The free market will regulate this since at some point, saw dust will become rare
"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?
Just like you can get away with eating cellulose from other plants. It's usually called fibre and everyone likes fibre.
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.
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.
I can (probably) sum it as "Person's freedom ends where rights of other begins."
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.
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.
Wanna hear how many rodents crap on your vegetables in warehouses throughout the US before the get loaded in trucks?
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 so much that it's not even noticeable.
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*
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.
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.
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 not purely satire.
In fact, they did polls with people who knew one rice crispy square was 15% sawdust and the other had none and people couldn't tell the difference. Even knowing.
Label “Not for human consumption” and you’re good.
Can we make a "not for public office " stamp for the foreheads of fascists?
Parmesean flavored sawdust cheese-like crumbles
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
