“How much sawdust can you put in a Rice Krispy treat before people notice?”
Answer: As much as they can legally get away with. If you’ve ever eated grated Parmesan cheese from the store, you’ve eaten sawdust. They list it on the can as “cellulose.”
Sawdust is not (just) cellulose and cannot be listed as such on nutrition labels. Sawdust, i.e., wood shavings, contains many other compounds, especially lignin. Wood is refined by e.g. the Kraft process to separate the lignin from the cellulose, giving a suspension of cellulose fibers in water called “wood pulp.” I didn’t look, but I would imagine that calling wood pulp “cellulose” on a nutrition label is fine, 'cause that’s what it is.
Now, none of this invalidates the crux of your argument that cellulose can be used as a cheap filler, such as in cheap “Parmesan cheese,” and no disagreement here that that shit is scummy af. However, there are some legitimate uses for smaller amounts in foods, such as anti-caking, thickening, and literal dietary fiber.
I love insightful answers like these. It scratches my food science itch.
wtf, how can they get away with that
It’s all about companies putting things on the label that are technically true but deliberately misleading. For years, Kraft sold “100% Grated Parmesean cheese” that was nearly 8% cellulose. I assume their excuse if they got caught would be, “Well, our cheese is ‘100% Grated’ just like it says on the label.” Meaning, everything in the can WAS “100% grated” but it was NOT 100% cheese. The first reports on this were around 2015, but it looks like their more recent containers don’t have the word “100%” anymore. They’re constantly playing these stupid little word games with their customers.
And libertarians wonder why the rest of the world think their ideas are stupid.
But muh perfect market!
Pretty sure that would be illegal because it would be based on the interpretation of a “reasonable person”, right?
That’s when lawyers get involved, and real bullshittery begins.
Money.
Before the FDA, they used to put formaldehyde and cow brains into milk. It killed children and they knew it killed children, but they tried to tell people it actually made children stronger and that we didn’t need the FDA.
In the vast majority of cases, every step we’ve taken away from libertarianism has been a huge improvement.
*looks at capitalism and libertarianism* Why is when something happens, it’s always you two?
deleted by creator
So would sand and talc powder. Diamond dust.
It’s cheap and doesn’t hurt you. There are more food like things that will fix it that are more expensive.
Removed by mod
I don’t think it’s fair to say kale and cellulose are basically the same.
I’d much rather eat cellulose.
I appreciate this joke
Yup, actually cellulose in food is not a problem at all in my mind, and is probably actually improving the average Americans health if anything.
What? Does sawdust have high levels of vitamins A, B6, C, K, folate, fiber, carotenoids and manganese? The last time i checked it doesn’t.
Removed by mod
There’s no difference for your body between kale and saw dust.
Be careful now, say something like that and someone might start a weird fad diet
Removed by mod
True, but I was thinking sawdust diet lol
Well there is right? Kale has other macro and micro nutrients, unlike you’re referring to the Fibre part only, then there would be no different right?
Removed by mod
Because it’s kinda-sorta edible (you won’t die from eating it) and it makes a cheap filler.
It’s not filler, it’s an anti-clumping agent to make sure your cheap cheese shakes out of the can correctly every time.
Canned cheese… America really is a dystopia.
This is why Trump wanted to make America grate again.
Right. And they use as much “anti-clumping agent” as they think they can get away with.
It’s filler. Because it’s cheaper than the advertised product.
it’s not harmful so i guess as long they print it on the can it’s just unethical but not yet illegal.
Pay off the regulators
deleted by creator
The free market will regulate this since at some point, saw dust will become rare
Or humans become scarce.
Look at what them meat bags survived in the past, they can eat the sawdust all day long and they won’t die out.
Fun experiment. Look at labels when shopping and make note of standard fillers like “cellulose”.
I usually think of myself as a libertarian, but end up getting into arguments with other people who think they’re libertarians. My version of the libertarian government has a very powerful EPA, child protective services, and fda. Because the freedom to do what you want with the things you own does not extend to polluting. Children are their own humans and needs their freedom protected, you don’t own them and can’t abuse them just because they live in your house. Also you can make and eat whatever you want, but you’re not allowed to poison people.
It’s like the phrase, your right to wave your fists in the air ends at my nose. Do whatever the hell you want, as long as it’s not hurting anyone. But it’s not a trust based system.
I always identified as libertarian, then had surgery, lost my job, became homeless. I’ve seen firsthand how important things like Medicare, ssi, social services are. Yeah, a lot of people using these programs are lifers, don’t care about getting a job. But there are a lot of people who just need help, women fleeing domestic abuse, people with legitimate physical or mental disabilities that make it hard to hold jobs. Many see this help as essential, but temporary, they want to get back on their feet, start working.
Those “lifers” will quite often also just not be fit to work. Physically, sure, but they might be mentally fucked. I don’t mean full schizophrenia or something, just… broken people. Saw it all around me growing up, literally in my neighbors. People that were at some point just discarded. They can’t get a job and the longer they can’t get one, the less likely it is they’ll ever get one. They fall into alcoholism, health deteriorates… 20 years later the chances of them getting a job are slim to none because nobody would hire them. They just end up stuck, lost in a system that doesn’t care about them.
I know a lot of libertarians. I think a lot do accept that the government is going to do some amount of provision for poor or sick people or children. But many are very skeptical of these services, it’s true.
Please don’t take this the wrong way. I’m assuming you’re saying you’re philosophically libertarian, and not Libertarian as in a particular party, because you didn’t capitalize the word but could be mistaken…
So you’re a liberal that doesn’t like to label themselves that way? Why throw your hat into a ring with all the rest of that batshit crazy shit if you believe in a strong centralized government and regulation (ie support for a strong FDA, EPA, and CPS)? The things you appear to support are philosophically liberal ideals. What things make you want to label yourself libertarian that conflict with a liberal philosophy?
Again, genuinely curious because libertarians tend to be either liberals that don’t like that label, or batshit crazy racists that want the end of times so they can shoot minorities. And I’m just endlessly fascinated by both types of people. Also I’m always on the look out for the elusive 3rd type of libertarian.
Not the one you responded to, but I do see myself as libertarian socialist - which is nothing else than an anarchist.
The right side always seems to want to steal the labels from our side, because freedom and liberty sells good…
A liberal on the other hand is a very comformist stance in my opinion
TIL that a libertarian socialist can be equated to an anarchist…
Time to go dive into another wikipedia hole regarding classical political theory.
Yes, traditionally,
a libertarian socialist can be equated to an anarchist
However, that’s only one of the definitions. Libertarian capitalism, commonly known as anarcho-capitalism, is another type of anarchism.
Where specifically does your philosophy diverge from liberalism. What parts of it seem conformist and what made you feel that way? In my understanding libertarian-socialist, with a lean to anarchist, seems to be liberalism without the label. So just trying to figure out the specifics of your personal philosophy.
Do you believe in private property? Regulation of commerce? Do you think social safety nets should be maintained by the government? Emergency/public services like fire departments, school, and utilities? Taking a step back, do you think the government should collect taxes? Again, just curious where your personal philosophy diverges and why. Not trying to put you on the defense or anything, just genuinely curious.
Also I’m always on the look out for the elusive 3rd type of libertarian.
You mean the original libertarians? Lol!
I can (probably) sum it as “Person’s freedom ends where rights of other begins.”
I mean, it’s still sort of a trust based system even with the FDA. It just becomes, “do I trust the FDA?” instead of the market or someone else. I think they’re generally pretty good. But then sometimes they get pressure from Big Dairy and stomp all over farmers producing almond milk because calling it milk is deceptive in their eyes. And other times they block life saving drugs from being approved for years while sick people die, even after the drugs have been proven safe. So, there’s still trade offs.
Same here, my version of libertarianism is basically socialism, which tends to greatly offend other “libertarians”. And socialists too, for that matter.
I don’t think an FDA with token regulations that companies can follow to the letter without actually providing safety (and to some extent EPA) help that much. I think especially for food safety the best way to ensure it is not by providing the shield of “we were following FDA regulations” and instead by allowing companies to be very vulnerable to suits.
There isn’t a lot of consistency in the courts.
There should be with a proper justice…
As they say, “Either the government chooses the rules, transparently, or the company does, secretly. Take your pick.”
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/herbal-supplements-targeted-by-new-york-attorney-general/
I mean, they’re doing it anyways without a free market, so long as you stamp not tested by the FDA or some shit. You can claim all kinds of crap and get away with it now.
Thanks for that! Surprising that the 15% they couldn’t tell the difference!
Label “Not for human consumption” and you’re good.
Can we make a "not for public office " stamp for the foreheads of fascists?
In one of my D&D campaigns, my wizard got tasked with a quest by half a pantheon, but mostly the god of knowledge, and realized that she was going to have to go tell Clerics of these gods what to do. She asked for “some sort of proof of the task, a letter of recommendation, or something.” The god of knowledge magically wrote his glyph on her forehead. At least it stopped glowing after a week, so you could only see it with a “True Sight.” after that. It didn’t go away even once she had a new body.
Be careful what you say around God’s. Your DM may decide to be “funny.”
Removed by mod
Don’t lie. You’re secretly role playing the “Linux guy” from Ctrl+Alt+Del
The penguin gave it away. A seeing eye pseudodragon I wouldn’t have seen through.
Pun intended.
I haven’t been able to drink milk since I discovered that the FDA allows a certain amount of pus in each carton.
If the allowed amount was “literally none” then the cost of adherence and monitoring would make milk too expensive to produce or it would be poorly enforced and nothing would be different. The same is true for insect parts, rat hair, and other contaminents in literally all processed food. Perfect cleanliness simply isn’t possible, and you’ll never notice anyway.
This. This is why there’s an episode of Bob’s Burgers about their daughter lying at school about the funeral parlor next to the burger shop and her dad’s food having corpses in it and the FDA investigating the restaurant because it potentially had more than 0.4% (?) of human flesh content. Why any at all? At such a small amount it’s impossible to detect, completely safe to consume, and would be well less than a single finger in literal tons of hamburger. It’s gross, but you’ll be fine just like you have so far.
That, and farmers have to drink milk too; if there was pus in the milk, they’d care enough to do better, and they do because that’s why we give cows antibiotics sometimes.
Now, if the government decides to loosen all those regulations, THEN I’ll be worried.
the FDA investigating the restaurant because it potentially had more than 0.4% (?) of human flesh content. Why any at all? At such a small amount it’s impossible to detect, completely safe to consume, and would be well less than a single finger in literal tons of hamburger
Not to actually argue against your point (nor to conflate this cartoon scenario with real-life regulations), but 0.4% would be way more than just one human finger in literal tons of hamburger. 0.4% of one ton would be 8 pounds / ~4 kilograms. I don’t know how many human fingers that is, but I’m certain it’s significantly more than one.
Okay, to be fair, I can’t math. Sorry about that. Just curious, how much is 0.4% in, say, a pound?
Never mind, I guess I’ve got a smartphone for a reason. “6.4 ounces”. Thanks for correcting me. :)
deleted by creator
Bobs burgers was originally going to be about the family feeding people to customers.
Wait, is that actually true?
Oof, okay. Not much else for me to say, I guess.
Wanna hear how many rodents crap on your vegetables in warehouses throughout the US before the get loaded in trucks?
I’d advise against learning about how any other food or drink is prepared in that case. It’s more gross than un-gross across the board.
Well, mastitis is very common in an animal that consistently lies on dirt to rest. And when you think about it, pus is nothing more than immune cells and their secretions fighting bacteria, but it’s diluted to the point what it’s negligible.
On the other hand, coprophagia is also inevitable and part of everyday life but nobody curls their upper lip at that! Lol
But yeah, studying microbiology changes people. *twitches*
Is this real in any way or purely satire?
Not sure about the picture, but the concept is real. The UK had to implement bread standards to prevent this sort of thing.
That’s where food safety regulations in every country come from.
It’s why Americans can’t have kinder surprise eggs.
nah that was because their lobbyist would lose market share.
I hate how we have so many problems getting food standards correct. You got one extreme with the market cutting quality and you got the other extreme with government killing innovation. I should be able to buy a beer that was made by some microbrewer madman with strange taste combos I should also be able to buy real freaken ice cream not frozen dessert treat.
I might be crazy sounding, but I don’t like the idea of innovating what goes in my body. There are eons and eons of dead humans that tried to be creative with what they ate. It’s not a game I personally want to play.
Well I do. I like trying a beer that has notes of orange in it. I am sure I have some cans of Budweiser lying around you can have.
I’ve had Dill pickle beer, curry beer, habanero beers, and all sorts of weird beers. I love experimenting with crazy flavors lol. I might not drink them regularly, but it is fun to taste something you’ve never had before, whether it is good or bad.
I agree. This is the greatest era for beer drinkers in human history, meanwhile there are areas that have beer laws allowing for zero variation. A unit of beer with about as much heart, craftsmanship, and creativity as an metal i-beam or a plastic spoon. Yes this is what I want. In a very finite life with so much to experience I want to drink the exact same beer over and over again.
I totally agree. It’s incredible experiencing totally new flavor combinations. Why drink only the same lager all the time when there are so many new flavors to try.
I’m also not afraid to have something I don’t like. Even if I hate a flavor, I’m always grateful to have tried it at least once.
Then you should be able to choose not to buy it, just as people should be able to choose to buy it.
I think with sufficiently informed consent people should be able to buy raw milk that was sitting in a moldy bucket for two weeks.
Great concept. This requires regulation to force sellers to put all ingredients on packaging, and to test that those are accurate. Otherwise sellers lie and put chalk in bread.
What does disclosure laws have to do with rules like you can’t call it almond MILK and you can’t make beer out of wheat?
Because words have common meanings. You can’t say “contains milk” and have that be almond. There needs to be definitions of what is what.
If the buyers don’t trust the seller, or just want to know the information, they can refuse to buy any product without ingredients listed, trusted quality control stamp, date etc. Or they can decide to just blindly trust a seller if they want to. Let me buy my cheap chalk bread if I prefer / don’t care.
You can only buy what exists. In the capitalist race to the bottom, good things won’t exist at reasonable prices.
I agree. If you want to buy my piss in a bag, and we trust each other, no one should possess the power to stop our trade.
But I don’t get the example you provided, since am already able to buy cheese in the shop!?
Yeah but then you’ve got some of those same regarded people filling up a baby bottles and feeding it to their kids. And then pikachu face there’s dead babies from bacteria infections.
It is hard writing rules for humans that they can’t game. In sales they had to constantly change the rules to prevent them from being gamed.
And if you want bird shit in your milk, you need to reduce regulations and oversight. It’s really a question about freedom.
https://youtu.be/AKDal51f5LU - william osman actually tried it
It’s from this: https://www.somethingawful.com/photoshop-phriday/science-fair/1/
Edit: I guess the sawdust version turned up later, but the original “minorities” version is from that
It’s at least partially satire, because libertarians oppose the existence of “corporations” (in particular, llcs) in the modern sense. Corporations are antithetical to personal liberty.
Libertarians don’t really exist. They’re just embarrassed Republicans.
A libertarian is just a Republican trying to have sex with a Democrat
This joke is dumb, too, but it’s funnier. Lol
I know this is probably a joke, but this recurring joke is dumb. Libertarians disagree with Republicans on like half of political issues, and with Democrats on the other half. I invite anyone who doesn’t believe me to go check the Party platform.
It doesn’t matter how Libertarians think. It matters who they caucus and vote with. They generally vote with Republicans. So their protests are irrelevant.
I don’t know what you mean. The Libertarian Party runs its own candidates. Members of the Party generally vote for those candidates.
During the Cold War before the Party existed and while it was still very young there was an idea called Fusionism that did involve libertarians and conservatives basically forming a truce, since they both saw the Soviet Union as the biggest problem at the time. But that time is over.
Libertarians oppose intellectual honesty
My absolute favorite part of this exchange is the number of intellectually dishonest folk downvoting my comment and upvoting yours, as if we disagreed with each other.
https://youtu.be/qmI4Ipyi86c?si=_N-PBSEJk9cc62jc
People have actually done it
That’s a video by B&H Photo, the electronics store. Is it supposed to be about sawdust in food?
It was supposed to be.
That was awesome. They called it wood flour
Parmesean flavored sawdust cheese-like crumbles
Is that Linus Techtips?
Don’t think so. But I remember the picture, I think from an Onion article from the ancient internet of about 15 years ago.
It’s the same as people putting water in milk in the past
Water is still put in the milk, aside from i being economical it’s also because drinking milk from cow directly could give you diarrhea and taste is too much form many people. I’ve seen the process on bio farm with manual milking.
Fun fact: if you stop drinking milk for a while you are very likely to develop a lactose intolerance
Interesting. Does it work for all “races” . Because I thought Caucasian developed high rate of lactose tolerance genetically to compensate for lack of vitamin D from sun light among other things but e.g. Asians have higher rate of lactose intolerance.
As far as I am aware, yes. Maybe not with a 100% success rate, but yes. I am white as snow and when I went vegan I developed a lactose intolerance (every once in a blue moon I’ll accidentally grab some milk chocolate or something without realising.) While there’s probably some genetics at play, western cultures have a much higher focus on milk, so you are much more likely to just drink/consume milk with some regularity throughout your life, from childhood, so you just never lose those… well, I don’t know, enzymes, I think? Every mammal starts out with a lactose tolerance, after all.
interesting. I’ve always read about genes version never about time between consumption of lactose.
As for mammals, it’s unique for humans to be able to drink other species milk on large scale AFAIK. Even adult cats can get into trouble after drinking cow milk.
Or sugar water
Sugar water is supposed to have water in it
Key word is supposed. Pretty sure if left to the free marker it will contain never sugar nor water.
Only sawdust
I had an internet discussion with someone who believed that all regulations are bad. I don’t think s/he’s a troll, but tried as I might I couldn’t get this person to agree that at least some regulations might be good.
Can’t remember off the top of my head, but one argument was that even for major safety violations, the market would put them out of business, and other companies won’t do it. I said that this would be after the damage is done and people/environment are hurt, but the person said that regulations are reactive anyway and companies would just stop doing it. It was very frustrating trying to get this person to agree that maybe some regulations can be good.
