Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

The 7 Nastiest Things Lurking in Your Supermarket

Big A

By Big A,
in Huddle Lounge

Recommended Posts

Big A Newbie

Big A

Posted
Posted

Great article the puts together a lot of info in one place. I posted most of the article below, but if you use the link, there are a ton of very good info articles at this site.

http://www.hungryforchange.tv/article/the-7-nastiest-things-lurking-in-your-supermarket

THE 7 NASTIEST THINGS LURKING IN YOUR SUPERMARKET

By Judy Molland, Care 2

If you've watched the Food Matters or Hungry For Change films, you'll understand how important it is to read ingredient labels. So often, dubious food labelling regulations mean that many toxic or harmful ingredients are either not declared or are listed as another name!

If you think pink slime is awful, (which it is, of course), and that arsenic in baby food, cereal bars, rice and even chicken is an outrage, here are seven more nasty items lurking in your local supermarket.

Discover below the 7 nastiest ingredients found in commonly consumed food.

1. Flame-Retardant Sodas

The toxic flame retardant chemical brominated vegetable oil, or BVO, was first used to keep plastics from catching on fire. However, the food industry has been using it in sodas, juices and sports drinks to keep those artificial flavoring chemicals mixed in with the rest of the liquids. You’ll find it in drinks such as Mountain Dew, Fanta Orange, Sunkist Pineapple and Powerade.

BVO has been linked to skins lesions, memory loss, and nerve disorders.

2. Petroleum-Laced Candy

You’ve probably wondered if that candy with those wacky bright colors is good for you. It’s not. Many of the artificial food dyes found in everyday foods, including candy, are made from petroleum-derived materials. Kids love those “fun” colors in their cereal and candy, but food dyes are also used in hundreds of supermarket foods.

They are harmful: orange and purple food dyes have been shown to impair brain function, while other dyes have been linked to ADHD and behavioral problems in kids. Of course, companies don’t care because it’s cheaper for them to use those fake dyes than it is to use real ingredients.

3. Moldy Berries

Here’s a sobering fact: the FDA legally allows up to 60 percent of canned or frozen blackberries and raspberries to contain mold; 15 percent mold is the limit for canned fruit and vegetable juices.

It’s true that it’s perfectly fine to eat some food when it starts to grow mold, but you should toss soft fruits and vegetables, since they may have mold growing below the surface. Also, because mold spreads quickly in fruits and vegetables, check nearby foods in your produce drawer.

4. Salade Verte With Paint Chemicals

Perhaps you didn’t know that your salad dressing may well contain titanium dioxide, which is a component of titanium, a mined substance that is sometimes contaminated with toxic lead.

This chemical is widely used in paints and sunscreens, but Big Food also adds it to lots of things we eat, including processed salad dressing. They do this to to make dingy, overly processed items, like your salad dressing, appear brighter and whiter.

5. Hormone-Heavy Milk

Ah, the wonders of modern technology: today’s cows produce double the amount of milk they did just 40 years ago, and that’s mostly because of a genetically engineered, synthetic hormone called recombinant bovine somatotropin, or rBST, that helps them along.

This synthetic hormone is banned in many other countries because it has been linked to prostate, breast and colon cancers. However, it is still legal here, although many dairies are being pressured to abandon it.

6. Meat Laced With Flesh-Eating Bacteria

MRSA kills about 19,000 people a year in America.

7. Toxic shrimp

Imported shrimp is on the Monterey Bay’s Seafood Watch List as “Avoid” at all costs. Less than two percent of all imported seafood is inspected, which is a huge problem.

As a result, imported shrimp often contains antibiotics, cleaning chemicals used in farmed shrimp pens, residues of toxic pesticides banned in the U.S., and pieces of insects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Big A Newbie

Big A

Posted
  • Author
Posted

canned mushrooms might be the worst

Just read something recently about that too

Gross Food #1: Mushrooms

Why it’s gross: The FDA legally allows 19 maggots—tiny, rice-shaped fly larvae that feast on rotting foods—and 74 mites in every 3.5-ounce can of mushrooms. Bon appetit!

Why it’s bad: While maggots do have their place in the medical world—they can help heal ulcers and other wounds—most of us would agree that they don’t have a place in our mouths. Opt for fresh mushrooms instead, and if you need another reason to ditch canned goods, consider this: Most are lined with bisphenol A (or BPA), a plastic chemical that causes unnatural hormonal changes linked to heart attacks, obesity, and certain cancers.

And for the full list of dangerous and disgusting ingredients lurking on your grocery store’s shelves, check out The 15 Grossest Things You’re Eating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Big A Newbie

Big A

Posted
  • Author
Posted

It's kinda amazing how much bad stuff is in most of the common food products, but even more surprising is how all the info is out there and most of the general public just doesn't really seem to care that much. Most of the foods are actually food products and have a goal of making you buy more, not providing you an actual nutritional meal. I don't eat anything processed, and a tiny amount of things that already prepared and packaged. At the same time, I spend hours a day between juicing and preparing meals and spend over $2k a month just at whole foods, but the average person doesn't have that time and money, isn't the Goverment supposed to be looking out for us and keeping poison out our food!?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

This sort of reeks of BS.

This line makes me wonder a little too:  titanium dioxide, which is a component of titanium

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • TD alt
      Greg beats Brady for Sportscasting Emmy

      By TD alt · Posted

      Exactly what I was going to say. Brady seems to be taking a page out of Olsen's playbook, which is probably a good thing. They'll probably get around to giving Brady an Emmy one day, and he should thank Olsen for giving him the blueprint for success.
    • TD alt
      LWOS on the FO's error--my word--on X...traits, timelines, Brazzell, & indications of improvement.

      By TD alt · Posted

      In before: "XL sucks, there is no hope." "As long as we have Bryce, none of this matters." My response: "It's X, not XL...we're not discussing apparel sizes, or we'd have to consider XS."  
    • TD alt
      LWOS on the FO's error--my word--on X...traits, timelines, Brazzell, & indications of improvement.

      By TD alt · Posted

      Alain Pierre provides some food for thought on Last Word On Sports regarding Xavier Legette, and his article, though specifically on X, kind of puts me in the mind of QBs being overdrafted and put into situations that they're not prepared for, some ultimately failing due to drafting missteps by front offices who don't necessarily view prospective players within the contextual importance that situations demand.  At this point, Legette looks like a failure in reference to expectations, of not only what a consistently productive NFL receiver looks like, but a first round pick (which he obviously should never have been). But the story on X isn't necessarily completely over. Damn. I seem to be experiencing deja vu...It wasn't X's fault that he was overdrafted, that was a choice by an FO that obviously downplayed actual realized skill vs outstanding measurables and upside. Sure, the FO was impressed by X's one-year feats during his senior season at South Carolina, but it was the NFL god, RAS (a.k.a. Raw Athletic Score), that had Dave Canales's and Dan Morgan's jaws dropping in amazement at the sight of X running around in underwear at the Combine...   "At 6-foot-3 and over 220 pounds, Legette brought rare athletic upside to the position. His breakout season at South Carolina showed flashes of dominance that NFL teams dream of. Projecting forward, many scouts compared his physical profile to D.K. Metcalf, and the Panthers clearly believed they could develop him into a true wide receiver 1 over time. The issue was never his talent. The issue was the timeline. Just a few picks later, the Chargers selected Ladd McConkey, a receiver who may have lacked Xavier Legette’s physical ceiling but entered the league far more technically refined. McConkey immediately showed advanced route discipline, leverage awareness, good pacing, and separation ability.  Bryce Young’s game has always depended on timing and anticipation. His best football at Alabama came with receivers capable of winning through precision rather than pure athleticism. Jameson Williams and John Metchie III were excellent route runners and were able to get drafted in 2022. McConkey naturally fit that style of play. Legette, meanwhile, needed significant development in the exact areas where Bryce Young needed help. The Panthers drafted traits when Bryce Young needed reliability."   Yes, the FO was guilty. The good thing is that the execs appear to be improving. Some of that may be attributed to the hiring of Eric Eager (who was hired right after the Xavier Legette draft). Eager seems to have helped the Panthers FO fine-tune their analytical progress, and, at least on paper, they acquired players with a lot of value during the last draft in regards to actually (what I'll refer to as) "underdrafting" talent relative to their position with value already built in.  Look at Chris Brazzell: He may be more of the quintessential project receiver who was arguably more or less just as raw as Legette was when he was drafted, and with a relatively high RAS as well. The notable difference is value, as Brazzell was a round three pick and Legette was a first rounder.    "Unlike the Xavier Legette situation, Carolina’s environment for Brazzell is completely different. "The Panthers are not asking a raw receiver prospect to stabilize this offense for Bryce Young. "Brazzell enters a much healthier developmental situation with far less pressure. With Tetairoa McMillan established as the primary target and Jalen Coker continuing to settle as the number 2 option...Xavier Legette, Metchie III, and Jimmy Horn Jr. are also still in this rotation, fighting for reps. "It gives Carolina something they failed to give Legette when they drafted him: A developmental runway. "Xavier Legette entered the league with expectations attached to a first-round pick and an offense desperate for answers. Brazzell enters a room where he can spend a year working on his route running, learning the playbook, and earning snaps gradually rather than being asked to become part of Bryce Young’s solution immediately. "And truthfully, Brazzell needs that time coming out of college. Despite his elite physical tools, many evaluators have several concerns about his overall polish as a receiver. "His route tree at Tennessee was viewed as fairly limited due to the type of offense that they run. The receivers are expected to run a lot of choice routes, which are dictated by the placement of the defenders. It doesn’t require technical route-running and an understanding of the playbook needed at the NFL level...   "Context changes significantly when expectations change. "The Panthers are not depending on Brazzell to save the offense. They can allow him to develop slowly, expand his route tree, improve his technical refinement, and learn behind a much more stable receiver room... "Traits become much easier to bet on when patience is built into the plan."   It's all about understanding your situation. I don't agree that it's an inherently difficult choice like the author is suggesting in the following excerpt. At the very least, I think that it should be easier as long as all parties involved stay levelheaded and true to their process.    "That is what makes these draft decisions so difficult. "Every front office believes it can find the next Metcalf, Owens, or Marshall. Sometimes they do. More often, they are betting on a development path that may take years to complete. "The challenge is understanding what your offense needs right now. "If a team has patience, stability, and a quarterback capable of carrying the offense while a receiver develops, betting on traits can make sense. But if a young quarterback needs immediate help, there is a strong argument for prioritizing the receiver who already knows how to separate, create throwing , and earn trust from day one. "That’s why the Xavier Legette-Ladd McConkey debate remains so fascinating. "It was never really a discussion about talent. It was a discussion about timing."   For me, Ladd McConkey was talented enough in his own right, that the gap--the upside--was never as big as people are suggesting between not only McConkey and Legette, but McConkey and other receivers drafted in the first round during that draft. The technique divide between Ladd and X was pretty stark though, as was the roughly 35 pounds, but the speed was identical, the maybe 1½ height difference isn't huge (6' and 6'1"), and it may surprise some that Ladd's RAS (9.34) was also enough to put him in the top 10 percent of receivers since 1987. There is an argument that he would've been a better pick for Bryce and the Panthers, regardless of timeline and talent. But, I still appreciate the thesis (if you will) of the article, as it still provides some hope--perhaps a glimmer at this point, that X's RAS may finally translate to the NFL given more time, but, perhaps more importantly, it explains how Dan Morgan and company are showing improvement, even if it appears somewhat understated. My hope is that continued improvement is palpable by this time next year. https://lastwordonsports.com/nfl/2026/05/30/xavier-legette-draft-lessons/#google_vignette        
×
×
  • Create New...