scare tactic too?). Again, I will stress that there is a BIG difference between any sort of regulation of addictive or toxic substances (such as cocaine, the toxic additives China has put in its products, etc) and the liberal desire to regulate unhealthy components of food (like trans fats, sugars, butter). If liberals had free reign we'd all be eating boiled hemp and washing it down with seaweed puree. -[[User:Foxtrot|Foxtrot]] 22:05, 23 November 2008 (EST)
:Thank you for adding quotes/cites. Now let's go through them:
:*[http://www.msgtruth.org/addiction.htm this] (which I found as well) does not say that MSG is addictive; it says that GBGA (which is created from, but not the same as MSG) "may be addictive". The quality of the source itself is rather suspect. It uses big words, but is a rather unprofessional design and doesn't cite any studies which show that MSG is addictive
:*[http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/addiction/reward/pathways.html This] cite (which is redundant; it's just linked from the first cite) again doesn't say that MSG is addictive. In fact, the source doesn't mention MSG (nor addiction, for that matter), it mentions the essential role of glutamate in the body. So if glutamate can be gained from MSG (and without looking it up, I honestly don't know), then that citation says that MSG is essential for brain function.
:*[http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/442155/monosodium_glutamate_msg_the_addiction.html?cat=5 This] cite is from a user-generated site. In other words, anyone can write whatever they want. But let's assume, for sake of discussion, that the reference is realiable: it still doesn't say that MSG is addictive. It says that MSG makes you ''hungry'' by stimulating insulin production. Eating a bowl of sugar does the exact same thing. Should we add sugar to this page? The article tries to say that you crave chips because they have MSG, but clearly chips are craved for some other reason: [http://www.fritolay.com/fl/flstore/cgi-bin/Nutrition_ProdID_3001.htm potato] [http://www.fritolay.com/fl/flstore/cgi-bin/Nutrition_ProdID_3023.htm chips] [http://www.snydersofhanover.com/en/products.php?cat=6&id=57 don't] [http://www.fritolay.com/fl/flstore/cgi-bin/Nutrition_ProdID_3057.htm contain] [http://fritolay.com/fl/flstore/cgi-bin/Nutrition_ProdID_3065.htm MSG].
:I'm sorry if you think I called you a liberal, but I didn't mean to. I said you were using liberal tactics, which I still think is true. (I'm not a liberal, as I've said numerous times, but now you know what it feels like, eh? I don't think you ever incorrectly call people liberals, but maybe you can tell your friends to be more careful.)
:As to cocaine in Coke: as an economic conservative, I believe that the free market will remove harmful additives from food. In the case of Coke, [http://www.snopes.com/cokelore/cocaine.asp the free market worked]. The same is happening with the "evil" trans fats -- liberal NYC and Chicago banned trans fats, but most companies simply removed them from their products when they found out consumers didn't like them. We also already mentioned Chinese food: the free market worked again (and most of these people aren't even born Americans!) So are you as bad as the liberals who want to have us eat boiled hemp? No. Are you using bad science to advocate that the government force regulation onto the free market? Yes. I don't call this economic conservatism; if that's what you call it then we'll agree to disagree on that point. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 23:30, 23 November 2008 (EST)