\t''''by FOOD BABEIf you've ever been to the U.K., you might notice that the fast food restaurants over there are a little bit different, and slightly healthier than they are here. In the past, I wrote about how it's a common practice for food companies (everyone from Betty Crocker to Pringles to Quaker Oats) to reformulate their products with safer ingredients overseas, while they continue to sell us inferior products with unhealthy ingredients here in the States. If you walk into any McDonald's in the U.K. you'll find organic milk available for children in their Happy Meals, and no chocolate milk. Just think about that for a minute… \tMcDonald's serves organic milk to children in the U.K.? But not here in the U.S.?McDonald's also serves organic milk with their porridge (oatmeal), coffee and tea! You'll also find healthier items, like pineapple and carrot sticks that you won't find at any McDonald's in the U.S. – also without preservatives. Their fries aren't cooked in oil that contains TBHQ (a derivative of butane) or the anti-foaming agent dimethylpolysiloxane (an ingredient in silly putty) like they are here. Isn't it funny that the oil in the U.K. seems to work just fine without these ingredients? Pull through the Taco Bell drive-thru and you won't be able to order Cinnabon desserts and big Mt. Dew Baja Blast Frozen drinks because these super sugary “treats†simply aren't available. If you dine at Pizza Hut, you'll get to take advantage of a free unlimited salad bar full of fresh vegetables (like they used to have in the United States but discontinued). I'm not saying everything is healthy in these restaurants, because it's certainly not – but, it's definitely different than what we've got going on here in the U.S. Not only are their ingredients different, but they are serving up completely different ingredients and menu choices. One startling thing I noticed is that many of the menu items in the U.K. contain far less sugar than the versions that they serve us in the U.S. \tFive Fast-Food Restaurants Serving Up More Sugar In the U.S.:\t1. McDonald's Chocolate Shake (without whip cream or cherry on top)If you order a large chocolate shake in the U.K., you'll get it in the classic smaller cup (16.9 oz.) that I remember as a kid. This is about the same size as a medium size shake now in the U.S., as cup sizes have grown dramatically over the years. McDonald's has changed their shakes for the worse in the U.S. and now serve new larger versions (22 oz.) with whipped cream that contain an astounding 120 grams of sugar. In the U.K. that large shake still has a whole lot of sugar (67 grams), but it's so much less sugar than what we get here at home. Taking into account the bigger cups sizes in the U.S., ounce for ounce, the U.S. McDonald's shake without whip has 33% more sugar than the U.K. version. \t2. Pizza Hut Pepperoni Lovers/Pepperoni Feast Thin Crust Pizza (14†large/8 slices)Not only would you get to take advantage of that free unlimited salad bar in the U.K., but when you order this pizza it only contains 16 grams of sugar, versus a whopping 40 grams in the U.S. version. That's 151% more sugar! \t3. Subway Turkey Ham Sandwich (6″ with 9-grain wheat bread, lettuce, cucumbers, tomatoes, green peppers and onions)Subway used to be one of my go-to “healthy†sandwiches before I stopped eating processed fast food. Their Turkey Ham Sandwich isn't exactly high in sugar, but here in the U.S. you'll get over 56% more sugar (8 grams of sugar for 217 gram subway sandwich) than if you were to order the exact same sandwich in the U.K (5.4 grams of sugar for 228 gram sandwich). \t4. Starbucks Pumpkin Spice Latte (20 oz. venti, semi-skim/2% milk with whip)Following my Starbucks Pumpkin Spice Latte investigation, I couldn't help but wonder if Starbucks was serving up the same ingredients in other countries. I obtained the complete list of ingredients for the Pumpkin Spice latte in the U.K., and my hunches were correct. Not only did they reformulate their recipe with safer ingredients, but it also contains a lot less sugar. The venti Pumpkin Spice (2% milk with whip) in the U.S. has a whopping 58% percent more sugar than the U.K. version. A “tall†latte in the U.S. (small size) has almost the same amount of sugar as the Venti (large size). Starbucks also doesn't use use caramel coloring in the U.K., which proves this is a totally unnecessary ingredient. Instead, they color it with beta carotene (from carrots) and don't use preservatives. Starbucks is telling news agencies here in the U.S. that they've got a “team in place†working on phasing out caramel coloring in the U.S. But, they've already done it in the U.K., so why can't they just serve the same, safer, product here? *Caramel Color Level IV contains 4-MEL, which is classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer as “possibly carcinogenic to humansâ€. The National Toxicology Program also has determined caramel coloring level IV compound 4-MEL to be a carcinogen. \t5. Krispy Kreme Glazed DoughnutA plain Krispy Kreme glazed doughnut in the U.S. has 52% more sugar than the U.K. version. Not only is the U.S. doughnut slightly smaller (49 gram size), but it's got more sugar, ringing in at 10 grams, versus 7 grams in the U.K. doughnut (52 gram size). If you eat more than one doughnut, those extra sugar grams can add up quick. \tMy mind was reeling when I found this data.Why are they doing this? In the U.K., restaurants are required to let you know if their food contains any genetically modified (GMO) ingredients, with a warning on the menu. If they simply remove all GMO ingredients, they can avoid this obligation. One of the most prevalent GMO crops in the world are sugar beets. Most sugar in the U.S. actually comes from GMO beets, and no longer from sugar cane (which is generally more expensive to produce). According to Ken Roseboro of the Non-GMO Sourcebook, non-GMO ingredients tend to cost food manufacturers 25% to 50% more. So, here in the US it's easy for food producers to just switch to GMO sugar beets to save money and keep pumping our food up with more of it than they do overseas without taking a hit financially. On packaged food containing GMO sugar, the ingredient list can still say “sugar†and they are not required to tell us if it's GMO here in the U.S.. For restaurants it's even easier, because they don't need to even tell us the ingredients if they don't want to. READ MORE ''''
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/science-sushi/2011/07/18/mythbusting-101-organic-farming-conventional-agriculture/ Myth #1: Organic Farms Don't Use Pesticides http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~lhom/organictext.html "Contrary to what most people believe, "organic" does not automatically mean "pesticide-free" or "chemical-free". In fact, under the laws of most states, organic farmers are allowed to use a wide variety of chemical sprays and powders on their crops." "Until recently, nobody bothered to look at natural chemicals (such as organic pesticides), because it was assumed that they posed little risk. But when the studies were done, the results were somewhat shocking: you find that about half of the natural chemicals studied are carcinogenic as well."
No not really. I'm aware that organic farmers use pesticides also. Doesn't mean all organic farmers use it. And pesticides are still not good for you. What are you trying to debate here?
Am I going to die? I feel like I'm going to die. Sent from my iPhone 5s using Grasscity Forum..💨⛽ï¸
I never said it was healthier... Please quote me on that. Not what I implied at all. Assumptions man..
My bad, I assumed you were saying they were healthier because you seemed to argue with BlazedGlory saying there was no evidence of that. So, organic food not necessarily healthier, not necessarily pesticide free? I guess we're on the same page then
All the food we grow is probably horrible for us anyways. Organic, non organic, doesn't make a difference to me As long as you don't come for my steak then eat what you want!
There's also no evidence that the tiny, tiny trace amounts of pesticides you may consume from produce have any effects on your health whatsoever.