"We have the freedom to choose what we eat."
Mel Weinstein, joins me today to dissect the truth behind ultra-processed foods. His expertise, captured in his written work and podcast, aims to demystify the additives that shape America's fast-food empire and our grocery store shelves.
Have you ever wondered what goes into your favorite packaged snacks that make them so irresistible? We examine why these concoctions captivate our taste buds and how they're engineered to do so, often at the cost of our health. The revelation of the commercial food industry's motive to prioritize shelf stability and uniformity over nutrition underscores the urgency of making informed choices. The curtain is pulled back to reveal some shocking facts about our food system in the US.
Resources from this Episode:
"Fast Food Ingredients Revealed" Book
"Could ultra-processed foods be the new 'silent killer'?" Article
FDA Substances List
If you want to connect with Mel, visit the following:
Website: FoodLabelsRevealed.Com
Podcast: Food Labels Revealed
Facebook: Prophet of Processed Food
_____________________________________________________________________
Plant Centered Nutrition Essential Resources:
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
Welcome to the Plant-Centered and Thriving
Podcast.
I'm your host, ashley Kitchens.
I'm a plant-based registereddietitian and virtual nutrition
mentor.
I was raised on an Angus cattlefarm, grew up with a lot of GI
issues and used the power ofplant-based eating to promote
healing.
Here you'll find inspiration,ideas and encouragement for your
(00:23):
own plant-based journey.
I'm so thrilled you're heretoday.
Let's get started.
Welcome to the showPlant-Centered Listener.
My name is Ashley and I am yourhost today.
And today's episode, or at leastthe intro, is going to be a
little bit different from whatyou're used to, because this
intro comes with an enthusiasticand a heavy heart that I share.
(00:47):
Some important news about ourpodcast moving forward as we go
into this episode.
It also marks a pause, a momentof reflection and a hiatus for
our beloved show.
So first I want to talk aboutthe why, the reason behind our
decision when I say our, I meanKatie, who's my amazing co-host
(01:09):
and I's decision to take a break.
Life as it has it, you know, ithas its way of doing its own
thing and it has pulled me andmy amazing team in different
directions.
The demand of other areas in mylife and business are calling
for a bit more attention,leading me to simplify my life
and business operations, whichmeans taking a pause with the
(01:33):
podcast.
Also, my lovely podcast editorand co-host, katie, is pursuing
other passions and we both fullysupport this new chapter.
I'm very excited for her.
Looking back, I will say I amincredibly overwhelmed with
pride for how far this podcasthas come, and I have you to
(01:54):
thank for it.
We've had almost 300,000downloads.
This is our 164th episode andwe've had listeners in 142
countries all across the world,which is amazing.
These numbers are more thanjust stats.
They are a testament to thedream we turned into reality
(02:18):
almost three years ago and theamazing community that we've
built together.
And again I just want to thankyou.
Each download truly marks astory.
We've shared a conversationabout the transformative power
of plant-based eating and thelives that they've touched and
changed, and I am just soincredibly grateful.
(02:39):
The future of the podcast isuncertain at this time.
I'm not sure when or if we'llbe back on the airwaves, on the
show, in your earbuds.
This space was born out of adream.
I really had thought aboutstarting this podcast for years
and it finally happened aboutthree years ago.
And we have celebrated so manymilestones over the past three
(03:03):
years and, primarily, just beingable to share success stories
of people who have changed theirlives with plant-based eating.
So I'm immensely proud andforever grateful, and to you,
our listener, I hope thesestories have inspired you as
much as they have inspired me.
Your support, your engagementand the community we've created
together has been the heartbeatof this show and again, I'm just
(03:28):
so, so thankful.
Saying thank you really justdoesn't quite capture the depth
of my gratitude, but from thebottom of my heart, thank you
for tuning in, for sharing theseepisodes and for being part of
this incredible journey.
Although we're pressing pausefor now, the stories, the
conversations and the impactwe've made continue to resonate.
(03:51):
I encourage you to revisit pastepisodes, share them with
friends and family and tocontinue the conversation about
the power of plant-based livingin whatever way feels best to
you.
In closing, this really is notgoodbye, because you know where
to find me I'm on social mediabut it's more of a see you later
(04:12):
, at least for now, with thepodcast, the world is filled
with stories that need to betold and voices that need to be
heard, and I hope, in one way oranother, we can continue to all
be a part of those narrativesand I hope, in one way or
another, we can continue to allbe a part of those narratives.
So with today's episode, I'veactually been excited to share
this episode with you forprobably a month now.
(04:32):
If you like to nerd out overnutrition, this episode is for
you.
I want to introduce you to MelWeinstein, who has a master's in
organic chemistry.
Mel Weinstein, who has amaster's in organic chemistry.
He is a former chemistryeducator and retired research
analytical chemist for a globalfood ingredient company.
(04:52):
Are your ears perking up?
Do you know which directionwe're going in?
Mel's mission is to shareknowledge that he has gained
over the past 20 plus yearsabout the commercial food
industry.
Research continues to show thatthe rising rates of chronic
diseases like type two diabetes,heart disease and other
lifestyle diseases is linked tomany things, including the
(05:16):
overconsumption of ultraprocessed foods, which are often
comprised of syntheticadditives.
At the end of 2022, melpublished a book called Fast
Food Ingredients Revealed whatare you eating?
This book arose from topicsdiscussed on his monthly podcast
called Food Labels Revealed,which first aired in 2016.
(05:37):
The book that he wrote isreally the first of its kind.
It delves into the basicingredients found in the menu
items of three iconic Americanfast food restaurants, which is
pretty fascinating.
These ingredients arecategorized by their degree of
industrialization and how, farfrom quote nature or natural,
the food has evolved.
(05:58):
The book also discusses howsome countries which the US is
not one of them, and how theyare using front of package
labeling to help their citizensmake healthier food choices.
We talk about what an ultraprocessed food actually is.
We talk about the Food and DrugAdministration's role in
approving or denying newadditives, which I found
(06:19):
particularly mind blowing.
We also talk about what doesnatural flavors actually mean on
an ingredients list, because Iknow that you've had that
question.
I still have that question.
I'm like, okay, well, whatactually is this?
And so much more.
So I hope you find this episodeas fascinating as I did.
I really want you to take careand keep making a difference and
(06:40):
never underestimate the powerof a plant-based lifestyle to
change the world.
Please join me in welcoming Melto the show.
Mel, welcome to the show.
Thank you so much for beinghere today.
Speaker 2 (06:52):
I will enjoy this interview a lot.
I like to talk about this stuff.
Speaker 1 (06:56):
Yes, yes, I know you're a perfect person to talk
about this, so I'm curious, justto kind of get us started, mel,
after really a couple decadesas an analytical chemist in food
ingredients and a multitude ofthings, what really sparked your
curiosity about the impact ofall the processed foods
processed foods, industrialfoods, I guess, in general on
our health?
Speaker 2 (07:17):
Well, it took a long time for me to concentrate on
that.
You know, when I was younger Ididn't give a hoot about what I
ate, you know, as long as ittasted good.
I had a big sweet tooth.
I enjoyed lots of differentcandies and desserts and things
like that.
So as I was growing up therewas nothing to kind of point me
(07:39):
in that direction.
But once I decided to become achemistry major and then I
became a chemistry teacher, Igot started to get more
interested in what was actuallyin foods and I wound up actually
teaching a couple of classesthat dealt with that subject in
(08:00):
terms of consumer chemistry, andthose are the kinds of
questions that were raised inthose courses what's in our
environment, what's in thekitchen, what's in the foods
that come from commercialcompanies?
So I did develop an interest,probably in my mid-20s, in that
(08:21):
area and then, after I stoppedteaching, I taught for about 10
years and I went into industryas an analytical chemist and did
that, as you mentioned, for 20years.
Here I found myself confrontedwith the actual ingredients that
were going into commercialfoods, because the company I
(08:42):
worked for it's called Tate Lyle, out of England.
It did not make any foods thatwere sold directly to consumers.
They prepared additives fromprimarily corn and soybeans that
were sold to the commercialfood companies to put into their
foods.
So on that end of it, Idefinitely saw the industrial
(09:06):
side of food preparation andparticularly a host.
You know dozens, if nothundreds, of additives that went
into commercial foods.
So it was at that point Istarted to ask questions Okay,
what were these things?
Were they impacting our health?
Should I be avoiding them?
So that's really when myinterest in what winds up in
(09:29):
commercial foods developed.
So I was probably at that pointin my 40s.
So it took a long time, youknow, for me to start asking
questions about what winds up incommercial foods.
And then it was even later whenI started my podcast, which was
in 2016,.
(09:50):
It's called Food LabelsRevealed.
That I started digging deeperinto questions of okay, how does
the consumption of a diet richin commercial foods,
particularly ultra processedfoods, affect our health?
And then, a couple of years ago2022, I was working on my book,
(10:11):
which is called Fast FoodIngredients Revealed.
And that's when I starteddigging deeper in terms of
researching what were thenotable health issues associated
with eating diets that's veryhigh in ultra-processed foods
and I came across dozens ofresearch studies taken together
(10:35):
really pointed to the hazardsassociated with consuming a diet
like that and I put that at theend of my book in a chapter
that kind of summarized some ofthe most recent and important
studies that have been done.
Speaker 1 (10:52):
And I appreciate that there's more and more research
coming out showing the effectsof eating a diet high in ultra
processed foods on our healthand amongst many other things.
So it's just kind of neat tosee that that research is coming
out more and more and more andhopefully we learn some things
from it in the meantime.
Speaker 2 (11:10):
Can I share with you just a recent article that I
came across?
Speaker 1 (11:13):
Please yes.
Speaker 2 (11:14):
And this is dated February 20th of this year, so
very current.
I'll just read you the titleand the summary, because I think
it's really pointing directlyto what we're talking about here
.
So this is out of FloridaAtlantic University.
The title is Could UltraProcessed Foods Be the New
(11:39):
Silent Killer?
Are now found in nearly 60% ofthe average adult's diet and
nearly 70% of children's dietsin the US.
An emerging health hazard isthe unprecedented consumption of
these ultra-processed foods inthe standard American diet.
This may be the new silentkiller, as was unrecognized high
(12:04):
blood pressure in previousdecades.
Wow, I thought that was kind oftelling.
Speaker 1 (12:11):
Yes, very telling, very timely too.
I'm actually curious, mel, ifyou wouldn't mind defining what
ultra-processed foods are,because we know those are a bit
different from mechanicallyprocessed foods.
Just so that we're all aware ofwhat those are.
Speaker 2 (12:23):
The word ultra-processed actually is
fairly new.
It goes back, I think, toaround 2009.
There was a professor out ofthe University of Sao Paulo in
Brazil His name is MonteiroCarlos Monteiro, and he's done a
lot of research into theeffects of industrial foods on
(12:43):
human health, and so he coinedthat word and now everybody uses
it.
Right, it didn't take all thatlong for that to become just
very common in our language.
And it's an important word,because if you just talk about
processed foods, to me the wordprocessed is very generic.
(13:06):
It doesn't have a whole lot ofmeaning, because you could take
a piece of fruit, let's say, andgive it a good washing, clean
off the dirt, make itpresentable to somebody who
wants to eat it, and that'sreally a processed food.
Yes, it's lightly processed,but it's really important to
(13:27):
distinguish foods that have verylittle processing versus ones
that have a lot of processing.
So that's where the wordultra-processed comes in.
Dr Montero actually developed aclassification system called
NOVA that's N-O-V-A which becamekind of the classic way to
(13:49):
classify different foods interms of their processing and
has been adopted primarily byEuropean countries to basically
judge a food in terms of thedegree of processing that it has
.
So there's like four categories, which I won't go into because
we probably don't have the time,but they range from basically
(14:11):
unprocessed all the way through.
The last one would be ultraprocessed.
So it goes from what we wouldconsider, you know, friendly,
healthy foods, to foods that weprobably either shouldn't be
eating or eat very, very littleof.
And so and that's what thesestudies I mentioned before are
(14:33):
addressing is the amount ofultra-processed foods that
people have in their diets.
And what has been found is thatthe higher the percentage of
ultra-processed foods in thediet, the higher the risk of
lifestyle diseases, Such thingsas heart disease, stroke,
(14:53):
diabetes, obesity, metabolicdiseases and so on and so on.
Now, what is an ultra-processedfood?
As Dr Montero defined it?
It's basically a food thatstarts out natural, okay, and
then, through the wonders offood science and food technology
(15:13):
, that food gets broken downinto components, and those
components may be industriallymodified.
Then they are reincorporatedinto a commercial food product
so they no longer look like,smell like, act like, you know,
the foods that came from theoriginal plants, let's say.
(15:36):
So that is an ultra-processedfoods, and a good example would
be a potato chip.
A good example would be apotato chip.
Think about what a potato goesthrough to become a potato chip.
So it starts as a natural food,right Potato.
Out of the ground, it getscleaned up, it gets cut up, it
(15:59):
gets sliced up into small pieces, so then it can go into a fryer
to become a potato chip.
But in that process the potatois having additives added to it
for flavor, for appearance, forpreservation, and then there's
all kinds of fat added to it,right and salt, and so it
(16:19):
becomes a highly modified formof the potato which is now
ultra-processed, stratified formof the potato which is now
ultra-processed.
And that is an extreme changefrom its original form, which
most people would agree wasprobably pretty healthy.
You know, just to eat a potato,just throw a potato in water
and boil it and then eat.
It is a pretty healthy food toeat.
(16:39):
But ultra-processed foodseliminate a lot of the
nutritional quality of the foodand in fact may alter the food
to the extent where not only isit less nutritious, but now it's
a health challenge if you eatthat kind of food as a large
part of your diet.
Speaker 1 (16:58):
That's fascinating.
I love the potato chip examplebecause you said it's highly
modifiable, and even the wordthat came to mind after you said
that is it's also highlypalatable.
So it's just something that isso easy to eat versus a potato.
You get pretty full eating abaked potato.
Speaker 2 (17:12):
Yeah, yeah, that's the thing about food science
it's not always doing thingsthat are beneficial to humankind
.
And what you just mentioned, theidea of hyper palatability,
that the food scientists who aremaking these ultra-processed
foods are very, very aware ofhow to modify a food to make it
(17:34):
taste so good that people aregoing to get kind of hooked to
it.
And I certainly admit to havingthat issue as I was growing up
and I mean I didn't come acrossthe word hyper palatability
until probably in the last 10years, so I didn't know what was
going on either for most of mylife, that I was being, you know
(17:55):
, encouraged to eat these foodsand by eating them I wanted to
eat more of them.
And by eating more of them Iwas endangering, you know, my
health in the long run Not apleasant thing to think
aboutangering.
You know, health in the longrun Not a pleasant thing to
think about.
But you know, knowledge ispower.
So as you become more and morefamiliar with how food is
manipulated and changed forcommercial interests, then you
(18:20):
can begin to understand well,maybe I shouldn't be eating a
lot of that or none of it, youknow, maybe I should be eating
foods in their nutritious, wholeforms uncontaminated by lots of
different chemicals, and wehaven't even talked about
additives yet.
Speaker 1 (18:38):
Yeah, yes, I was actually curious to ask you
about additives becauseobviously we know that additives
serve their function, theyserve a place in our food system
.
But I'm kind of curious youropinion on them and how they're
sort of justified by the foodindustry in a way.
Speaker 2 (18:54):
Yeah, well, additives , there's good ones and there's
bad ones.
Here's a key thing to keep inmind Most food companies not all
food companies, but most foodcompanies, particularly the big
ones are not making foods tohelp our health, you know, to
make sure that we're eatingnutritiously, that there's
(19:15):
nothing going to be harmful inthese foods to our health.
Their main concern is to sellfood right.
It's a commercial interest.
It's strictly, for many ofthese companies, a capitalist
endeavor where they have ifthey're public companies, they
(19:36):
have shareholders.
So their job essentially, is tomake very successful commercial
foods and this includes many ofthe products we see in grocery
stores as well as the fast foodrestaurants that are out there,
and they're going to make aproduct that meets certain
expectations.
In the case of let's take afast food restaurant like
(19:59):
McDonald's, okay, what'simportant to them is to make
something that tastes delicious,it looks good, it smells good,
it tastes great, and the otherthing that you want to keep in
mind is uniformity.
Okay, that's a big deal,because if you're a McDonald's
(20:20):
executive, you want to make surethat whatever is sold in a
McDonald's restaurant appearsthe same to everybody everywhere
you go into a McDonald'sanywhere in the country or the
world.
You know what you're going toget, so you need to mass produce
it.
Number one, number two you wantthat food product to be stable,
(20:42):
so you're going to add whateverit takes to the food, such as
preservatives, to make sure thatthat food doesn't change over
time.
It lasts as long as it can last, and so that's where additives
come in.
That can last, and so that'swhere additives come in.
(21:03):
The additives are there tocreate a consistent product.
It's a big deal.
Most people don't realize theamount of food science that goes
into the preparation of thesecommercial foods.
I mean, we're talking hundredsand hundreds of chemists and
food scientists and foodtechnologists who, through their
creativity, are able to inventthese foods that didn't exist in
(21:26):
the past, using additives,chemicals that never existed in
the past.
Think about the modern foodindustry, commercial food
industry.
It's only been around for acouple of hundred years, and you
know we have been around for ahalf a million years, right?
So it's relatively new that allof these chemicals that didn't
(21:48):
exist several hundred years agoare now circulating in our food
system, and so it's a realconcern.
A lot of people are gettingconcerned about what these
chemicals are doing ultimately.
Speaker 1 (22:01):
Absolutely, and I actually think about that a lot
with sodas.
I have people in my life wholike to have a couple sodas a
day and I think about the peoplebehind creating those sodas are
brilliant because they arecreating those sodas so that you
just keep coming back and youkeep coming back to the same one
, because those diehard sodadrinkers I mean they're, you
know either hardcore Pepsi orhardcore Coke you know that type
of thing they're dedicated.
Speaker 2 (22:22):
Yeah, yes, very.
Speaker 1 (22:24):
Yeah Well, I'm actually curious, mel too.
Do you have an estimate on howmany food additives currently
exist in our food supply?
Speaker 2 (22:33):
Okay, I have a rough estimate it's really hard to put
your finger on it Somethinglike 9,000 to 10,000 additives
that are approved for use in theAmerican food system, and that
number is going to vary becausethere are food additives that
come and go.
You know they may be popularand useful early on, but then
(22:56):
they get replaced by somethingelse.
But they're still on the list,as far as possible food
additives that could wind up incommercial foods.
Now it's difficult to reallypin that number down because, as
far as I know, there is nosingle resource that you can go
to that shows you the whole listof food additives that are used
(23:19):
.
You know what their names are,what their properties are, where
they are used, which is kind ofamazing when you think about it
.
But not even our government hassuch a list.
If you go to the FDA's website,Food and Drug Administration,
there is a page calledSubstances Added to Food
(23:41):
Inventory Substances Added toFood Inventory.
But if you look at that list itonly has less than 4,000
entries.
So, as I said, there's like9,000 to 10,000.
So that's only a fraction ofwhat may possibly be in
commercial foods.
That's only a fraction of whatmay possibly be in commercial
(24:02):
foods and so if anybody outthere in your audience, is aware
of a single resource that listsevery food additive.
I'd like to hear about it,Because in my experience I have
not come across that yet.
Speaker 1 (24:12):
Could you just maybe list a couple of common food
additives that we might see whenwe're at the grocery store?
Speaker 2 (24:18):
Oh gosh, where do I start?
While I was doing my research, Igot curious about the question
are the food additives that wesee in the foods that we buy in
grocery stores, big box stores,convenience stores are those
food ingredients also used bythe fast food industry?
(24:38):
And so I started looking atwhatever fast food restaurants
actually revealed, what was intheir foods, started looking at
the additives and overall, itturns out that most of the
additives that are in fast foodsare the same ones that you see
on food labels in the commercialfoods and stores.
(24:58):
And so, in terms of some of thecommon ones and this gets to be
a difficult question to answer,and it's one of my pet peeves
is that the government, throughthe FDA, food and Drug
Administration allows for somevague terms to be used on food
labels, and everybody knowsabout these but maybe haven't
(25:20):
thought about them too much, andso there are specific names
that I can give you, but there'salso very generic names that
don't give you a whole lot ofinformation, which is kind of a
problem.
So, as far as food attitudesthat you maybe would see on food
labels and this is one I usedto have to deal with when I was
(25:41):
a working chemist.
Have you seen the wordmaltodextrin?
Speaker 1 (25:45):
Yes.
Speaker 2 (25:46):
Maltodextrins.
That's actually not a singleingredient, it's a mixture, it's
a word that covers a bunch ofsimilarly related chemicals, and
maltodextrins are essentiallystarch molecules, and starch can
come from a number of differentsources.
(26:07):
Right, you can have cornstarch,wheat starch, rice starch and
so on.
This is starch that has beenpartially broken down, either
chemically or using enzymes, tosome intermediate form.
Now, if you take starch and youbreak it all the way down, you
get dextrose or glucose, right?
(26:28):
Okay, so maltodextrins are someform that's kind of partly in
between the original starch andthe sugar dextrose, and so they
essentially represent a range ofsweetness and a range of
texture between starch andglucose.
(26:51):
So if you could have a sweetmaltodextrin, or you could have
a not very sweet or non-sweetmaltodextrin, so they tend to be
used sometimes for sweetness,but oftentimes as texturizers.
They produce a certain texturein the food product.
That creates, you know, thedesirable mouthfeel as you're
(27:14):
eating that food, and it's avery complicated area.
And well, what I was sayingbefore when you see maltodextrin
listed on the label, it doesn'ttell you specifically what
you're eating.
So it's a range of substancesthat fall into a category, and
so it's a little deceptive thereAnother deceptive term that you
(27:40):
often see.
Well, actually two of them arekind of related.
You see natural flavors or youmay see artificial flavors.
Speaker 1 (27:50):
Okay, oh, yes, I feel like I see that all the time.
Speaker 2 (27:52):
All the time it's in the top five.
So natural flavors.
What does that mean?
Well, that could be hundreds orthousands of different
substances.
All you know is the wordnatural means that these flavors
were derived from some naturalsource.
(28:13):
So it could be plants, it couldbe animals, it could even be
microbial.
So it's not much information,and if you're somebody who is
maybe sensitive to one of thoseflavors, you may have an allergy
or some other kind ofsensitivity to it.
(28:34):
You're not going to know it.
So that's a pet peeve of mineas well that the Food and Drug
Administration allows foodmanufacturers to use that kind
of terminology on food labels,and the same is true for color.
There's natural colors andthere's synthetic colors.
(28:57):
So it is a little bit ofinformation, but it's not
complete information that showsup on the label.
Speaker 1 (29:06):
Yeah, I'm curious, with your insider perspective,
how you would sort of describethe FDA's role in the regulatory
process for additives.
I mean, it seems a littleconfusing, especially when
they're allowing things likenatural flavors where, like you
said, it could be 100,000different things put into this
one little, these two littlewords on the ingredient label.
Speaker 2 (29:27):
Right, right.
Well, it's not always bad.
I think the FDA is a greatagency in the federal government
in that they do play a role tosafeguard our food supply, and
if it wasn't for an agency likethat, it'd be the Wild West Okay
(29:47):
.
So, yeah, there are issues withit, but they are responsible
for making sure that additivesthat are used in commercial
foods are safe.
Now you have to use quotationmarks around safe.
You know what do you mean bysafe.
Well, generally, what theydetermine as safe is they decide
(30:13):
on a.
If a food additive is approved,they determine at what level
that food or, excuse me, thatadditive can be used in food so
that it doesn't have adverseeffects.
So they determine, like a, whatis the upper limit?
You know it may be a parts permillion thing.
You know you can use thisadditive up to 100 parts per
(30:35):
million in a food and, based ontesting that's been done, you
know we consider that safe forhuman consumption.
You know.
So they set limits, okay, onthese food additives.
So that's important, so thatany manufacturer has to follow
those rules in order to usewhatever additive they want in
the food that they're making.
So that's an important functionin the food that they're making
(31:00):
.
So that's an important functionof the FDA.
Now what gets problematic is andI don't know if you want a
little bit of history here, butback in the 1950s okay, this is
following World War II there wasa great explosion in in food
technology and food science andall kinds of new commercial
(31:25):
foods were being produced, withnew methodologies and factories.
And as a consequence, afterWorld War II not that there
weren't any before there was,but there were a lot more new
chemicals got introduced, allright.
So through the 1950s it wasbuilding, building, building.
There are people.
Some people became concernedabout that approach, the
(31:50):
legislators, and so governmentofficials and leaders in the in
the federal government began tolook into this matter.
Okay, is this a legitimateconcern?
Should we be worried about whatshows up in our foods and how
it's affecting our health?
And so that movement kind ofbuilt through the 50s.
(32:10):
Another thing that added fuel tothat was the fear of cancer.
Okay, because cancer started toshow up more and more, kind of
paralleling the development ofthe commercial food system,
right, and as a consequence,questions about okay, are there
things in the food systempossibly contributing or causing
(32:35):
people getting cancer?
And so there was a food act inthe late 1950s called the
Delaney Act that addressed thatspecifically.
They basically said if there isany scientific evidence to
indicate that a food additivemay cause cancer in humans, it's
(32:55):
to be pulled from the foodsystem.
I mean no argument there.
You know, if the evidence isthere, it's going to be, we're
going to take it off the list.
Okay.
So at the same time that washappening this is around 1958,
food additives law was passed.
It basically said weacknowledge that there are
(33:20):
hundreds and hundreds andhundreds of food additives in
the food system at this point intime, but we're going to draw a
line, okay.
And they created a list calledGRAS G-R-A-S, which stands for
Generally Recognized as Safe.
And they said okay, I'm talkingabout the federal government,
(33:41):
and the FDA and associatedagencies said that at this point
in time we recognize that thesechemicals have been in the food
system a long time.
We are going to sort of makethe assumption that if a
chemical like baking soda, forexample like baking soda for
example, has been used for 50,100 years and we haven't seen
any adverse health problemsassociated with it, we're going
(34:12):
to automatically say it's okayto use that in all future food
products.
So that's where the generallyrecognized as safe comes in.
At that time there wereprobably don't quote me, but
somewhere in the neighborhood of600, 800 of these substances
that got on the automaticallyapproved list, so that food
manufacturers didn't have tosecond guess whether they were
(34:34):
allowed to use it or not.
If it was on the list, you'refine, okay.
Now the question then arose okay, what about all the new
chemicals that are now that werebeing used in foods after 1958?
What's going to be done aboutthose?
Well, I mean, the averageconsumer might think, okay, so a
(34:56):
new food ingredient comes along.
It gets information about thisfood ingredient, gets sent to
the FDA.
The FDA takes the food additiveand through their expertise and
laboratory capabilities, theydo research on this additive,
(35:17):
put it through all kinds oftests, see whether it does what
it's supposed to do, see if it'ssafe and determine what a safe
level is if it is safe, a levelthat shouldn't be exceeded.
And then they come back to themanufacturer after they've done
all this work and said, ok, thislooks like a good ingredient.
(35:39):
We determine that it's safe andthat it's doing what it's
supposed to do.
It is now approved that it'ssafe and that it's doing what
it's supposed to do.
It is now approved.
Okay, the vast majority of foodentities are not approved like
that.
Okay, probably more than 90%,maybe more than 95%.
So the shocking fact is thatthe FDA, early on in the late fs
(36:03):
, early 60s, realized theydidn't have the manpower, they
didn't have the money, theydidn't have the facilities to
keep up, you know, with all thenew food additives that the food
industry was coming up with.
So they then decided, okay, wecan't do all this work, but we
(36:24):
still want to make sure that theAmerican population is
protected, right?
So they decided that they wouldexpand the meaning of this
grass list and basically turnedit back to the manufacturers.
So you have this new foodadditive, additive X, that
(36:45):
you're wanting to include infood manufacturing.
The onus to show that this foodadditive does what it's supposed
to do and is safe is on you.
Okay, so it's not the FDA, forthe most part, that does the
testing and the termination.
It's food companies.
Now, the food companies mighthave their own laboratories and
(37:08):
personnel to do that, or theymay hire that out to a
consulting company, and thatcompany does it and creates all
of the data and the report tosubmit to the FDA to show that
this is a good additive.
Now, this happens dozens oftimes a year and you can
(37:29):
actually go to the FDA websiteand they'll show you a list of
all the applications for newfood ingredients.
And so what the FDA does throughtheir scientific expertise,
they will review the datasubmitted by the food
manufacturer and they will makethe determination, if it meets
(37:53):
their expectations, as to whatneeded to be properly done to
certify this new ingredient, andthey will essentially make one
of three decisions.
They will say, hey, everythinglooks great, you've done your
homework, we're going to acceptthis data, and so, essentially,
(38:13):
they'll rubber stamp the usageof that additive.
Or they may say we don't agreewith you, your data doesn't look
good, we don't think thisingredient is either doing the
job it should, or people shouldbe consuming it in food, and so
it gets rejected, okay, and thenthe company's got to go back
(38:36):
and try again.
Or a third thing might be well,you've done a pretty good job
here and most of it looks good,but there's a few things that we
have questions on and and youneed to go back and and and
clarify that information.
So that's essentially what theprocess is today, uh for how a
(38:58):
food additive gets approved.
Essentially, it's theresponsibility of the people who
make it.
Speaker 1 (39:03):
Wow, I didn't, didn't really know all of that, and so
it's a little more concerningthan I was anticipating.
Speaker 2 (39:10):
Yeah, yeah it is.
It puts a whole extra layer onwhether these things should be
consumed or not.
Speaker 1 (39:17):
Right, yeah, absolutely.
So I'm curious, just to kind oflike wrap us up with you having
seen the industry really fromthe inside out in a way, what
changes would you like to see inthe way food additives are
maybe managed or regulated?
Speaker 2 (39:33):
Okay, in writing my book.
Here's basically what Iconcluded.
As individuals you and I,everybody listening it's really
hard to get all the informationthat we would need to decide
whether eating a commercial foodis going to be good for us or
not.
It's just too much information.
(39:54):
No single individual is goingto be able to keep track of that
, and new things, as I said, arebeing added all the time.
Okay, so what do we do?
I think it should be theresponsibility of the government
to inform us what we should beeating and what we shouldn't be
eating, or at least give us someinformation that will help us
(40:16):
make that decision for ourselves.
Now the federal government andstate governments you know
they've done things over theyears.
You know, ever since the early1900s, there's been laws passed
basically telling foodmanufacturers here's what you
need to do if you want to put afood out there in the
marketplace.
So that's how we got theinformation we see on food
(40:38):
packaging, where a company hasgot to be truthful in terms of
telling us what's in their foods.
They have to put otherinformation on the packages,
such as contact information andso on.
So if anybody has a question,we can contact that company and
then we have the special foodlabels, and this didn't happen
(41:01):
until relatively recently, likein the 90s, where there was a
requirement for companies tohave an ingredient list on every
package right, which listed allthe ingredients that were in
the food, from the ones presentin the highest amount to the
ones in the lowest amount, asyou know.
(41:21):
And then there was thenutrition facts label came along
, you know.
So here is a whole bunch ofinformation, and that label is
loaded with lots of informationabout nutrition.
So if you learn how to use it,you will be very informed.
So it's another way to let thepublic know about the quality of
(41:44):
the food that they'repurchasing.
I think the government should gotwo steps further, and other
countries are doing this,primarily ones in Europe.
Even our neighbor of Mexico isdoing this.
Now the US government, throughthe FDA and USDA.
They're talking about it Allright.
(42:06):
So here are the two things thatI think should be required of
all food manufacturers thereshould be front of package
labeling, and there should betwo things that are on the front
of every commercial food.
One of them should be some kindof label that tells you
(42:28):
nutritionally, at a glance,whether this food is considered
high quality or low quality.
And so you might see on thefront of a pack, let's say, bag
of potato chips, a label thathas maybe letters A through E or
(42:49):
numbers one through five and itdepends upon how they're done,
when may be the best or five maybe the worst, but a number at a
glance that'll tell you this isconsidered to be a highly
nutritious food or, at the otherend of the scale, a very low
nutritious food.
So now a consumer doesn't haveto turn the package over and
(43:14):
look real carefully at the foodfacts label and figure that out
for themselves, and figure thatout for themselves.
Some other highly responsiblescientific group has already
made that determination for youfor every food that you would be
buying at the store.
(43:35):
So that's the first thing.
Now the second thing isbeginning to happen in some
places there should be anotherlabel that tells you how
processed that food Okay, is itlightly processed or is it
primarily ultra processed andeverything in between.
(43:56):
So you'll have another scaleyou know, a to E or 1 to 5, that
will tell you that information.
And now you've got two veryimportant pieces of information
where, in a few seconds, you canlook at that front of package
labeling and decide for yourselfis this the kind of food I want
to eat to benefit my long-termhealth?
(44:19):
So that's essentially where I'dlike to see things going.
Yes, it's great to educateourselves individually, learn
about food additives, theirnames and which ones may be bad
for us, which ones are okay.
But that's a lot of work formost people and we lead busy
lives and, quite frankly, mostpeople are not going to make the
(44:40):
effort to do that.
Speaker 1 (44:42):
Yeah, yeah, it's just one less thing that we have to
do as the consumer and as ultraprocessed foods become more and
more prevalent you know they'repacking our grocery stores it
seems like they're overflowingsometimes with packaged foods.
I feel like this is somethingthat could be potentially just
really easy for the consumer toglance at and not really have to
give a second thought and, likeyou said, instead of having to
look at the label, read all theingredients, question what even
(45:05):
are natural flavors in thispackaged food that I'm about to
buy all of those things.
So I was actually kind ofwondering, you know, what advice
you might have for the listenerwho might want to make
healthier choices when it comesto all to processed foods.
Speaker 2 (45:20):
Yeah, well, that's something that's coming.
It's down the road, so it's notsomething that's going to be
available to us probably anytimesoon in this country.
So the other thing we can do isjust protect ourselves.
I mean, we have the freedom tochoose what we eat we eat.
(45:50):
So if this is a concern to youabout the availability and the
amount of ultra-processed foodsthat we consume in our diet,
well, we have the option not toconsume them.
Now, maybe easier said thandone, but you can make decisions
for yourself as far as cuttingback or eliminating those kinds
of foods from our diet, so wecan eat a whole foods type of
diet that has very little ornone in terms of these additives
(46:15):
in them.
We can choose to eat organic sowe're not exposed to
environmental toxins that alsowill affect our health, and so
there are decisions we can makefor ourselves if we are
ultimately concerned.
The problem with eating thesefoods is that most people are
not going to keel over dead thenext day after eating some fast
(46:39):
food.
It's the kind of effects thattake a long time to develop.
A lot of these studies that Imentioned before they take place
over 5, 10, 15 years, you knowto see if there are any effects
from eating those kinds of diets.
So we don't get immediatefeedback most of the time,
unless we're food poisoned, youknow, and probably most people
(47:03):
at some point have experiencedthat, so they know what that's
like.
But as far as the highconsumption of ultra processed
foods and all the food additivesthat wind up in them, we're not
going to know how they affectour health until much, much
later in life, and even thenwe're not going to be able to
know for sure.
Well, it was all those potatochips and ice cream and all this
(47:24):
stuff that I ate 20 years agothat is causing me to have
autoimmune disease, you know, orheart disease and stuff like
that.
So it's very difficult to trace, you know, once we come down
with an illness.
So the easiest thing to do istry to avoid anything that's
going to contribute to it in thelong run.
Speaker 1 (47:43):
Yeah, I think that's a great way to end it, because I
know a lot of the listenershere are very passionate about
more whole food, plant-basedeating.
So I feel like this was a greatconversation to have and for
you, the listener, if you'recurious to continue this
conversation or learn more aboutthis topic, we included Mel's
book, his podcast website andFacebook group as links in the
show notes so you can easilyaccess those and get in contact
(48:06):
with more of this information,which is fascinating.
I feel like we could talkanother hour because I didn't
even get through half myquestions.
So well, Mel, thank you so muchfor sharing your knowledge with
us.
I really appreciate you and Ithank you so much for tuning in
today as well.
Speaker 2 (48:20):
Great talking with you, Ashley.
Appreciate being on your show.
Speaker 1 (48:29):
Thank you so much for listening to the Plant-Centered
and Thriving podcast today.
If you found this episodeinspiring, please share it with
a friend or post it on socialmedia and tag me so I can
personally say thank you.
Until next time, keep thriving.
Welcome to the Plant-Centered and Thriving
Podcast.
I'm your host, ashley Kitchens.
I'm a plant-based registereddietitian and virtual nutrition
mentor.
I was raised on an Angus cattlefarm, grew up with a lot of GI
issues and used the power ofplant-based eating to promote
healing.
Here you'll find inspiration,ideas and encouragement for your
(00:23):
own plant-based journey.
I'm so thrilled you're heretoday.
Let's get started.
Welcome to the showPlant-Centered Listener.
My name is Ashley and I am yourhost today.
And today's episode, or at leastthe intro, is going to be a
little bit different from whatyou're used to, because this
intro comes with an enthusiasticand a heavy heart that I share.
(00:47):
Some important news about ourpodcast moving forward as we go
into this episode.
It also marks a pause, a momentof reflection and a hiatus for
our beloved show.
So first I want to talk aboutthe why, the reason behind our
decision when I say our, I meanKatie, who's my amazing co-host
(01:09):
and I's decision to take a break.
Life as it has it, you know, ithas its way of doing its own
thing and it has pulled me andmy amazing team in different
directions.
The demand of other areas in mylife and business are calling
for a bit more attention,leading me to simplify my life
and business operations, whichmeans taking a pause with the
(01:33):
podcast.
Also, my lovely podcast editorand co-host, katie, is pursuing
other passions and we both fullysupport this new chapter.
I'm very excited for her.
Looking back, I will say I amincredibly overwhelmed with
pride for how far this podcasthas come, and I have you to
(01:54):
thank for it.
We've had almost 300,000downloads.
This is our 164th episode andwe've had listeners in 142
countries all across the world,which is amazing.
These numbers are more thanjust stats.
They are a testament to thedream we turned into reality
(02:18):
almost three years ago and theamazing community that we've
built together.
And again I just want to thankyou.
Each download truly marks astory.
We've shared a conversationabout the transformative power
of plant-based eating and thelives that they've touched and
changed, and I am just soincredibly grateful.
(02:39):
The future of the podcast isuncertain at this time.
I'm not sure when or if we'llbe back on the airwaves, on the
show, in your earbuds.
This space was born out of adream.
I really had thought aboutstarting this podcast for years
and it finally happened aboutthree years ago.
And we have celebrated so manymilestones over the past three
(03:03):
years and, primarily, just beingable to share success stories
of people who have changed theirlives with plant-based eating.
So I'm immensely proud andforever grateful, and to you,
our listener, I hope thesestories have inspired you as
much as they have inspired me.
Your support, your engagementand the community we've created
together has been the heartbeatof this show and again, I'm just
(03:28):
so, so thankful.
Saying thank you really justdoesn't quite capture the depth
of my gratitude, but from thebottom of my heart, thank you
for tuning in, for sharing theseepisodes and for being part of
this incredible journey.
Although we're pressing pausefor now, the stories, the
conversations and the impactwe've made continue to resonate.
(03:51):
I encourage you to revisit pastepisodes, share them with
friends and family and tocontinue the conversation about
the power of plant-based livingin whatever way feels best to
you.
In closing, this really is notgoodbye, because you know where
to find me I'm on social mediabut it's more of a see you later
(04:12):
, at least for now, with thepodcast, the world is filled
with stories that need to betold and voices that need to be
heard, and I hope, in one way oranother, we can continue to all
be a part of those narrativesand I hope, in one way or
another, we can continue to allbe a part of those narratives.
So with today's episode, I'veactually been excited to share
this episode with you forprobably a month now.
(04:32):
If you like to nerd out overnutrition, this episode is for
you.
I want to introduce you to MelWeinstein, who has a master's in
organic chemistry.
Mel Weinstein, who has amaster's in organic chemistry.
He is a former chemistryeducator and retired research
analytical chemist for a globalfood ingredient company.
(04:52):
Are your ears perking up?
Do you know which directionwe're going in?
Mel's mission is to shareknowledge that he has gained
over the past 20 plus yearsabout the commercial food
industry.
Research continues to show thatthe rising rates of chronic
diseases like type two diabetes,heart disease and other
lifestyle diseases is linked tomany things, including the
(05:16):
overconsumption of ultraprocessed foods, which are often
comprised of syntheticadditives.
At the end of 2022, melpublished a book called Fast
Food Ingredients Revealed whatare you eating?
This book arose from topicsdiscussed on his monthly podcast
called Food Labels Revealed,which first aired in 2016.
(05:37):
The book that he wrote isreally the first of its kind.
It delves into the basicingredients found in the menu
items of three iconic Americanfast food restaurants, which is
pretty fascinating.
These ingredients arecategorized by their degree of
industrialization and how, farfrom quote nature or natural,
the food has evolved.
(05:58):
The book also discusses howsome countries which the US is
not one of them, and how theyare using front of package
labeling to help their citizensmake healthier food choices.
We talk about what an ultraprocessed food actually is.
We talk about the Food and DrugAdministration's role in
approving or denying newadditives, which I found
(06:19):
particularly mind blowing.
We also talk about what doesnatural flavors actually mean on
an ingredients list, because Iknow that you've had that
question.
I still have that question.
I'm like, okay, well, whatactually is this?
And so much more.
So I hope you find this episodeas fascinating as I did.
I really want you to take careand keep making a difference and
(06:40):
never underestimate the powerof a plant-based lifestyle to
change the world.
Please join me in welcoming Melto the show.
Mel, welcome to the show.
Thank you so much for beinghere today.
Speaker 2 (06:52):
I will enjoy this interview a lot.
I like to talk about this stuff.
Speaker 1 (06:56):
Yes, yes, I know you're a perfect person to talk
about this, so I'm curious, justto kind of get us started, mel,
after really a couple decadesas an analytical chemist in food
ingredients and a multitude ofthings, what really sparked your
curiosity about the impact ofall the processed foods
processed foods, industrialfoods, I guess, in general on
our health?
Speaker 2 (07:17):
Well, it took a long time for me to concentrate on
that.
You know, when I was younger Ididn't give a hoot about what I
ate, you know, as long as ittasted good.
I had a big sweet tooth.
I enjoyed lots of differentcandies and desserts and things
like that.
So as I was growing up therewas nothing to kind of point me
(07:39):
in that direction.
But once I decided to become achemistry major and then I
became a chemistry teacher, Igot started to get more
interested in what was actuallyin foods and I wound up actually
teaching a couple of classesthat dealt with that subject in
(08:00):
terms of consumer chemistry, andthose are the kinds of
questions that were raised inthose courses what's in our
environment, what's in thekitchen, what's in the foods
that come from commercialcompanies?
So I did develop an interest,probably in my mid-20s, in that
(08:21):
area and then, after I stoppedteaching, I taught for about 10
years and I went into industryas an analytical chemist and did
that, as you mentioned, for 20years.
Here I found myself confrontedwith the actual ingredients that
were going into commercialfoods, because the company I
(08:42):
worked for it's called Tate Lyle, out of England.
It did not make any foods thatwere sold directly to consumers.
They prepared additives fromprimarily corn and soybeans that
were sold to the commercialfood companies to put into their
foods.
So on that end of it, Idefinitely saw the industrial
(09:06):
side of food preparation andparticularly a host.
You know dozens, if nothundreds, of additives that went
into commercial foods.
So it was at that point Istarted to ask questions Okay,
what were these things?
Were they impacting our health?
Should I be avoiding them?
So that's really when myinterest in what winds up in
(09:29):
commercial foods developed.
So I was probably at that pointin my 40s.
So it took a long time, youknow, for me to start asking
questions about what winds up incommercial foods.
And then it was even later whenI started my podcast, which was
in 2016,.
(09:50):
It's called Food LabelsRevealed.
That I started digging deeperinto questions of okay, how does
the consumption of a diet richin commercial foods,
particularly ultra processedfoods, affect our health?
And then, a couple of years ago2022, I was working on my book,
(10:11):
which is called Fast FoodIngredients Revealed.
And that's when I starteddigging deeper in terms of
researching what were thenotable health issues associated
with eating diets that's veryhigh in ultra-processed foods
and I came across dozens ofresearch studies taken together
(10:35):
really pointed to the hazardsassociated with consuming a diet
like that and I put that at theend of my book in a chapter
that kind of summarized some ofthe most recent and important
studies that have been done.
Speaker 1 (10:52):
And I appreciate that there's more and more research
coming out showing the effectsof eating a diet high in ultra
processed foods on our healthand amongst many other things.
So it's just kind of neat tosee that that research is coming
out more and more and more andhopefully we learn some things
from it in the meantime.
Speaker 2 (11:10):
Can I share with you just a recent article that I
came across?
Speaker 1 (11:13):
Please yes.
Speaker 2 (11:14):
And this is dated February 20th of this year, so
very current.
I'll just read you the titleand the summary, because I think
it's really pointing directlyto what we're talking about here
.
So this is out of FloridaAtlantic University.
The title is Could UltraProcessed Foods Be the New
(11:39):
Silent Killer?
Are now found in nearly 60% ofthe average adult's diet and
nearly 70% of children's dietsin the US.
An emerging health hazard isthe unprecedented consumption of
these ultra-processed foods inthe standard American diet.
This may be the new silentkiller, as was unrecognized high
(12:04):
blood pressure in previousdecades.
Wow, I thought that was kind oftelling.
Speaker 1 (12:11):
Yes, very telling, very timely too.
I'm actually curious, mel, ifyou wouldn't mind defining what
ultra-processed foods are,because we know those are a bit
different from mechanicallyprocessed foods.
Just so that we're all aware ofwhat those are.
Speaker 2 (12:23):
The word ultra-processed actually is
fairly new.
It goes back, I think, toaround 2009.
There was a professor out ofthe University of Sao Paulo in
Brazil His name is MonteiroCarlos Monteiro, and he's done a
lot of research into theeffects of industrial foods on
(12:43):
human health, and so he coinedthat word and now everybody uses
it.
Right, it didn't take all thatlong for that to become just
very common in our language.
And it's an important word,because if you just talk about
processed foods, to me the wordprocessed is very generic.
(13:06):
It doesn't have a whole lot ofmeaning, because you could take
a piece of fruit, let's say, andgive it a good washing, clean
off the dirt, make itpresentable to somebody who
wants to eat it, and that'sreally a processed food.
Yes, it's lightly processed,but it's really important to
(13:27):
distinguish foods that have verylittle processing versus ones
that have a lot of processing.
So that's where the wordultra-processed comes in.
Dr Montero actually developed aclassification system called
NOVA that's N-O-V-A which becamekind of the classic way to
(13:49):
classify different foods interms of their processing and
has been adopted primarily byEuropean countries to basically
judge a food in terms of thedegree of processing that it has
.
So there's like four categories, which I won't go into because
we probably don't have the time,but they range from basically
(14:11):
unprocessed all the way through.
The last one would be ultraprocessed.
So it goes from what we wouldconsider, you know, friendly,
healthy foods, to foods that weprobably either shouldn't be
eating or eat very, very littleof.
And so and that's what thesestudies I mentioned before are
(14:33):
addressing is the amount ofultra-processed foods that
people have in their diets.
And what has been found is thatthe higher the percentage of
ultra-processed foods in thediet, the higher the risk of
lifestyle diseases, Such thingsas heart disease, stroke,
(14:53):
diabetes, obesity, metabolicdiseases and so on and so on.
Now, what is an ultra-processedfood?
As Dr Montero defined it?
It's basically a food thatstarts out natural, okay, and
then, through the wonders offood science and food technology
(15:13):
, that food gets broken downinto components, and those
components may be industriallymodified.
Then they are reincorporatedinto a commercial food product
so they no longer look like,smell like, act like, you know,
the foods that came from theoriginal plants, let's say.
(15:36):
So that is an ultra-processedfoods, and a good example would
be a potato chip.
A good example would be apotato chip.
Think about what a potato goesthrough to become a potato chip.
So it starts as a natural food,right Potato.
Out of the ground, it getscleaned up, it gets cut up, it
(15:59):
gets sliced up into small pieces, so then it can go into a fryer
to become a potato chip.
But in that process the potatois having additives added to it
for flavor, for appearance, forpreservation, and then there's
all kinds of fat added to it,right and salt, and so it
(16:19):
becomes a highly modified formof the potato which is now
ultra-processed, stratified formof the potato which is now
ultra-processed.
And that is an extreme changefrom its original form, which
most people would agree wasprobably pretty healthy.
You know, just to eat a potato,just throw a potato in water
and boil it and then eat.
It is a pretty healthy food toeat.
(16:39):
But ultra-processed foodseliminate a lot of the
nutritional quality of the foodand in fact may alter the food
to the extent where not only isit less nutritious, but now it's
a health challenge if you eatthat kind of food as a large
part of your diet.
Speaker 1 (16:58):
That's fascinating.
I love the potato chip examplebecause you said it's highly
modifiable, and even the wordthat came to mind after you said
that is it's also highlypalatable.
So it's just something that isso easy to eat versus a potato.
You get pretty full eating abaked potato.
Speaker 2 (17:12):
Yeah, yeah, that's the thing about food science
it's not always doing thingsthat are beneficial to humankind
.
And what you just mentioned, theidea of hyper palatability,
that the food scientists who aremaking these ultra-processed
foods are very, very aware ofhow to modify a food to make it
(17:34):
taste so good that people aregoing to get kind of hooked to
it.
And I certainly admit to havingthat issue as I was growing up
and I mean I didn't come acrossthe word hyper palatability
until probably in the last 10years, so I didn't know what was
going on either for most of mylife, that I was being, you know
(17:55):
, encouraged to eat these foodsand by eating them I wanted to
eat more of them.
And by eating more of them Iwas endangering, you know, my
health in the long run Not apleasant thing to think
aboutangering.
You know, health in the longrun Not a pleasant thing to
think about.
But you know, knowledge ispower.
So as you become more and morefamiliar with how food is
manipulated and changed forcommercial interests, then you
(18:20):
can begin to understand well,maybe I shouldn't be eating a
lot of that or none of it, youknow, maybe I should be eating
foods in their nutritious, wholeforms uncontaminated by lots of
different chemicals, and wehaven't even talked about
additives yet.
Speaker 1 (18:38):
Yeah, yes, I was actually curious to ask you
about additives becauseobviously we know that additives
serve their function, theyserve a place in our food system
.
But I'm kind of curious youropinion on them and how they're
sort of justified by the foodindustry in a way.
Speaker 2 (18:54):
Yeah, well, additives , there's good ones and there's
bad ones.
Here's a key thing to keep inmind Most food companies not all
food companies, but most foodcompanies, particularly the big
ones are not making foods tohelp our health, you know, to
make sure that we're eatingnutritiously, that there's
(19:15):
nothing going to be harmful inthese foods to our health.
Their main concern is to sellfood right.
It's a commercial interest.
It's strictly, for many ofthese companies, a capitalist
endeavor where they have ifthey're public companies, they
(19:36):
have shareholders.
So their job essentially, is tomake very successful commercial
foods and this includes many ofthe products we see in grocery
stores as well as the fast foodrestaurants that are out there,
and they're going to make aproduct that meets certain
expectations.
In the case of let's take afast food restaurant like
(19:59):
McDonald's, okay, what'simportant to them is to make
something that tastes delicious,it looks good, it smells good,
it tastes great, and the otherthing that you want to keep in
mind is uniformity.
Okay, that's a big deal,because if you're a McDonald's
(20:20):
executive, you want to make surethat whatever is sold in a
McDonald's restaurant appearsthe same to everybody everywhere
you go into a McDonald'sanywhere in the country or the
world.
You know what you're going toget, so you need to mass produce
it.
Number one, number two you wantthat food product to be stable,
(20:42):
so you're going to add whateverit takes to the food, such as
preservatives, to make sure thatthat food doesn't change over
time.
It lasts as long as it can last, and so that's where additives
come in.
That can last, and so that'swhere additives come in.
(21:03):
The additives are there tocreate a consistent product.
It's a big deal.
Most people don't realize theamount of food science that goes
into the preparation of thesecommercial foods.
I mean, we're talking hundredsand hundreds of chemists and
food scientists and foodtechnologists who, through their
creativity, are able to inventthese foods that didn't exist in
(21:26):
the past, using additives,chemicals that never existed in
the past.
Think about the modern foodindustry, commercial food
industry.
It's only been around for acouple of hundred years, and you
know we have been around for ahalf a million years, right?
So it's relatively new that allof these chemicals that didn't
(21:48):
exist several hundred years agoare now circulating in our food
system, and so it's a realconcern.
A lot of people are gettingconcerned about what these
chemicals are doing ultimately.
Speaker 1 (22:01):
Absolutely, and I actually think about that a lot
with sodas.
I have people in my life wholike to have a couple sodas a
day and I think about the peoplebehind creating those sodas are
brilliant because they arecreating those sodas so that you
just keep coming back and youkeep coming back to the same one
, because those diehard sodadrinkers I mean they're, you
know either hardcore Pepsi orhardcore Coke you know that type
of thing they're dedicated.
Speaker 2 (22:22):
Yeah, yes, very.
Speaker 1 (22:24):
Yeah Well, I'm actually curious, mel too.
Do you have an estimate on howmany food additives currently
exist in our food supply?
Speaker 2 (22:33):
Okay, I have a rough estimate it's really hard to put
your finger on it Somethinglike 9,000 to 10,000 additives
that are approved for use in theAmerican food system, and that
number is going to vary becausethere are food additives that
come and go.
You know they may be popularand useful early on, but then
(22:56):
they get replaced by somethingelse.
But they're still on the list,as far as possible food
additives that could wind up incommercial foods.
Now it's difficult to reallypin that number down because, as
far as I know, there is nosingle resource that you can go
to that shows you the whole listof food additives that are used
(23:19):
.
You know what their names are,what their properties are, where
they are used, which is kind ofamazing when you think about it
.
But not even our government hassuch a list.
If you go to the FDA's website,Food and Drug Administration,
there is a page calledSubstances Added to Food
(23:41):
Inventory Substances Added toFood Inventory.
But if you look at that list itonly has less than 4,000
entries.
So, as I said, there's like9,000 to 10,000.
So that's only a fraction ofwhat may possibly be in
commercial foods.
That's only a fraction of whatmay possibly be in commercial
(24:02):
foods and so if anybody outthere in your audience, is aware
of a single resource that listsevery food additive.
I'd like to hear about it,Because in my experience I have
not come across that yet.
Speaker 1 (24:12):
Could you just maybe list a couple of common food
additives that we might see whenwe're at the grocery store?
Speaker 2 (24:18):
Oh gosh, where do I start?
While I was doing my research, Igot curious about the question
are the food additives that wesee in the foods that we buy in
grocery stores, big box stores,convenience stores are those
food ingredients also used bythe fast food industry?
(24:38):
And so I started looking atwhatever fast food restaurants
actually revealed, what was intheir foods, started looking at
the additives and overall, itturns out that most of the
additives that are in fast foodsare the same ones that you see
on food labels in the commercialfoods and stores.
(24:58):
And so, in terms of some of thecommon ones and this gets to be
a difficult question to answer,and it's one of my pet peeves
is that the government, throughthe FDA, food and Drug
Administration allows for somevague terms to be used on food
labels, and everybody knowsabout these but maybe haven't
(25:20):
thought about them too much, andso there are specific names
that I can give you, but there'salso very generic names that
don't give you a whole lot ofinformation, which is kind of a
problem.
So, as far as food attitudesthat you maybe would see on food
labels and this is one I usedto have to deal with when I was
(25:41):
a working chemist.
Have you seen the wordmaltodextrin?
Speaker 1 (25:45):
Yes.
Speaker 2 (25:46):
Maltodextrins.
That's actually not a singleingredient, it's a mixture, it's
a word that covers a bunch ofsimilarly related chemicals, and
maltodextrins are essentiallystarch molecules, and starch can
come from a number of differentsources.
(26:07):
Right, you can have cornstarch,wheat starch, rice starch and
so on.
This is starch that has beenpartially broken down, either
chemically or using enzymes, tosome intermediate form.
Now, if you take starch and youbreak it all the way down, you
get dextrose or glucose, right?
(26:28):
Okay, so maltodextrins are someform that's kind of partly in
between the original starch andthe sugar dextrose, and so they
essentially represent a range ofsweetness and a range of
texture between starch andglucose.
(26:51):
So if you could have a sweetmaltodextrin, or you could have
a not very sweet or non-sweetmaltodextrin, so they tend to be
used sometimes for sweetness,but oftentimes as texturizers.
They produce a certain texturein the food product.
That creates, you know, thedesirable mouthfeel as you're
(27:14):
eating that food, and it's avery complicated area.
And well, what I was sayingbefore when you see maltodextrin
listed on the label, it doesn'ttell you specifically what
you're eating.
So it's a range of substancesthat fall into a category, and
so it's a little deceptive thereAnother deceptive term that you
(27:40):
often see.
Well, actually two of them arekind of related.
You see natural flavors or youmay see artificial flavors.
Speaker 1 (27:50):
Okay, oh, yes, I feel like I see that all the time.
Speaker 2 (27:52):
All the time it's in the top five.
So natural flavors.
What does that mean?
Well, that could be hundreds orthousands of different
substances.
All you know is the wordnatural means that these flavors
were derived from some naturalsource.
(28:13):
So it could be plants, it couldbe animals, it could even be
microbial.
So it's not much information,and if you're somebody who is
maybe sensitive to one of thoseflavors, you may have an allergy
or some other kind ofsensitivity to it.
(28:34):
You're not going to know it.
So that's a pet peeve of mineas well that the Food and Drug
Administration allows foodmanufacturers to use that kind
of terminology on food labels,and the same is true for color.
There's natural colors andthere's synthetic colors.
(28:57):
So it is a little bit ofinformation, but it's not
complete information that showsup on the label.
Speaker 1 (29:06):
Yeah, I'm curious, with your insider perspective,
how you would sort of describethe FDA's role in the regulatory
process for additives.
I mean, it seems a littleconfusing, especially when
they're allowing things likenatural flavors where, like you
said, it could be 100,000different things put into this
one little, these two littlewords on the ingredient label.
Speaker 2 (29:27):
Right, right.
Well, it's not always bad.
I think the FDA is a greatagency in the federal government
in that they do play a role tosafeguard our food supply, and
if it wasn't for an agency likethat, it'd be the Wild West Okay
(29:47):
.
So, yeah, there are issues withit, but they are responsible
for making sure that additivesthat are used in commercial
foods are safe.
Now you have to use quotationmarks around safe.
You know what do you mean bysafe.
Well, generally, what theydetermine as safe is they decide
(30:13):
on a.
If a food additive is approved,they determine at what level
that food or, excuse me, thatadditive can be used in food so
that it doesn't have adverseeffects.
So they determine, like a, whatis the upper limit?
You know it may be a parts permillion thing.
You know you can use thisadditive up to 100 parts per
(30:35):
million in a food and, based ontesting that's been done, you
know we consider that safe forhuman consumption.
You know.
So they set limits, okay, onthese food additives.
So that's important, so thatany manufacturer has to follow
those rules in order to usewhatever additive they want in
the food that they're making.
So that's an important functionin the food that they're making
(31:00):
.
So that's an important functionof the FDA.
Now what gets problematic is andI don't know if you want a
little bit of history here, butback in the 1950s okay, this is
following World War II there wasa great explosion in in food
technology and food science andall kinds of new commercial
(31:25):
foods were being produced, withnew methodologies and factories.
And as a consequence, afterWorld War II not that there
weren't any before there was,but there were a lot more new
chemicals got introduced, allright.
So through the 1950s it wasbuilding, building, building.
There are people.
Some people became concernedabout that approach, the
(31:50):
legislators, and so governmentofficials and leaders in the in
the federal government began tolook into this matter.
Okay, is this a legitimateconcern?
Should we be worried about whatshows up in our foods and how
it's affecting our health?
And so that movement kind ofbuilt through the 50s.
(32:10):
Another thing that added fuel tothat was the fear of cancer.
Okay, because cancer started toshow up more and more, kind of
paralleling the development ofthe commercial food system,
right, and as a consequence,questions about okay, are there
things in the food systempossibly contributing or causing
(32:35):
people getting cancer?
And so there was a food act inthe late 1950s called the
Delaney Act that addressed thatspecifically.
They basically said if there isany scientific evidence to
indicate that a food additivemay cause cancer in humans, it's
(32:55):
to be pulled from the foodsystem.
I mean no argument there.
You know, if the evidence isthere, it's going to be, we're
going to take it off the list.
Okay.
So at the same time that washappening this is around 1958,
food additives law was passed.
It basically said weacknowledge that there are
(33:20):
hundreds and hundreds andhundreds of food additives in
the food system at this point intime, but we're going to draw a
line, okay.
And they created a list calledGRAS G-R-A-S, which stands for
Generally Recognized as Safe.
And they said okay, I'm talkingabout the federal government,
(33:41):
and the FDA and associatedagencies said that at this point
in time we recognize that thesechemicals have been in the food
system a long time.
We are going to sort of makethe assumption that if a
chemical like baking soda, forexample like baking soda for
example, has been used for 50,100 years and we haven't seen
any adverse health problemsassociated with it, we're going
(34:12):
to automatically say it's okayto use that in all future food
products.
So that's where the generallyrecognized as safe comes in.
At that time there wereprobably don't quote me, but
somewhere in the neighborhood of600, 800 of these substances
that got on the automaticallyapproved list, so that food
manufacturers didn't have tosecond guess whether they were
(34:34):
allowed to use it or not.
If it was on the list, you'refine, okay.
Now the question then arose okay, what about all the new
chemicals that are now that werebeing used in foods after 1958?
What's going to be done aboutthose?
Well, I mean, the averageconsumer might think, okay, so a
(34:56):
new food ingredient comes along.
It gets information about thisfood ingredient, gets sent to
the FDA.
The FDA takes the food additiveand through their expertise and
laboratory capabilities, theydo research on this additive,
(35:17):
put it through all kinds oftests, see whether it does what
it's supposed to do, see if it'ssafe and determine what a safe
level is if it is safe, a levelthat shouldn't be exceeded.
And then they come back to themanufacturer after they've done
all this work and said, ok, thislooks like a good ingredient.
(35:39):
We determine that it's safe andthat it's doing what it's
supposed to do.
It is now approved that it'ssafe and that it's doing what
it's supposed to do.
It is now approved.
Okay, the vast majority of foodentities are not approved like
that.
Okay, probably more than 90%,maybe more than 95%.
So the shocking fact is thatthe FDA, early on in the late fs
(36:03):
, early 60s, realized theydidn't have the manpower, they
didn't have the money, theydidn't have the facilities to
keep up, you know, with all thenew food additives that the food
industry was coming up with.
So they then decided, okay, wecan't do all this work, but we
(36:24):
still want to make sure that theAmerican population is
protected, right?
So they decided that they wouldexpand the meaning of this
grass list and basically turnedit back to the manufacturers.
So you have this new foodadditive, additive X, that
(36:45):
you're wanting to include infood manufacturing.
The onus to show that this foodadditive does what it's supposed
to do and is safe is on you.
Okay, so it's not the FDA, forthe most part, that does the
testing and the termination.
It's food companies.
Now, the food companies mighthave their own laboratories and
(37:08):
personnel to do that, or theymay hire that out to a
consulting company, and thatcompany does it and creates all
of the data and the report tosubmit to the FDA to show that
this is a good additive.
Now, this happens dozens oftimes a year and you can
(37:29):
actually go to the FDA websiteand they'll show you a list of
all the applications for newfood ingredients.
And so what the FDA does throughtheir scientific expertise,
they will review the datasubmitted by the food
manufacturer and they will makethe determination, if it meets
(37:53):
their expectations, as to whatneeded to be properly done to
certify this new ingredient, andthey will essentially make one
of three decisions.
They will say, hey, everythinglooks great, you've done your
homework, we're going to acceptthis data, and so, essentially,
(38:13):
they'll rubber stamp the usageof that additive.
Or they may say we don't agreewith you, your data doesn't look
good, we don't think thisingredient is either doing the
job it should, or people shouldbe consuming it in food, and so
it gets rejected, okay, and thenthe company's got to go back
(38:36):
and try again.
Or a third thing might be well,you've done a pretty good job
here and most of it looks good,but there's a few things that we
have questions on and and youneed to go back and and and
clarify that information.
So that's essentially what theprocess is today, uh for how a
(38:58):
food additive gets approved.
Essentially, it's theresponsibility of the people who
make it.
Speaker 1 (39:03):
Wow, I didn't, didn't really know all of that, and so
it's a little more concerningthan I was anticipating.
Speaker 2 (39:10):
Yeah, yeah it is.
It puts a whole extra layer onwhether these things should be
consumed or not.
Speaker 1 (39:17):
Right, yeah, absolutely.
So I'm curious, just to kind oflike wrap us up with you having
seen the industry really fromthe inside out in a way, what
changes would you like to see inthe way food additives are
maybe managed or regulated?
Speaker 2 (39:33):
Okay, in writing my book.
Here's basically what Iconcluded.
As individuals you and I,everybody listening it's really
hard to get all the informationthat we would need to decide
whether eating a commercial foodis going to be good for us or
not.
It's just too much information.
(39:54):
No single individual is goingto be able to keep track of that
, and new things, as I said, arebeing added all the time.
Okay, so what do we do?
I think it should be theresponsibility of the government
to inform us what we should beeating and what we shouldn't be
eating, or at least give us someinformation that will help us
(40:16):
make that decision for ourselves.
Now the federal government andstate governments you know
they've done things over theyears.
You know, ever since the early1900s, there's been laws passed
basically telling foodmanufacturers here's what you
need to do if you want to put afood out there in the
marketplace.
So that's how we got theinformation we see on food
(40:38):
packaging, where a company hasgot to be truthful in terms of
telling us what's in their foods.
They have to put otherinformation on the packages,
such as contact information andso on.
So if anybody has a question,we can contact that company and
then we have the special foodlabels, and this didn't happen
(41:01):
until relatively recently, likein the 90s, where there was a
requirement for companies tohave an ingredient list on every
package right, which listed allthe ingredients that were in
the food, from the ones presentin the highest amount to the
ones in the lowest amount, asyou know.
(41:21):
And then there was thenutrition facts label came along
, you know.
So here is a whole bunch ofinformation, and that label is
loaded with lots of informationabout nutrition.
So if you learn how to use it,you will be very informed.
So it's another way to let thepublic know about the quality of
(41:44):
the food that they'repurchasing.
I think the government should gotwo steps further, and other
countries are doing this,primarily ones in Europe.
Even our neighbor of Mexico isdoing this.
Now the US government, throughthe FDA and USDA.
They're talking about it Allright.
(42:06):
So here are the two things thatI think should be required of
all food manufacturers thereshould be front of package
labeling, and there should betwo things that are on the front
of every commercial food.
One of them should be some kindof label that tells you
(42:28):
nutritionally, at a glance,whether this food is considered
high quality or low quality.
And so you might see on thefront of a pack, let's say, bag
of potato chips, a label thathas maybe letters A through E or
(42:49):
numbers one through five and itdepends upon how they're done,
when may be the best or five maybe the worst, but a number at a
glance that'll tell you this isconsidered to be a highly
nutritious food or, at the otherend of the scale, a very low
nutritious food.
So now a consumer doesn't haveto turn the package over and
(43:14):
look real carefully at the foodfacts label and figure that out
for themselves, and figure thatout for themselves.
Some other highly responsiblescientific group has already
made that determination for youfor every food that you would be
buying at the store.
(43:35):
So that's the first thing.
Now the second thing isbeginning to happen in some
places there should be anotherlabel that tells you how
processed that food Okay, is itlightly processed or is it
primarily ultra processed andeverything in between.
(43:56):
So you'll have another scaleyou know, a to E or 1 to 5, that
will tell you that information.
And now you've got two veryimportant pieces of information
where, in a few seconds, you canlook at that front of package
labeling and decide for yourselfis this the kind of food I want
to eat to benefit my long-termhealth?
(44:19):
So that's essentially where I'dlike to see things going.
Yes, it's great to educateourselves individually, learn
about food additives, theirnames and which ones may be bad
for us, which ones are okay.
But that's a lot of work formost people and we lead busy
lives and, quite frankly, mostpeople are not going to make the
(44:40):
effort to do that.
Speaker 1 (44:42):
Yeah, yeah, it's just one less thing that we have to
do as the consumer and as ultraprocessed foods become more and
more prevalent you know they'repacking our grocery stores it
seems like they're overflowingsometimes with packaged foods.
I feel like this is somethingthat could be potentially just
really easy for the consumer toglance at and not really have to
give a second thought and, likeyou said, instead of having to
look at the label, read all theingredients, question what even
(45:05):
are natural flavors in thispackaged food that I'm about to
buy all of those things.
So I was actually kind ofwondering, you know, what advice
you might have for the listenerwho might want to make
healthier choices when it comesto all to processed foods.
Speaker 2 (45:20):
Yeah, well, that's something that's coming.
It's down the road, so it's notsomething that's going to be
available to us probably anytimesoon in this country.
So the other thing we can do isjust protect ourselves.
I mean, we have the freedom tochoose what we eat we eat.
(45:50):
So if this is a concern to youabout the availability and the
amount of ultra-processed foodsthat we consume in our diet,
well, we have the option not toconsume them.
Now, maybe easier said thandone, but you can make decisions
for yourself as far as cuttingback or eliminating those kinds
of foods from our diet, so wecan eat a whole foods type of
diet that has very little ornone in terms of these additives
(46:15):
in them.
We can choose to eat organic sowe're not exposed to
environmental toxins that alsowill affect our health, and so
there are decisions we can makefor ourselves if we are
ultimately concerned.
The problem with eating thesefoods is that most people are
not going to keel over dead thenext day after eating some fast
(46:39):
food.
It's the kind of effects thattake a long time to develop.
A lot of these studies that Imentioned before they take place
over 5, 10, 15 years, you knowto see if there are any effects
from eating those kinds of diets.
So we don't get immediatefeedback most of the time,
unless we're food poisoned, youknow, and probably most people
(47:03):
at some point have experiencedthat, so they know what that's
like.
But as far as the highconsumption of ultra processed
foods and all the food additivesthat wind up in them, we're not
going to know how they affectour health until much, much
later in life, and even thenwe're not going to be able to
know for sure.
Well, it was all those potatochips and ice cream and all this
(47:24):
stuff that I ate 20 years agothat is causing me to have
autoimmune disease, you know, orheart disease and stuff like
that.
So it's very difficult to trace, you know, once we come down
with an illness.
So the easiest thing to do istry to avoid anything that's
going to contribute to it in thelong run.
Speaker 1 (47:43):
Yeah, I think that's a great way to end it, because I
know a lot of the listenershere are very passionate about
more whole food, plant-basedeating.
So I feel like this was a greatconversation to have and for
you, the listener, if you'recurious to continue this
conversation or learn more aboutthis topic, we included Mel's
book, his podcast website andFacebook group as links in the
show notes so you can easilyaccess those and get in contact
(48:06):
with more of this information,which is fascinating.
I feel like we could talkanother hour because I didn't
even get through half myquestions.
So well, Mel, thank you so muchfor sharing your knowledge with
us.
I really appreciate you and Ithank you so much for tuning in
today as well.
Speaker 2 (48:20):
Great talking with you, Ashley.
Appreciate being on your show.
Speaker 1 (48:29):
Thank you so much for listening to the Plant-Centered
and Thriving podcast today.
If you found this episodeinspiring, please share it with
a friend or post it on socialmedia and tag me so I can
personally say thank you.
Until next time, keep thriving.
Popular Podcasts
United States of Kennedy
United States of Kennedy is a podcast about our cultural fascination with the Kennedy dynasty. Every week, hosts Lyra Smith and George Civeris go into one aspect of the Kennedy story.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com