“By and large, the FDA doesn't regulate most uses of "natural" labels, though it will occasionally send warning letters — if, say, a product is labeled "all-natural" but contains citric acid or calcium chloride or potassium sorbate. (Though, as one investigation by the Center for Science in the Public Interest found, those warning letters often go ignored by food companies.)
Things are a little different with fresh meat, which is regulated by the US Department of Agriculture. There, "natural" is defined as meaning the meat contains no artificial ingredients and is minimally processed. But even here, some artificial additives are allowed (such as chicken flavored with a salt broth). And meat from animals raised on antibiotics or hormones can still be called "natural."…
There are plenty of real issues and questions around food. Can we produce enough food to feed a growing population without ravaging our environment? Are we using too many antibiotics in our farms and accelerating the spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria? Should we eat healthier? Is our food system safe?
But labeling foods "natural" or "unnatural" sheds basically no light on any of these questions. It's a goofy marketing term that says nothing.”
I think there needs to be a big conversation around what is “natural” and what is that value and how does it relate to mental and physical health. A huge, interdisciplinary conversation. Because it taps into this basic disgust-reflex and into these weird imbedded social values about physical health and social behavior, and there is this overlap with ‘normal’ and ‘appropriate’ and it is so much.
No comments:
Post a Comment