top of page

Why are synthetic foods, processed foods and beverages, and supersynthetic foods and beverages...

October 8, 2023 David Greene


According to statistics, the ingredients that make up 99 % of all foods are a complete mystery. The USDA National Nutrition Standard Reference Library details 188 nutrients found in foods, including 38 flavonoids, but scientists believe our foods contain more than 26,000 different biochemicals. We're concerned about processed foods, and we don't know much about the ingredients in synthetic foods. food. They falsely claim that they have "the same value" as real foods, such as "plant-based meat" and "animal-free milk." A paper published in Animal Frontiers in April 2023 warns that scientists cannot create equivalence unless they know what at least 85% of the food they are trying to recreate is made of. There is. Intended to be replaced!


Example : Today, you can easily buy milk from anywhere in any city. After all, can you really get that much milk from a cow? ?


Not recently, in 2022, a British newspaper reported: 00-0000-0000- 000000000111_Cow-Free Milk startup seeded Raise $13 million in funding A start-up that has raised a record $13 million (£9.7 million) in seed funding from investors to stay healthy is set to be in stores in Israel by 2023. Make traditional dairy products. Basically, the programming process involves the production of whey and casein (Major milk proteins) DNA instructions inserted into microorganisms will be done. To convert the whey and casein produced by microorganisms into dairy or dairy-free products, Imaginadaly adds plant-based fats, sugar, and water. NGOs believe methane-free milk can significantly reduce the effects of climate change and deforestation. Heres how to reduce themApprox. 32 %Methane Mainly generated by humans from billions of people on earthTaurusCow. Reducing methane emissions is considered the most important step to mitigating global warming over the next 25 yearsPowerful Leverage. There are already many alternative milks on the market, and the demand for oat milk, soy milk, almond milk, and other types that make "milk" from other milk alternatives has increased significantly in recent years. is increasing. But cellular agriculture companies that produce meat, dairy, and fish without animals are working on commercial-scale production. andEuropean dairy producers Commenting on the funds raised by Imaginavery, Vice President Tom Dunn said it would be impossible to recreate milk in a lab. said.


There are many things that are always missing from nature. The main elements may be there, but they don't contain everything that milk contains. ” he said. "Cows are a millions-year-old natural system that produces milk. It's okay if you want to feed your child something you created in a lab and later find out it might not be right." Is it?


As the author, my current thoughts are as follows. This is a commercial project aimed at generating profits, but I will never drink fake milk or fake meat products_11100000 -0000-0000-0000-000000000111_!


A report released in May by the U.S. Food and Agriculture Organization found that lab-grown meat contains at least 53_11100000- We conclude that it exists. 0000-0000-0000-000000000111_ Potential health risks, including significant metals, microplastics, nanoplastics, chemicals, allergenic additives, toxic ingredients, antibiotics, and the possibility of prion contamination, in the food you eat Do you know what's included?


Example : I was looking for dark matter (dark nutrition, or hidden nutrition) in the kitchen, and I found it in the following package. Found it in. Korean instant noodles. Food labels list 38 ingredients, many of which are new. But real foods are also listed, including soybeans, chili peppers, sesame seeds, shrimp, cabbage, seaweed, mushrooms, anchovies, and squid. And the desired garlic. Just to be clear, I'm not saying that garlic contains black matter. According to physicists, about 85% of the matter in the universe cannot be directly observed. However, it contains the so-called "nutritional dark matter" . These are thousands of compounds found in food that were completely unknown until recently and can affect our health.


This is an incredible oversight, considering that food is one of the most universal to humankind. Albert Rubushree Barabshi, Harvard Medical School Coined the term nutrient dark matter He said: ``Our understanding of how diet affects health is limited to 150 important nutrients.'' But these are just a few of the biochemicals found in our food.'' It's time for nutritionists to kick out the black stuff, he says. This scale has led to a better understanding of what goes on our plates and how it affects us, but to this day, the chemistry of our food remains The complexity remains unexplored.


However, these are just a few of the biochemicals found in our food. ”…The idea that food is a rich and complex combination of biochemicals is by no means new. The well-known macronutrients proteins, carbohydrates, and fats are highly diverse, and there are also many micronutrients such as minerals, vitamins, and other biochemicals, many of which are present in only trace amounts but still contribute to health. It can have a big impact. /span>


The world lacks the talent and resources to demystify nutritional information and ultimately relies solely on official U.S. sources. Unfortunately, its authenticity is questionable. What is known is that the ingredients of hundreds of thousands of foods are listed, but it's not as detailed as you might think.


So far, only 188 nutrients have been described, including 38 flavonoids, but scientists believe our food contains 26_11100000 -0000-0000-0000-000000000111_000 We estimate that it contains more than 100 different biochemical substances.


New Scientist points out that: “If we use the USDA as a guide, 99.5% of the time, ``what's in our food is a mystery,'' Barabasi points out. Thus, it is foolish to think that 99.5 % of the compounds we ingest are unimportant...If we don't solve this conundrum, we won't really understand what to do.


December 9 11100000-0000-0000-0000-000000000111_2019, scientist Katherine Gammon_1110000 Announcing 0 Did. -0000-0000-0000-000000000111_:_11100000 -0000-0000-0000-000000000111_ Studying the "dark matter" in food can help reveal the relationship between diet and health. A new paper shows how difficult it is to understand how many biochemicals are present in our food and how they affect our bodies. body. Scientists have been trying for decades to understand how different elements in foods, such as vitamin C in oranges or selenium in garlic, affect people's health. However, the USDA and research databases only track key nutrients for about 150 of the approximately 26,000 biochemicals known to be present in foods.


Researchers have begun collecting data and crunching numbers to understand what happens when these biochemicals reach the body. I would like to know more. "We're starting to talk about how to combine information about diet and the causes of disease," says Albert László Barabási, a networking researcher at Northeastern University in Boston. Barabashi studies biological networks and their role in human disease. He said that with all the genetic data we have, we can explain 10 to 20 percent of the causes of disease. Where else? From an environmental perspective, the biggest environment is food.


In a new article in the journal Nature Food, Barabashi explores how scientists can use machine learning and more systematic approaches to study different variables. I am proposing it. Tackle what he calls the "dark matter" of food. For example, each person's dietary habits define a unique daily biochemical barcode that researchers call a "foodome." It is derived from other research fields that characterize a wide range of bioinformatics, such as genomes and biomes. This food can be studied using daily image-based food diaries combined with genomics and medical history. https://www.nature.com/articles/s43016-019-0005-1


Barabashi says we won't really understand how we get sick until we solve this mystery. After all, diseases caused by diet and behavior, such as diabetes and heart disease, are the leading causes of death. “To solve this health crisis, we need to start asking ourselves: What is actually in our food? -0000-0000-0000-000000000111_? What compounds make us sick and which compounds are good for us_11100000 - 0000-0000-0000-000000000111_?


Frustrated by the lack of information, an international research team began working on a more comprehensive database 10 years ago. In 2020, that database contained 70_11100000-0000-0000-0000. -000000000111_000 Nutritional information. But even this database still has a long way to go. An estimated 85% of the listed nutrients are still quantified. In other words, we know that a food contains a certain ingredient, but we don't know how much. The health effects of most compounds also remain largely unknown.


The same is true for individual micronutrients, the scientists said. Consider beta-carotene, Barabashi said. "Epidemiological studies show that beta-carotene tends to be associated with heart disease, but studies of adding beta-carotene to the diet have not shown any health benefits." One possible reason: is that beta-carotene never exists alone in plants. Approximately 400 molecules are still present and, like good quality true curcumin, no other components are removed from the composition of the plant, only curcumin remains, and the same principles apply. It must contain other accompanying substances to grow and be effective. Therefore, epidemiology can examine the effects of other molecules on health. "


Wishart, the database's founder, said another possible reason is the influence of the microbiome on dark nutrients. "Most dark-colored nutrients are chemically transformed by gut bacteria. For this reason, research results on the benefits of different foods are relatively vague. Digging deeper, we find that the gut microbiota varies from person to person depending on how the fetus was born, the environment, parental factors, etc. Therefore, it is impossible to enumerate universal standards.





Processed foods are a big mystery


The reason I started with this context is because we are so confused about the ingredients in processed and synthetic foods that ignorantly claim traditional foods are real. Because I don't even know. Examples include animal-free meat, animal-free milk, and packaged, ready-to-eat foods and beverages. Food processing alone tends to change the composition of bioactive molecules in the food and thus its health effects, but today's processed foods have a tendency to It also includes a wide range of synthetic chemicals that were not. Therefore, they pose a risk to long-term health and well-being.


How do scientists create equivalence when they don't know more than 85 % of the set of foods they're testing? Is it possible? To reproduce ?


In recent years, researchers have discovered that whole foods can be easily replaced with synthetic, genetic, or lab-grown alternatives that are completely equivalent to whole foods. The origin of the idea has been established. In reality it's not possible at all.


How do scientists create equivalence when they don't know more than 85 % of the set of foods they're testing? Is it possible? How to reproduce ?Common sense tells us that this is impossible. They may look, smell, and even taste similar, but their micronutrient composition is completely different, making their health effects unprecedented. Animal-free equivalence is a deceptive way of promoting this equivalence.


Let's take the example of cultured meat. Because it is made from animal cells, it is said to be equivalent to real animal meat. The cells are then grown in a nutrient solution in a bioreactor until they become meat-like dishes. Similarly, animal-free milk is a dairy alternative made from whey protein obtained through a fermentation process, vegetable fat (in place of milk fat), citrus fiber (used in cream), and additional vitamins and minerals. is.


Cultured meat proponents argue that the product is "real meat" and not "fake meat," with the only difference being that the production There is no need to slaughter animals to do so. that's it. Cultured meat and other synthetic foods will also become more environmentally friendly. But nothing could be further from the truth.

The impact is much more similar to the pharmaceutical industry than the food industry. According to a recent Cradle to Gate life cycle analysis, the lab-grown meat industry produces 4 to 25 times more carbon dioxide than traditional livestock production.


According to this assessment, each kilogram of cultured meat produces between 542 pounds (246 kilograms) and 3 325 The range is Pounds (1_11100000). -0000-0000-0000-000000000111_508 kilograms), the climate impact of cultured meat is 4 to 25 times greater than that of conventional beef. This information is provided solely to refute those who believe in the global warming myth.


As the authors point out, investors are buying animal cell-based meat (ACBM) based on the theory that cultured meat is more environmentally friendly. ) has invested billions of dollars in the field. beef. . But these researchers say this hype is based on a flawed analysis of carbon emissions.


Cultured meat is also typical of ultra-processed foods, which can lead to other ultra-processed foods and health problems such as obesity and cardiovascular disease. there is. 0000-0000-0000-000000000111_2. Increased rates of diabetes, metabolic syndrome, irritable bowel syndrome, cancer, mental health problems, eczema, and all-cause mortality.


An article published in the April 2023 issue of Animal Frontiers27 also warns that some impacts of cell-based meat need to be considered But that's not all. The fact that farmed products are not nutritionally equivalent to the meat they replace.


It is also not true that no animals were killed in the process. Currently, most cultured or cell-based meat is made from animal cells grown in a solution of fetal bovine serum (FBS) made from the blood of an unborn calf. In other words, pregnant cows are slaughtered to drain the fetus's blood.



Is it safe to eat tumor meat ?

There are also many unanswered questions regarding security. For example, some companies use immortalized cells, which are technically precancerous and/or completely cancerous, to grow cell cultures. 28 (Other companies use embryonic stem cells or cells from live animals. 29)


The reason for using immortal cells is that normally functioning cells cannot divide forever. Most cells reproduce only a few dozen times before aging and dying.


This won't work if your goal is to grow thousands of pounds of tissue from a small number of cells. Therefore, immortal cells without an off switch are used. . You can make copies and split an unlimited number of copies. Therefore, meat substitutes grown in this way could be considered tumors, as the meat is entirely composed of pre-cancerous or cancerous cells. Is it safe to eat tumor meat? We don't know.


Biologist Robert Weinberg, Ph.D., of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, believes that humans cannot use these cells because they are not human cells and therefore cannot exist in the body. He proposed that cancer cannot develop from cancer. In vivo replication. However, there are no long-term studies to support this theory.


Next diet concerns

It is also important to be aware that the nutritional content and safety of synthetic foods vary from brand to brand.

For example, when processing beef, the meat from one cow is relatively the same as the meat from other cows (the only major exception is This is how the cows are raised (feeding). Wild salmon is just as good as any other wild salmon, and any red potato is more or less the same as any other red potato.


However, because each synthetic food brand uses unique ingredients and processes, no two have the same ingredients or safety profile, and ultimately Only one is proven to be nutritious. These results cannot be applied to other brands.


This disparity risks creating major problems in the future when different foods are replaced by synthetic products that are not equivalent. How do you decide which brand of cultured beef, chicken, or salmon is best for you? When every food product has countless variations with different ingredients and safety profiles, how do you eat wisely? Should I create it?


Synthetic foods pose unique food safety risks


Many synthetic food proponents argue that lab-grown foods avoid many food safety concerns, but The reverse is also true. Of course, foods such as beef can become contaminated during processing, packaging, transportation, storage, and even cooking.


However, in cultured meat, every ingredient and processing step has the potential for contamination, and any one of the hundreds of ingredients individually or synergistically may be toxic.



In fact, in May 2023, the organization published a detailed analysis of existing evidence published by a team of experts from the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Health Organization. It concludes: The bottom line is that lab-grown meat has at least 53 potential health risks. Among them are heavy metals, microplastics, nanoplastics, chemicals, allergens, toxic ingredients, antibiotics, and possible prion contamination.


Additionally, some ingredients used in synthetic biology, such as cultured meat, are regulated as "undetectable manufacturing aids," meaning I don't even know what it is. For example, Israeli startup Profuse Technology has developed a growth media supplement that promotes large-scale protein growth.


Article titled " Breakthrough " in Cultured Meat_1110 on Food Navigator Europe reported in I am. 0000-0000 -0000-0000-000000000111_: Media supplements achieve full muscle maturation in 48  hours on scaffold. This supplement reduces the time needed to grow fillets and steaks by 80% and increases the final protein content by 5 times. product.


Unsustainable model


The meat growing process also produces toxic biological waste, an issue that does not exist in traditional agriculture or food processing.

Many of the starting materials come from genetically modified corn and soybeans grown in monocultures and containing large amounts of herbicides, pesticides, and synthetic fertilizers, which are harmful to the environment. cheap sugars and fats.

Thus, they are full of chemical residues. Hundreds of other ingredients can then be added to the fermentation to produce the desired end product, including specific proteins, colors, flavors, and aromas. The most common microorganism used in fermentation processes is E. coli, which has been genetically modified to produce the compounds necessary for the digestive process.


The microorganisms must also have antibiotic resistance, as they must withstand the antibiotics used to kill other unwanted microorganisms in the barrel. not. As a result, antibiotic-resistant microorganisms will also be incorporated into the final product, and no one knows what kind of food poisoning will be caused by gene-edited antibiotic-resistant E. coli and its metabolites.


In addition to desirable target metabolites, these genetically modified organisms can also expel non-target metabolites with unknown environmental and health effects. There is a gender. But that's not all. Once the target microorganisms are extracted, only biohazardous waste remains.


Traditional fermentation processes, such as beer production, produce waste that is edible to animals, compostable, and does not pose a biohazard. Microorganisms produce biofermented compounds. Please deactivate it first and then safely dispose of it. Landfill is not allowed.


Food production, which requires GMO inputs and produces more CO2 than conventional agriculture or biohazardous waste, is far from a sustainable model. hard. But then again, synthetic biology and processed foods are not far removed from real sustainability concerns.


If that's the goal, everyone will pay attentionRegenerative farming, each systematic part supports and supports the others, eliminating the need for chemical inputs and significantly reducing water requirements while optimizing yields.


No, synthetic biology is being pursued because it is a powerful control mechanism. Whoever owns all the production of synthetic foods will literally rule the world. For more information on this control conspiracy, please visit < please. span style="color: #000000;"> Food is medicine. Wrong agenda. In other words, globalists already own and control most of the carbohydrates grown in the world today. By replacing real animal foods with proprietary lab-made protein substitutes, they will wield unprecedented power over the world's population.


This gives people more control over their health. Eating ultra-processed foods is known to cause disease, and big pharmaceutical companies are reaping the benefits of poor health.


The processed food industry has been fighting chronic diseases for decades, treating them with drugs rather than better diets. Synthetic foods can be a major cause of chronic disease and premature death. The truth is, artificial meat and dairy products cannot replace the complex combination of nutrients found in grass-fed beef and dairy products, and eating ultra-processed meats and dairy alternatives provides the same health benefits as processed foods. That means it can cause problems. So if you really want to protect your health and the environment, you should avoid patented fake foods and stick to foods that occur in nature instead.


  • 1, 6, 7, 10 New Scientist July 22, 2020 (Archive)

  • 2, 4Natural foods 2020 ; 1 :33-37

  • 5 Afector February 26, 2020

  • 8 Inside Science December 9, 2019< /p>

  • 9 FooDB

  • 11 Knowledge Magazine September 20, 2023< /u>

  • 13 Food Safety News September 19, 2023

  • 14 BioRxiv April 21, 2023

  • 15 New Scientist May 9, 2023< /p>

  • 16 Interesting Projects May 14, 2023< u >

  • 17W ? 2023 5 Month 12th

  • 19 Cellular metabolism, 2019 ; doi_11100000- 0000-0000-0000-000000000111_: 10.1016/j.cmet.2019.05. 008

  • 20 BMJ 2018;360:k322< /p>

  • 22 JAMA Internal Medicine February 11, 2019;179(4):490 - 498

  • 23 BMJ February 14, 2018_11100000-0000-0000-0000 -000000000111_; 360

  • 24 JAMA 2017;317(9):912-924

  • 25 BMJ, 2019;365:I1451

  • 26 BMJ, 2019;365:l1949

  • 27 Animal Frontier April 2023;13(2):68-74 span>

  • 31 FAO.org Safety aspects of cell-based foods< /u>< /u>

  • 32 ISAAA.org May 10, 2023 < u>

  • 33 Food Navigator Europe September 26, 2023 < u>

Comments


Featured Posts