Well with Arielle Lorre - 85: The Food Science Babe - The TRUTH Behind Food Labels, Ingredients, Chemicals and Food Misconceptions!

Episode Date: November 25, 2020

In this episode I’m talking to Erin aka the Food Science Babe about the biggest misconceptions when it comes to our food’s labels, ingredients and content. She explains how she has worked for both a large food company and a small organic one, and how the latter changed her understanding of how our food is marketed. We also discuss the biggest misconceptions around topics like organic vs. non organic; GMO vs non-GMO; pesticides; chemicals in food; whether “natural” means “better”; food myths and so much more.   www.WooMorePlay.com/discount/BLONDEFILES for 20% off your order of Woo! www.TryOrgain.com/BLONDE for 20% off your first order PLUS extra savings when you subscribe!   Produced by Dear MediaSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Auto-hue with Sunny Cars feels as if the children Not me be seen. Kiselstramble Sandvorda. Actis forcare Dvind. Vacantz can chaotic

but who zorgalose an auto-hurt says, One no stress. No idea Noveled cost. Always full-ledged. So,

auto-huees under-sorgue. Go to your riceadviseur or Sunnycars. The following podcast is a dear media production. Hey, welcome to the Blond Files podcast. I'm your host, Ariel Lori, and I'm here to talk all things wellness.

From how to achieve optimal health and well-being to the best beauty tips and everything in between, no topic is off limits. I know there is so much information out there, so I'm here to help you navigate it all and live your best life. Thanks for listening. Let's get into it. You guys, today's episode is so fascinating. I am talking to Aaron, aka the food science babe, and we are going deep into misconceptions around food,

food labels, organic versus non-organic, GMO versus non-GMO, food myths, chemicals, synthetic ingredients, and so, so much more. And before we get into it, I'd like to just say that if I heard this episode two years ago, or even a year ago, I would have gotten defensive. I was of the eat real whole foods only. Natural is better. Only eat things you can pronounce. Gluten has been modified to make us all sick. I was of that camp. And just to be totally transparent here, I don't normally eat gluten. And I do like to eat as many whole foods as possible. And I don't eat processed food much because I like how I feel when I eat a certain way. But that's not the point of this conversation. So I just want to make that clear. Aaron is not here to give diet and nutrition advice. She's a food scientist. She's here to hopefully

calm our fears about, you know, quote unquote chemicals in food and just FYI, everything is made up of chemicals, even natural whole foods. And she's here to educate us on how a lot of our narratives around food is kind of elitist and harmful. And she sheds light on the food industry as a whole from her experience working at both a large food company and then at a small organic one where she realized that a lot of these organic non-GMO pesticide-free, etc., labels are literally marketing. So at the end of the day, we all have autonomy over what we eat for the most part and we can decide for ourselves what we're comfortable with and what feels good for us. But it's important to also know how harmful some of these

misconceptions can be both to ourselves and to others. So anyway, make sure you stick around until the end because we did a Q&A with a lot of your questions that you guys sent in. And I hope that you enjoy this episode. All right, welcome, Erin. Thank you so much for being here. Thanks for having me. We were just talking offline about how hot of a topic this is, how triggering of a topic this can be. So I would just urge everybody listening to keep an open mind. And we had tons of questions. So we're just going to kind of jump right into it. But to start, I would love to get a little bit of your background. What your journey has been with food, how you got into food science, all of that. So I ended up getting into the food industry out of college. So I went to school for chemical engineering

and ended up at a corn milling facility in Iowa in an engineering role. So I wasn't doing food science or anything like that. And in that role, I kind of started realizing that I wanted to be more on the research and development side of things that really interested me. Like I loved cooking and stuff like that. And so the engineering side didn't interest me as much as the research and development side. And so I ended up. So that was a large conventional ingredient company, and I ended up working in their R&D facility where they did, they did like snack products, cereal products, stuff like that. So that's how I got into that side of things. I ran a pilot plant there, which is basically when food products get developed, they get developed by, you know, food scientists on the bench top. And then I ran a pilot plant, which is a kind of like a small manufacturing line. And so I would

take it from the lab, scale it up to that size, and then I would go to large manufacturing facilities to scale it up before it would go on product shelves. And so that's kind of how I got involved more with the research and development side. I was able to work with food scientists, you know, formulating products on the bench top. And I really liked that a lot more than I still liked the engineering side, and it was kind of nice to be involved with both. So taking it from marketing, developing it, taking it all the way sometimes even to the store shelves. And interestingly enough at the time, I was an organic foods consumer. And I actually left that company specifically searching out a more natural and organic company to work for because that aligned with my beliefs at the time. And so I ended up

working for a small, a very, very small snack company. And so I did a lot of the regulatory work because they didn't really have a regulatory person there. And so I was getting the certification for organic, for non-GMO. And in doing that, I kind of started realizing kind of how arbitrary these labels really are. You know, it was basically just, you know, specifically the non-GMO project. It was like you pay them for the label,

you submit your ingredient information, and basically like they give you the label to stick on your package. And, you know, I was involved in a lot of these marketing meetings and I was just sort of starting to realize, like, how it was based on who your target market is. So our snack product specifically was targeted, mostly towards moms of young children, you know, looking for a healthy snack for their kids.

And, you know, it was like, yeah, they'll pay more for these labels. So let's get the certifications. And, you know, not necessarily meaning that it was making it any healthier or safer. And so that's kind of when I started questioning things. And then it wasn't really until I had my daughter almost five years ago now. Just because, you know, personally, I wanted to save money if I could. didn't want to have to buy organic anymore if I didn't need to. And so I was like, I really just want to start looking at the actual, you know, research and evidence around these things just for

myself to see if it is necessary for me to be paying more for these labels. And then just, you know, being involved in the food industry and seeing a lot of these accounts on social media, just sharing false information about the food industry in general. And, you know, it's coming from a lot of people that have really never worked in the food industry. And so I was just kind of fed up with it. And I was like, I'm going to start a page basically sharing information that I wish I would have had earlier on. Because I kind of, you know, I was like, gosh, I could have not been spending, you know, all this money on organic labels and stuff like that. And I wish I would have had this information earlier. So yeah, that's kind of how I got started with my page. I'm always looking for new nutrition

products to incorporate into my diet. And you guys, I have to tell you about how I have seriously leveled up my morning matcha. Okay, it's my favorite part of the day. So I've been using organe vanilla protein almond milk and it is so good. Not only is the flavor and consistency perfect for a latte, but it has 10 grams of protein, 2 grams of fiber, and 25% of my daily calcium and vitamin D needs. I usually don't eat breakfast until pretty late, and this fuels me through my morning workout without being super heavy or overly sweet. It's also amazing with granola or overnight oats or chia pudding. So, so good. Okay, so organ has all kinds of organic products to fit your active lifestyle from nutrition shakes to protein powders, meal powders, and bars,

and they contain vitamins and minerals to provide maximum nutrition. So thanks to Organ, I finally found the best clean products to help keep me healthy and maximize my nutrition. And right now, you can save 20% off your first order. Plus, if you subscribe, you can save even more. So go to tryorgaine.com slash blonde. That's T-R-Y-O-R-G-A-I-N. com slash B-L-O-N-D-E for 20% off your first order plus extra savings when you subscribe.

Again, that's tryorgaine.com slash blonde. I used to care so much about portraying a perfect life and acting like everything was okay when really things were far from it. I was secretly battling anxiety, depression, and an eating disorder. So it was a lot. I'm Victoria Garrick, former Division I, mental health advocate, and host of RealPod. Every Wednesday, I sit down with celebrities, athletes, entrepreneurs, and more to talk about the inner thoughts and feelings that we're all struggling with. So leave the filters and face tunes at the door

and join me on RealPod. What are some of the biggest misconceptions that you see right now out there? So I think probably, I would say the biggest one, you know, is regarding specifically the organic label. I would say, like, so many people think that organic. It's, you know, pesticide-free and safer and healthier. And it's just that's not the case. Organic uses pesticides. They do have to be naturally-driven. And some synthetically-drived pesticides are allowed as well.

But there is quite a bit of research now. And we have data to show that it's, you know, organic foods aren't safer. They're not healthier. And in a lot of cases, it is actually even worse for the environment. And so I think that's the biggest misconception. You know, it's like, well, why would they have that label if it doesn't mean anything? And, you know, I think it maybe started out as something that they really thought was, you know, healthier, safer, better for the environment.

But, you know, it just kind of turned into more of a marketing thing. And, you know, basically now it's just a marketing label. And it's a way for that industry to get consumers to pay more for their products. I mean, if consumers didn't think it was superior, in some way, they wouldn't be paying more for it. So I think that's one of the biggest misconceptions is just regarding the organic label. Is there anything that's better organic? There really isn't. Like as far as nutrition, I mean, you're going to have the same variations between, you know, crops in different parts of the country or different parts of the world, you know, and, you know,

different growing seasons and things like that. So there's going to be the same amount of variation within like, you know, the nutrients of a crop, farm to farm or, you know, region to region as there is going to be conventional versus organic. So you really can't say, you know, there's going to be one thing that's always going to be better organic. And even if there are slight differences, they're not significant enough to really warrant, in my opinion, paying more for it. So I personally, you know, there are certain products that I just like and they happen to have the organic label, but I'm not buying them specifically because I think, you know, they're safer, healthier, or anything like that. So it's interesting. You think of like the

dirty dozen and even that. I mean, it's like a catchphrase, like a line. Like it's scary. Yeah. So it's really interesting to hear about it. Yeah, that one too. Like I even used to shop the dirty dozen and, you know, strawberries always used to be or they probably still are at the top of that list. And that was one of the things that like I would always make sure I bought. organic. And, you know, if my store didn't have organic or if it was too expensive, I just wouldn't buy any strawberries at all. And that's the real issue with those lists is that they are, you know, they are harmful to a point because, you know, consumers, not all consumers have access, whether geographically or financially they can't afford organic. And so what happens a lot of times

with those lists is they'll just scare consumers away from buying produce in general, which obviously isn't going to be good for you. So that's the huge issue with those lists. And they're not, they're really not telling you anything helpful. Again, they're not even mentioning the fact that organic uses pesticides and the fact that the pesticides that are detected on both conventional and organic are at such low amounts. You'd have to eat. You can go, there's a calculator. It's called, it's the website is safe fruits and veggies.com. But you can, you can put in like strawberries. if you're an adult woman and it'll show you how many servings you would have to eat to get a potentially harmful amount of pesticide. And it's like, you know, hundreds of servings of these things.

So, you know, the pesticide residues on foods are super low and it's really not something that we should be concerned about. So just washing with water is sufficient? Yeah, yeah, just rinsing under water. They have shown that to be, you know, just as sufficient as using, you know, I know some people use like vinegar, baking soda. And if you want to do that, that's fine. But rinsing underwater is sufficient. So yeah. So one of the questions that I did get, and I want to kind of just put it out there at the beginning, is a lot of people asked, well, why does she use a pseudonym? And why is she evasive when she talks about who she's for? And so I think everybody hears this and they think, oh, well, somebody's funding her. So can you just tell everybody in the- Yeah, it's funny. Like I've I've answered the question

so many times on my page. Like I'm not evasive when it comes to that. Like I work for a large conventional company. I've worked for small organic natural companies. Right now I mostly take care of my daughter, but I do do some consulting, mostly for small startup food companies here in Minnesota. A lot of them decide to market their products as organic and non-GMO.

So I'm not being funded. I literally am not being funded by anybody. I have a Patreon that people can contribute to, but other than that, nobody is funding me. I think that is just, you know, one of those arguments that comes up when people don't necessarily agree with the information I'm putting out.

And so that's sort of like the only argument they have. And I don't give out my last name just because of privacy reasons. I mean, you can find out, I don't want people finding out my address or, you know, people get really angry about this stuff. And so it's not something, I'm not doing it to hide anything.

I'm actually like I've thought about it before and I think it's kind of funny if if somebody were to find out my last name and look into me like I think it would be sort of funny because in the interim between working for that large conventional company and working for that smaller organic company, I actually started a natural bath and body company because I was believing a lot of these things and I made handmade soap and I marketed it as all natural. I sold it at farmers market. So I think it would actually be kind of funny if somebody was like trying to dig up dirt on me, it would be like, oh, it's like the opposite of what we thought. Right. That's funny. I totally get it. And I mean,

I was telling you this before, but like when I did the Instagram story about the chemicals that make up a banana, people got so upset that I was telling them to go eat, you know, chemicals or whatever. And I was like, you, this is totally going over your head. And that was like one benign Instagram story. I cannot imagine, you know, the kind of anger and vitriol that you must receive. So I totally get not putting your information out there. I mean, social media is so toxic already as it is. You just don't need that. But I just wanted to put it out there so that people who are listening can get rid of their doubt or their bias. Anyway, so why don't we talk about all natural? Is that just another marketing? Yeah. So, yeah, definitely.

natural is for sure. That one isn't regulated. There is no FDA definition. I mean, you can pretty much put it on anything at this point. And it really, it doesn't mean anything just because it's not defined, but it also doesn't mean anything because, you know, natural doesn't mean safer. You know, whether a chemical is natural or synthetic, it doesn't tell you anything about its safety. I mean, some of the most toxic chemicals we know of are natural. And so that is what a lot of this marketing kind of falls back on is the appeal to nature fallacy because intuitively we just assume that things that are natural are safer and it's really hard. I mean, I even catch myself doing it sometimes. Like, it's hard to not, you know, kind of fall back on that when you're kind of reasoning

with yourself, but you can't. I mean, just because something is natural, it doesn't mean that it's safer. So that one is definitely just a marketing term that you'll see on the front of the package of a lot of food products. I saw a post that I think you did that shows like different fruits, I think it was, or maybe vegetables. And I think it was fruits like apples that have chemicals in them that are toxic, but you talk about like the dosage. Like again, back to pesticides. Like you would have to eat however many apples for it to have any kind of effect on you. And that's natural. Yeah. That's one. of my favorite examples sort of when, you know, you'll get a lot of people like arguing that,

well, I don't want to have any amount of pesticide on my food, you know, whether it's harmful or not. But we have to remember that, you know, the dose makes the poison and that applies to every single chemical, you know, even water can be poisonous if you drink too much of it. And so, you know, there are small levels of things like formaldehyde in apples and pears. And we know that at large doses, they can be very harmful. But we understand that those low doses in, you know, different foods, they are safe because they're at a low enough dose. So the same reasoning can be applied to pesticide residues. And, you know, those residues are being tested for they, there are specific tolerance levels that they have to be under. And they're regularly detected at

levels, you know, hundreds to thousands of times below those tolerance levels. So it's the same thing that goes for, you know, those small levels of chemicals that are naturally in foods. That we, again, it falls back on that appeal to nature. It's like, well, we know it's safe because it's natural. But the same thing applies to synthetic chemicals as well. So, yeah. You know that I am all about self-care here. And that doesn't stop with fitness, wellness, nutrition, relationships, all of that. it applies to sex as well. That's right. Sex care. So Wu Moore Play has got this area covered. They are the all natural sexual wellness brand that takes your sex life to the next level. They've got it covered from start to finish with their coconut love oil, their freshies, and now quickies. So you can

take your better sex life on the go, even if that just means down to the living room. I always use their freshies towelets. I love them. They're made with coconut water and they smell amazing. And they're also good to just take in the car for an easy way to like clean your hands between grocery runs, which I know we're all doing right now. And then for the best sex ever, you have got to try Wu's coconut love oil. It's made with organic coconut oil and it's edible. It tastes like vanilla cupcake. No joke. You have to try it. And if you love the love oil as much as I do, Wu's new cream. And it's quickies are a game changer. They are these cute, perfectly pre-portioned packs of love oil. So all you have to do is rip off the top and get going. So head on over to woo moreplay.com

slash discount slash blonde files for 20% off your order of Wu. That's W-O-O-M-O-M-O-R-E-P-L-A-Y.com slash discount slash B-L-O-N-D-E-F-I-L-E-S. And all of this is in show notes, too, so you guys can just go and click a direct link. or you can use the code, blonde files, B-L-O-N-D-E-F-I-L-E-F-I-S at checkout for 20% off Wu-M-R-P-M-R-P-E-M-A to start spicing it up today. Let's talk about the GMO issue

because that was the other main, the really big question that I got. So can you talk about that? Yeah, so that's one of the other things I would say is, you know, other than the organic label, the non-GMO label is very confusing. It's confusing because,

first of all, the term GMO is not a scientific term. It doesn't really make sense to being applied to what it's applied to just because, so obviously it stands for genetically modified organism. And the things that our GMO are genetically modified, but also we have to understand as well, you know, most of our crops today, if not all of them, are, have been genetically modified to some extent. You know, humans have been crossbreeding. artificially selecting crops for thousands of years. And so, you know, everything that we eat today has been modified to some extent. And there's even, there's something called mutagenesis that was,

that was started in the 1930s. And what happens with those crops is, you know, radiation and chemicals are used to induce mutations in seeds. And then those are propagated and they see what traits happen due to those mutations. There are thousands of mutant crops out there. Those crops, are not considered GMO. They can be organic. They can have the non-GMO label. And so GMO is really only referring to these more modern ways that we modify crops. And what's crazy is that in reality, these more modern ways that we modify crops, they're so much more precise. They're only changing a couple different genes. And like we can control it so much better. It's so much more precise then, you know, hitting a seed with radiation, having all these random mutations and just seeing

what happens, you know, even cross-reading, we don't really know what the outcome is going to be. It takes a really long time to get to the end product that you want to get to. And so these more modern techniques where you're going in and specifically inserting a gene that you want in there, we understand more what the outcome is going to be. It's way more efficient to do it that way. The other thing, too, is that it's so much more regulated. It takes an average of something like $130 million and 13 years to bring a GMO to market because they're so heavily regulated. So they have to go through so much safety testing, you know, making sure that there haven't been any new, like, allergens introduced.

So to be afraid of these crops that, you know, there's so much more regulated. There's so much more testing going on before they even are available for people to buy. And it's just been, you know, I think the non-GMO label has really made consumers afraid of it. Because any time you put a label that's like saying something's not in there, consumers just assume that, well, it must be bad if there's a label saying specifically that these things aren't in there. But in reality, you know, the end product of whatever modification technique is being used, the end product is what is assessed for safety. And as long as that end product is safe, it doesn't matter, you know,

what process was used to get there. And so to specifically be afraid of crops that have been modified using this one specific technique, it just doesn't make sense. But I get where the consumer confusion comes in because that label's not, it's not educating consumers. It's just, it's basically just scaring them about GMOs.

and the other thing about that label, too, it can be put on anything. I mean, as a company, if you have an orange juice product, you can pay for that label, you can get it on your orange juice, and there aren't any GMO oranges. So it's just sort of ridiculous because it's not telling the consumer anything helpful. Like, there aren't any GMO oranges. So all of the orange juice that you're going to buy is going to be non-GMO. It's just that some companies might not decide to pay for that label, and some might decide to pay for it.

So what has happened is because there are so many companies paying for it, if you're an orange juice company and you don't have the label and all of your competitors do, you're going to get it too because everyone's going to think that your orange juice is GMO and they think it's bad. And so it really is, that one is just, you know, it's purely a marketing label. It's not telling the consumer really anything helpful about the product they're buying. and there are only 10 GMOs. And so I think it creates confusion as well.

Like I said, you know, it's being put on all these things. And people think that everything is GMO if it doesn't have the label, but that's just not true. So yeah. And on the flip side, they can be beneficial, right? Like I was in my biology class last week, we were actually learning about rice, right? And rice has been genetically modified in some places to, have extra beta carotene, right? So that people who are starving don't also go blind.

Yeah. I don't remember the percent increase, but. Yeah, so that's golden rice. And they've been trying to get it approved in places, specifically the Philippines, I know is one place where they're trying to get it approved. And they're having a hard time because there are activists, there's literally like activist groups in these countries that go and destroy crops because they don't agree with GMOs.

And all it is is a variety that these farmers can plant. You know, they're already growing rice there. And so it would just be this variety that they could grow that would be higher in vitamin A, beta carotene that converts to vitamin A. But yeah, I mean, there's children that go blind that die because of vitamin A deficiency. And there are solutions and people are so against GMOs that they're literally, you know, creating this fear so these governments don't approve of it and spreading misinformation. And, you know, that's the real harm with all of the misinformation.

I mean, of course they are beneficial, you know, in developed countries as well. You know, they can reduce CO2 emissions. They can increase efficiency, things like that. But, I mean, where the real harm is is in some of these developing countries that literally this could be a life-saving technology. And because we're creating fear in these developed countries, you know, spreading this fear and then those governments don't approve of it, it's just, it's ridiculous. It literally could be saving lives. And, you know, it's not anything that should be feared. It's literally just one tool, you know. I mean, it's a tool that can and should be allowed, just like all of the other modification techniques, you know, should be allowed. And so it's just ridiculous that, you know, these fears are literally, you know, they're not allowing for a technology in a lot of countries that could save lives. And so it's super frustrating. And I think there's also a misconception that,

Things like golden rice or things in these developing countries are being forced upon farmers. And, you know, people think like Monsanto is, Monsanto doesn't own all of the GMO crops. So a lot of these are public sector projects. And they will, these farmers aren't being made to enter into contracts. You know, like if a farmer here in the United States wants to plant GMO corn or soy, they have to enter into a contract because those seeds are patented, The same thing can happen with organic seeds that are patented or non-GMO seeds that are patented. But in these developing countries, these public sector projects, it's not the same.

Like, they're not having to enter into contracts. They're not having to, you know, enter into these licensing agreements. And so I think a lot of people think like these are just like being forced upon them and they're being forced to grow them. But, I mean, I know there's farmers in India that actually just they planted GMOs, even though, their government won't allow it. It was like an act of civil disobedience because they want to be allowed to plant them and they should be and their government isn't allowing it. And it's just, it's just ridiculous. Like the fear around, around them isn't warranted and they could be doing a lot of, you know, they could be helping a lot in these countries. So. Right. It's fascinating. That made me

think of gluten because there's this narrative that gluten has been modified. over the years and now everybody is intolerant to gluten. Yeah. So is there, is there truth? No. So there's not even, so I see so many times people like referring to GMO wheat. There is no GMO wheat. Like there is no transgenic wheat.

There's no genetically engineered wheat. I think there is one that has been developed in Argentina. And I don't think it has been approved yet. But there is no GMO wheat. I have shared a study that showed the wheat is very similar to the wheat that we had, you know, hundreds of years ago. There's not much of a difference. So there's nothing like different about the gluten that we're eating now or, you know, I think one of the things is that celiacs and things like that are just being diagnosed better. Like we know what it is. It's being

able to be diagnosed better. You know, a lot of people think that they have gluten intolerance because when they stop eating gluten, they feel better. But, you know, it could just be that you're eating more fruits and vegetables or you're, you know, you're not eating things that, you know, maybe made you fuller or, you know what I mean? And so it's not necessarily that it is the gluten in it. And there is no GMO wheat. So that is one huge myth. Like I see it so much like people blaming things on GMO wheat. And it's like there is no GMO wheat. Yeah. I mean, especially out here in L.A., like I don't know one person that eats gluten. Yeah, it's kind of crazy.

It's my husband. He's like, I'll take extra gluten, please. I think that was one of those things, too. You know, we started seeing labels like gluten-free, and people just assumed, like, well, what's the deal with all these things that don't have gluten? It must be bad. You know, I remember seeing it, gosh, I don't know,

it must have been like 10 years ago, the first gluten-free label I saw. And I was like, why is gluten bad? I remember looking it up, like, why are all these things gluten-free? And, you know, it's great that it is an option for people that have celiacs and they can't eat gluten. But I think it's confusing for most consumers because they just assume, like,

it must be bad if all these things don't have it in it. But it's fine if you don't have celiacs. And there are so many doctors and nutritionists and practitioners and holistic, you know, whatever, who are proponents of gluten-free diet, even if you don't have celiac. And, you know, they kind of espouse all the side effects, the negative side effects. of gluten. Yeah, and a lot of that is not evidence-based. Yeah.

Okay. Speaking of not evidence-based, there is a big fear in the wellness world of citric acid. Oh, yeah. Are you familiar with this, the black mold? Yeah. So citric acid can be derived, obviously, from citrus fruits. There's also a process where they can use the starchy part of corn, essentially, to grow it on mold. That sounds gross. It sounds disgusting. But it is refined from the mold. It is

pure citric acid. The end result is citric acid. And the chemical compound citric acid is citric acid, regardless of what it was derived from. So if you get it from citrus fruits, it's the same exact chemical compound as if you derive it from corn. I think people just hear that black mold part and they think it's gross and they don't want to eat it. But in reality, it is a lot more sustainable to get it that way because obviously getting it from citrus fruits takes a lot of plant material. And so that's another big, I think, misconception around natural versus synthetic is that these two processes are literally, you know, they're giving you the same chemical compound. Like your body has no, has absolutely no way of knowing like that this citric acid

came from corn versus a lemon versus an orange. I mean, if it's an ingredient just being put in something like your body has no idea. I mean, even a chemist wouldn't be able to look at it and know where it was derived from. So I think a lot of this stuff just gets, you know, thrown around and people see mold and they're like, oh, that's gross. But it's actually more sustainable to be, it's more efficient to be synthesized that way, rather than growing a bunch of plant material to derive citric acid from it. So it's not something anyone should be afraid of.

Okay, you guys heard it here. Another one that people seem to really be afraid of are natural flavorings. Yeah, yep. So that, I still don't get that. But it was always like artificial flavorings, obviously, because everyone's always afraid of synthetic, artificial. But for some reason, I don't know why, but all of a sudden natural flavors have been getting a bad reputation.

I'm not exactly sure why. And again, I think it probably just comes back to that appeal to nature fallacy where it's like it's something being added in there that's not natural. But again, that doesn't mean that it's unsafe or it's unhealthy. A lot of times, you know, these flavors are being added into things because, for example, I used to work a lot on granola bars like fruit and not granola. And we would put dried fruits in there like dried cranberries, dried blueberries. And you're not, you don't get a ton of flavor from, you know, a dried fruit. And so we would add just a little bit

of like a blueberry flavor or something. And, you know, it's not making it unsafe. It's just allowing us to use potentially like less of those dried fruits, which again can be more sustainable. And you're still getting, you know, that flavor that you would expect. And I'm not exactly sure, like it's not a safety issue. Like, I would say if you don't let, you know, there are certain flavors I just don't like. I can't stand any coconut flavors because they all taste like sunscreen to me. But, you know, there's certain flavors where I'm like, I would prefer the natural thing. Like, I love real coconut. I hate coconut flavors, stuff like that. So if you don't enjoy it, you know, don't eat it. But as far as like safety goes or anything like that, there really isn't a concern. I've

posted a few times too about artificial versus natural flavors. And again, kind of the same thing with citric acid. You can you can derive the exact same chemical compounds sometimes through synthetic means versus natural. So vanillin was one that I showed on my page. And obviously you can drive it from vanilla beans and you can derive it synthetically. And it ends up being the exact same chemical compound that can be used in an artificial vanilla flavor versus a natural vanilla flavor. And, you know, it's the same chemical compound. But again, like, vanilla beans are a very, you know, labor-intensive process. And so it's actually more sustainable sometimes to be synthetically driving some of these chemicals. But flavors in general, the only reason, like,

somebody might be concerned is if they have a rare allergy to something that's not in the top eight allergens because the thing with flavors is they can be made up of so many different chemical compounds that they aren't necessarily all listed on there just because it would be like a really long list of just random chemical compounds. And so it'll just be labeled as natural flavor. It's not a concern unless you have some sort of rare allergy where you know that there could be something in a flavor. But you can always contact the manufacturer if you have a rare allergy like that just to make sure that it's not in that in that flavor. But, but otherwise there really isn't a safety concern as far as flavors go. I think I can't remember

exactly. I can't remember specifics, but the the fear that I've heard around natural flavorings is about where it's derived from. It's derived from some animal part. I can't remember what. That's the fever butts. Yeah. Maybe. Yeah. It was something weird. There is a flavor and, yeah, that's the one I always hear. It's like, oh, it's dry from beaver butts gross, which like, yeah, it's gross. But again, the chemical compound that you're ending up with is, you know, a flavor compound. You know, it's a refined flavor compound. And that actually isn't used very much anymore because it is very inefficient.

So that specific flavor that I always hear, I can't remember if it's a berry flavor or vanilla flavor. I always get it mixed up. but it's not even used that much anymore because it's not an efficient process. Obviously, it wouldn't be considered, you know, a vegan product. And so that's not even one that is used, but even if it was used, it's kind of the same thing as the black mold. People hear what it's derived from and they think like that's somehow still in it. But, you know, it's a highly refined chemical compound. And regardless of where it's from, like it's not making it unsafe because it's from like a source that you think is gross.

Right. Okay. So we got a lot of questions around sugar. Is sugar a sugar, a sugar, a sugar? Is a sugar a sugar? Is a coconut sugar molecule the same as a cane sugar molecule? Or, I mean, are the effects the same? You know, that's another one. Coconut sugar is like king here in L.A. and I just, I literally just wrote an article for Egg Daily about that. So they'll be publishing it on Wednesday, but I tied it sort of into Halloween can. because there's always these lists that go around every year of like how you need to swap out your candy with organic candy or like, you know, candy that doesn't use regular sugar. It uses coconut sugar. But at the end of the day, you know, there are very small differences. But at the end of the day, like, it's sugar is sugar. I mean, a coconut sugar will have, you know, some other trace

nutrients in it, but in order to get a significant amount of those nutrients, you would have to eat a ton of the actual sugar. So I know one of the nutrients in coconut sugar that's, you know, higher than just a regular granulated sugar is potassium. But you'd have to eat like, you know, cups of sugar in order to get the amount of potassium that you could just get from a banana or something like that. So, you know, if people are saying that it's better in that regard, it's not. You'd have to eat so much of whatever it is to get any significant amount of extra nutrients in it. And even when it comes down to like, I've posted about sugar versus honey versus high fructose corn syrup. And obviously high fructose corn syrup gets a horrible, you know, it has a horrible

reputation just because it's derived from GMO corn and people think that's horrible. But when it comes down to the actual chemistry of these things, they, you know, sugar is 50% sucrose, 50% fructose. Honey is, it's a little bit more higher in fructose, a little bit lower in sucrose than sugar. And then high fructose corn syrup, there's a misconception that like it's super high in fructose, but it's not. It's basically the same as honey. It's the same ratio of fructose to glucose as honey.

The only reason why it's called high fructose corn syrup is because it's derived from corn syrup, which is 100% glucose. And so they called it high fructose corn syrup because in relation to regular corn syrup, yes, it is high in fructose. But compared to sugar or honey, it's almost the same. The ratio of fructose to glucose is the same.

And so when you're putting it into a food product, it is going to be metabolized similarly by your body. And I've actually shared a few studies showing that that is the case. So yeah, I mean, at the end of the day, sugar is sugar. you know, if you prefer the taste of honey in certain applications, you know, go ahead and use it. But if you're putting it in there specifically because like you think it's making your cookies or your muffins healthier, that it's not making them healthier.

No, don't tell me that. I thought coconut sugar has no calories. Yeah, that's the other thing too. Like they all have four calories per gram. I mean, they're the same. I mean, when it comes down to it, they're the same. So, yeah. Okay, what else were the big ones?

So similarly, I guess, are there any oils that are superior? So, yeah, so there's a lot of misinformation specifically around, you know, like canola oil, you know, different vegetable oils, different seed oils. Those don't deserve, you know, to be demonized over, you know, an olive oil or a coconut that oil, you know, they do definitely have different percentages of different types of fats, you know, again, different like trace nutrients. But again, like if you're, you're not using oil typically in super high amounts for it to make that much of a difference. Like if you're just using it, you know, to cook something, you're not using a ton of it. And so, you know,

I'm not a dietitian, but I would, you know, say use whatever you prefer. And, and none of them are, I hear so much about like things like canola oil being toxic and things like that. And it's not. It's just another oil. It's fine to cook with. There are different oils that have different smoke points. So certain oils might be good for different applications depending on the smoke point, things like that. But if you're just doing, you know, regular cooking with oils, you know, change it up if you want to use different ones for different things. But don't, there's no reason to be specifically like afraid of any certain oil. Okay.

There's so many here. I'm trying to think of the ones that are the most pressing. A lot of people asked about gums, xanthin gum, guar gum. Should this be avoided? Not unless like, I mean, if you think you have a specific reaction to them, but otherwise, no, I mean, they're just being put in things. They're being put in products at super, super low amounts. So I had posted about Guargam a little while ago.

And these things are regulated by the FDA. So if you actually go into the CFR, which kind of is all of the food regulations, there are different percentages for different applications that, like, you have to make sure you're under because if these things are consumed in high amounts, they can, it's not necessarily a safety concern, but they can cause bloating, you know, gas, things like that. And so they have to be used at very, very low percentages. and they're basically, I mean, they're derived from beans, things like that.

So they're coming from natural foods. They're being put in things to help with a lot of the gums you'll see in plant-based milks, things like that, to kind of make it a little bit creamier, a little bit thicker. You'll see them in things like ice cream. A lot of times if it's like a low-fat or a fat-free dairy product, they might put some gums in there to add back that mouth feel that fats typically help with. And so, yeah, I wouldn't say it would be something that you necessarily need to avoid unless you specifically know that you have a bad reaction to one of them or something.

But otherwise, I would say, you know, they're in our foods at safe amounts and they're regulated. I'm curious. Is there any ingredient out there that you do think should be avoided? I mean, I'm sure it varies individual to individual, obviously, if someone has a reaction to guargam or if someone is celiac. But is there anything that you would see on a label that you would be like, no? They're really, I get that question so much. And like there's really not, like me personally, yes, I can't stand, you know, like I said, certain flavors or I can't stand high intensity sweeteners. Those just taste really bad to me.

So for personal preferences, like there are certain ones. but as far as safety goes, I mean, as long as you're varying your diet and, you know, you're consuming enough fruits and vegetables, there really, there really isn't any specific ingredient that I would say like everybody should avoid that, you know, I mean, like I said, a lot of these additives that people tend to sort of blow out of proportion are the things that are being put in foods at such low amounts. They're not, you know, changing the nutrition of it. They're, they're being put, they're regulated, you know, they're, they're highly studied before they're approved. And so there really isn't any specific ingredient

that I would say everybody should avoid. Right. So another one that a lot of people asked me that you address a lot actually are the things that are banned in other countries, their regulations versus our regulations. You know, people see, oh, they can't use that die in Europe, but we use it here. We're killing our citizens. Like, can you explain that? Yeah, so that is a huge misconception. A lot of times the things that people say are being banned in other countries are actually not even banned in the country that they're saying they're banned in. And so a lot of times I'll just link information showing them that it's not banned or they even allow imports with those ingredients in them. You know, they're not. So they are consuming them. But also it's just a different

way that we approach how we approve food products and food ingredients. ingredients. And it kind of goes the same for pesticides that are approved here. So in the U.S. we use a risk-based approach. And risk, so basically risk equals exposure times hazard. And so, you know, every single chemical can be hazardous, right? Like I said, even water can be hazardous. And so when you're doing a risk-based approach, you're taking into account not only the hazard, but the exposure. So the dose, essentially. So a risk-based approach is taking dose into account. So things that might be approved here, we understand that they're safe because we have data

showing that the amounts that they are approved in foods are safe doses. So the difference between so places like Europe that a lot of people say all these chemicals are banned there, it's not necessarily an evidence-based approach. So they take a hazard-based approach. And so it's interesting because, you know, literally anything could be argued as a hazard. And so if you're not taking dose into account, you can find rodent studies where pretty much anything can cause harm at a very high amount. And so some of these ingredients could potentially be banned if there's a rodent study out there where it's showing harm at a very high amount. but obviously that's not necessarily a very evidence-based way of doing it

because you have to take dose into account when you're assessing the safety of something. And so you will, yeah, so there are some chemicals that are banned there that aren't banned here, but it's not because of a safety risk. Sometimes it can just be that consumers are afraid of it so they decide we're not going to allow it here. It can be purely a decision by their government that has absolutely nothing. nothing to do with science. And a lot of times, too, you know, there's graphics that are, that go around all the time showing the differences in ingredients of something here versus the UK or something like that. And a lot of times, yes, it could be banned there, but a lot of times, too, it's just

that we like the way things, you know, different tastes here in the U.S. versus there. And so there might be different flavors that are used there or different spices. But also there's different regulations as far as how foods are labeled as well. So something that could be just called spices here. They might list out the spices there. Something that we call flavors here. They might list out, you know, like there's just differences in labeling. There's differences in preferences, how we formulate things for different countries. And then just also, like I said, the difference between a risk-based approach and a hazard-based approach. But it doesn't mean, you know, just because something is banned in another country,

that doesn't tell you anything about the safety of it. You have to actually go and look at the data. If there is data showing that it's unsafe, then that is a warranted concern. But these things that are being approved here for foods, they're being approved based on the specific application and the specific amount that's being allowed. So we know that the amounts that we're allowing in foods

based on the data that we have, they're safe. And so because we are taking dose into account when we approve those ingredients here. Why do you think we have such a problem here? This is probably a totally different subject. But with chronic health issues and with obesity and, you know, these products that are kind of, I mean, you can tell me because you were working for a large company, right? But that are kind of engineered to be addictive, right? Yeah.

Yes and now? I don't know. I have a hard time with that one just because I feel like the food industry is unnecessarily demonized in that regard. Like, you know, you go to a restaurant and the food is delicious and you want to go back and you want to have it again. But nobody would ever say, oh, that food is addicting. Like, you know what I mean? Like, you make a meal at home and you want it to be good. Like, you want food to be good typically when you make it.

I mean, the same thing goes for us as product developers at companies. we want it to taste good. Like consumers aren't going to buy it if it doesn't taste good. And so I just think it's kind of, I don't know, like I feel like it's unnecessarily demonized in that regard. It's like, yes, it tastes good. People wouldn't buy it if it didn't taste good. Right.

I mean, ironically, that company that I worked for, that conventional company, a lot of my projects there were trying to reduce sugar because that was a huge initiative that they were trying to reduce sugar in products. and actually sugar has gone down if you actually look at the data. Sugar consumption has gone down. Total calorie intake has increased. So I think a lot of times two people specifically demonize things like sugar or artificial ingredients, making things more addictive.

But a lot of times it just has to do with portion sizes increasing or things like that. And so it's such a nuanced topic. you can't just say like, oh my gosh, all these diseases, like, again, a lot of the diseases we're diagnosing better. We have an aging population. So the older you get, the more of a chance you have for getting cancer, things like that, you know, people are living with a lot of conditions that they would normally die, you know? And so like a lot of it has to do with that. It's not necessarily because of something that is causing it. It's just it's being diagnosed better. We're getting older. you know, we're actually being able to live with a lot of these conditions that would kill people

in the past. And so I think, you know, there are certain things that could potentially be linked to food, but it's tough. Like you can't just say all of these things that I, you know, that are bad about, you know, it's because of all these food ingredients. Like I hear that so much and it's like there's so much nuance in that discussion that it just can't it can't just be pinned on like I just think it's a scapego to like for everything people don't like about or don't understand like I think a lot of times people think like we're putting things in there that are like trying to get you addicted to it or like we're hiding ingredients in there but it's like everything has to be listed on the label like you know the grams of sugar are listed right there on the label like we're not we're not hiding anything from you

like you can look on the package and if you don't want to consume something you don't have have to buy it. So I don't know. It's interesting. I never, I never thought of it in the way, like, when you cook food, you want it to taste really good. When you go to a restaurant, they try to make it as good as possible and we don't blame them. But yeah, I mean, I think that, you know, I can't even, I can barely even form an opinion on this because of how little I know about it. But I do think that it's a way for people to absolve themselves of any kind of personal responsibility too. Yeah, I think so too. And then also, I mean, another huge issue, obviously, is food insecurity, accessibility to, you know, healthy fruits and vegetables. Like, that's,

that's another, that's another topic. And I won't get, I could do an entire episode on that. But, you know, that's a huge issue. Like, I think, you know, food insecurity, not having these options, you know, fresh fruits and vegetables or even canned or frozen available to you where you get your food. or it's available to you and you just can't afford it. So I think those are huge issues that are real issues. Yeah. Yeah. Or you don't know how to cook.

I mean, there's so many factors that go into it. Well, this is fascinating. I want to close with one question that I don't know if you can answer or not, but a lot of people asked, like, for the average person who's not a scientist, how do we begin to read labels and ingredients, just Google everything or do you have any advice? Depends on this sort of thing. So I would say definitely, except for like what the food is on the front of the package,

I would say don't be concerned with like any of the market, like everything on the front of the package is marketing. It's trying to get you to buy the product. So if you are concerned about the nutrition, you know, flip it to the back, look at the nutrition. You know, if you're concerned about sugar, the sugar, the sugar, you know, the grams of sugar are right on there. There's a lot of food mantras out there of, you know, if you can't pronounce it,

don't eat it or if it has more than five ingredients, don't eat it. You know, obviously those aren't evidence-based things. If there is an ingredient you don't get, I mean, I have a ton of information on my page. Another great source of information for specific food ingredients is a website called Food Insight. And I look at them too sometimes for ingredients that I might not even know, you know, they have a bunch of, I always direct people there for like high intensity sweeteners. I get questions about that all the time. But they're a great resource for looking up specific ingredients if you're not really sure.

I have a hard time saying like just Google it just because it's tough. But I think just understanding that no one single ingredient is going to make a product unsafe. You know, I wouldn't be too concerned about specific ingredients. I'd be more concerned about just like your overall diet, you know, the overall, you know, are you getting enough fruits and vegetables? Are you getting, you know, is your overall diet, you know, a healthy diet versus I think people, you know, spend too much time worrying about these really, really, really small ingredients that are in things and trying to avoid certain ingredients. When in reality, like if you have them every once in a while, it's going to be fine in an overall

healthy diet. Amazing. Well, this is so fascinating. That was so, so helpful. Tell everybody where they can find you. We'll also put a link to your Patreon so that people can just find that in the show notes. Awesome. Thank you.

Of course, thank you so much for coming on. I hope you enjoyed that episode. If you liked it, and if you like the show in general, please take a second to rate, review, and subscribe. It goes a long way and it's actually the best way to support the show. Also, if you want to see more about each episode, you can head over to The Blonde Files podcast on Instagram. I'm always posting about each episode there or over on my personal page at Ariel Laurie.