more ingredients in fast food usually indicate less value, for example in ops pic they use 4 types of oil mixed instead of 2 likely because it's cheaper and they can adjust the quantities during significant price fluctuations in a particular oil. also notice they omit sunflower entirely in the US, compare the price per litre of sunflower vs canola at walmart and you'll see why, whereas in the UK sunflower oil is around the same price or cheaper than canola
because ingredients are listed in decreasing order based on the weight percentage in the final product.
so by using two types of sugar, you can move it down the ingredient list so it doesn't look like sugar is as big of a proportion as it is.
example:
50g water, 40g brown sugar, 30g corn syrup.
would be listed that way. and it "looks like" it's mostly water.
but if you did this:
70g sugar, 50g water
it looks like there's much more sugar, even tough there is the same amount.
You can move the goal posts all you want how those dumb info graphics don't show all what is in there but one fact remains, we sure as frick don't import your cornsyrup to put it into literally everything unlike you guys, which is what OP is asking about.
Are you fricking moronic or something? It's a requirement in the EU, and also in many non-EU European countries. What you're allowed to put in your food is also stricter in the EU, particularly the crap they pump into animals in the US, like growth hormones and antibiotics, along with fat substitutes, bleached flour, toxic preservatives, certain food colorings and other unholy crap.
Our ingredients look like that because the make up of every ingredient has to be accounted for due to companies adding weird shit like fillers and cheap replacement chemicals to foods. Also some companies would wrongly classify ingredients. What they'd call "sugar" would actually be some syrup or chemical like dextrose, sucrose, fructose, etc
Chances are most other countries don't give a shit
Whoever the mod is on this board must have the most painful constipation of all time. The literal moron bans for the most harmless shit. It's fricking stupid.
>attention grabbing image about a hot topic, big brand name and OP question of "is [thing thats been proven to be bad for you] good for you?" that amounts to nothing but fodder about an incredibly controversial and outrage inducing topic
no (you)s for (you)
>The "France version" is labeling their Corn Syrup / HFCS as "Sugar"
It’s as “good” for you as sugar is.
Because one is a sweetener and the other is a thickener. “Corn syrup” is just liquid corn starch. It is entirely different from HFCS.
“High” and “corn” are scary words to euros, which is why the EU is fine with it as long as it’s labeled “Glucose-fructose syrup”.
You understand we just don't have as much corn derived sugar over here? We get it from beets and shit, it's not because corn freaks us out or something.
>You understand we just don't have as much corn derived sugar over here? We get it from beets and shit
Of course. But that isn’t what’s expressed by 98% of euros on this board. It would seem it’s “common knowledge” that corn syrup is banned by benevolent caring EU politicians, rather than simply being a simple matter of domestic economics.
>Here let me tell you about the EU, which basically has 27 different regulation systems in its 27 different countries with different cultures and states of development, by showing you some horseshit from Australia
This is what a peak American post looks like
>Can’t read past EU
Peak European “education”
Must be all the chemicals that aren’t listen on your food. But sure, I can say the same with you making generalizations
>Uhhh I mentioned Australia and etc. in my post, that means your accusation of me talking shit about Europe is invalid >Also just trust me bro Australia is literally the same as the EU
The moment you rather attacked a little flaw in my post than having an argument I knew you were just a shitposter.
Here in Germany products are required to show literally every single chemical and additive, meaning instant trash usually has a wall of E###s on its back.
>Dumbass here, what makes corn syrup the literal devil?
CS / HFCS is cheap so it's added to things more often than it should be. >It and sugar are basically the same unhealthy shit ultimately.
Table sugar (sucrose) is literally a glucose molecule and a fructose molecule joined together. So yeah, there's very little reason to consider them distinctly.
There are legitimate differences in the way your body processes the different sugars, but at the end of the day excess sugar is bad for you plain and simple and any moron should be able to understand that
Corn syrup or glucose syrup is actually healthier than sugar, because it doesn't have any fructose, meaning your liver doesn't have to break it down, causing less inflammation. High fructose corn syrup is the thing that's bad for you but it's like 50% sweeter or something, so they use that instead.
You're the moron if you don't understand that there's degrees of bad.
The main pathway how sugar and HFCS damage your body aside from insulin spikes and excess calories, is the existence of fructose without any fiber to slow its release into the bloodstream (which is why fruit is fine in almost any quantity). Fructose can't be readily used by your body and needs to be broken down in your liver, causing inflammation and has even been proven to lead to non-alcoholic liver cirrhosis, even in kids.
Pure glucose syrup still makes you fat and spikes your insulin, but it can be almost directly absorbed into your muscles as glycogen or through a process that's a little bit more complicated be turned into fat if you consume excess calories. In the end it's not much worse than eating white flour, except the insulin spike is a bit worse.
Frick's sake.
EU Regulation 1169/2011 Article 18 >The list of ingredients shall be headed or preceded by a suitable heading which consists of or includes the word ingredients. It shall include all the ingredients of the food, in descending order of weight, as recorded at the time of their use in the manufacture of the food.
Code of Federal Regulations Title 21, § 101.4 (a) (1) >Ingredients required to be declared on the label or labeling of a food, including foods that comply with standards of identity, except those ingredients exempted by § 101.100, shall be listed by common or usual name in descending order of predominance by weight on either the principal display panel or the information panel in accordance with the provisions of § 101.2, except that ingredients in dietary supplements that are listed in the nutrition label in accordance with § 101.36 need not be repeated in the ingredient list. Paragraph (g) of this section describes the ingredient list on dietary supplement products.
And no, there isn't a secret footnote in the EU regs that says >ps. don't actually list everything, leave a few things out so we can make fun of the americans :^)
Holy shit you are the stupidest motherfricker on this board right now.
Imagine googling that and thinking “well this is the law. I read the law. This is what it is.”
You have about 5000 more pages to read, staring with how “ingredients” are defined for the purpose of said regs.
Cope, that's just what lawyers say to justify their rates and long hours. Sometimes legislation really is crystal clear. And no, you don't have to read "5,000 pages" to find out one specific thing, at worse you have to jump between two or three sections that reference one another.
>you don’t have to read the rules to know the rules
Okay zoomc**t.
Yeah, I'm really gonna post a thousand pages of legislation in a Culinaly comment. US federal and EU regs are literally based on the same source, they're just worded and ordered slightly differently and the US set is way more autistic about label graphic design. If there's such a glaring difference why don't you post it?
>I’m not going to prove my point >You prove me wrong!
You didn’t post a point though. You read a paragraph and decided you understood the subject.
Cope
I work with legislation every day and correctly surmise specific rules about subjects. I've never been wrong and I haven't actually "read" acts and regulations in years. I go in, ctrl+f, jump between a few sections, that's it. 15 minutes max.
Yeah, I'm really gonna post a thousand pages of legislation in a Culinaly comment. US federal and EU regs are literally based on the same source, they're just worded and ordered slightly differently and the US set is way more autistic about label graphic design. If there's such a glaring difference why don't you post it?
so genuine question:
do people here actually think there is some grand conspiracy to poison everyone with cheap oils? or do you think it's just because these shit oils are cheap as frick and makes them the most money?
or both?
Cheap shit oil peddled by burger government to offload corn and soy crops. They probably know it's unhealthy but don't give a shit since it's massively profitable.
Seed oils are cheap to mass produce and have a long shelf life. This is why they're pushed so hard. That they have negative health consequences is irrelevant to companies who just want to make money and governments who take underhand payments to ignore said health consequences. Not a conspiracy, just buttholes who don't give a frick.
Stop asking funny questions goyim. Here take your happy pills and oh look there’s a big juicy cheeseburger over there, better grab it while it’s fresh!
The very words "high fructose corn syrup" disgust me, because it represents a company that's willing to cut whatever corners possible. It's why I just drink mexican sodas.
>>Not legally required to show all ingredients in EU countries, Australia, etc
kek you are an butthole Read and understand the list of ingredients
This list, which itemises the components used in the food’s manufacture that are still present in the finished product (agricultural raw materials, spices, additives, etc.), is an important source of information for people who need to monitor their diet or who have allergies or intolerances to certain products. The Regulation specifies the substances and products causing allergies or intolerances that must be highlighted in the list of ingredients, for example using specific colours for the printing characters.
>meanwhile here in Kiwiland
Mmmm... Yummy 105d... Oh, and 338! Like mum always used! And it even has FLAVOUR!
You need a fricking encyclopedia to decipher some of these fricking ingredient lists meant not to "dissuade consumers from safe ingredients".
Look, nobody voluntarily admits they've been coerced into shopping at Pak'n'save. Now, I'm not reporting you to the local commissar just yet (Trev's having his nap), but you delete this post, alright?
General food labelling is mandatory and must comply with the European regulation on food information to consumers. This Regulation, which aims to ensure a high level of protection of consumer health and interests, determines the information that must appear on packaging. The list of mandatory information includes:
the identity of the commodity (trade name, list of ingredients, country of origin, etc.);
how it should be used (use-by date, preparation instructions, etc.);
its nutritional characteristics.
I want to make the American food situation better so fricking bad. We could do so much better, but I swear everytime someone brings it up on this board the boomers and cross board tourists get so livid. Why are they so defensive of eating literal garbage? They post china webms like that makes me feel any better. This shit is making normies and good natured american morons sick and fat. And worst of all, it makes our food taste worse. Our base staples, like fricking BREAD, are fricked with sugar and corn syrup. Corn is unavoidable. Can we fix it?
abolish corn subsidies. we pay an absolute frickton of our tax money to subsidize corn to make it cheap, which in practice just makes high fructose corn syrup cheap, which makes it the most profitable to shove into all food as a sweetener. corn subsidies might as well be obesity subsidies and free paychecks to soda manufacturers
Frick you you fricking b***h I'm going to eat french fries and burgers slathered in mayo and there's fricking nothing you can do about it and if you try to touch my shit I will beat you to death with my ham fists.
It's not because there is an issue in the USA, it's because gays pretend it's the only place with similar issues and somehow Europe isn't facing the same shit. Then they get proven wrong and have b***h fits
They flat out will allow inedible plastics in their chocolates in Europe it's fricking insane
Fricking hell. I was wondering why when I went to America so much food tasted "wrong" like the chicken, eggs and milk. Probably because it's covered chlorine, food dye, and brain damaging nerve gas. This video makes me sad. If I were American I would be scared to feed my kids anything
goyslop
This poster is an AI.
no israelite we just notice the vile poison you put in food and hate it
this was automatically generated
you were generated by your father the devil
sure thing bud, whatever your dataset says to post
sure thing bud, whatever your talmud says to post
Frick off israelite
You ADL homosexuals dont belong here
Why do Americans always get the best value?
more ingredients in fast food usually indicate less value, for example in ops pic they use 4 types of oil mixed instead of 2 likely because it's cheaper and they can adjust the quantities during significant price fluctuations in a particular oil. also notice they omit sunflower entirely in the US, compare the price per litre of sunflower vs canola at walmart and you'll see why, whereas in the UK sunflower oil is around the same price or cheaper than canola
Frick wrong image. Watch how I get a week long ban for this despite all the actual off topic threads on the board
Again, why do the Americans get more?
Shitty quality
>2 kinds of corn syrup.
Why do you need two, what does that add that only one doesnt?
because ingredients are listed in decreasing order based on the weight percentage in the final product.
so by using two types of sugar, you can move it down the ingredient list so it doesn't look like sugar is as big of a proportion as it is.
example:
50g water, 40g brown sugar, 30g corn syrup.
would be listed that way. and it "looks like" it's mostly water.
but if you did this:
70g sugar, 50g water
it looks like there's much more sugar, even tough there is the same amount.
It’s as “good” for you as sugar is.
Because one is a sweetener and the other is a thickener. “Corn syrup” is just liquid corn starch. It is entirely different from HFCS.
“High” and “corn” are scary words to euros, which is why the EU is fine with it as long as it’s labeled “Glucose-fructose syrup”.
>my country doesn't have stringent laws on ingredient lists, I'm a huge moron
Its the same slop fricktard
You can move the goal posts all you want how those dumb info graphics don't show all what is in there but one fact remains, we sure as frick don't import your cornsyrup to put it into literally everything unlike you guys, which is what OP is asking about.
You literally eat the same slop as us idiot
Are you fricking moronic or something? It's a requirement in the EU, and also in many non-EU European countries. What you're allowed to put in your food is also stricter in the EU, particularly the crap they pump into animals in the US, like growth hormones and antibiotics, along with fat substitutes, bleached flour, toxic preservatives, certain food colorings and other unholy crap.
just buy different fries
just buy different ketchup
Our ingredients look like that because the make up of every ingredient has to be accounted for due to companies adding weird shit like fillers and cheap replacement chemicals to foods. Also some companies would wrongly classify ingredients. What they'd call "sugar" would actually be some syrup or chemical like dextrose, sucrose, fructose, etc
Chances are most other countries don't give a shit
call the troony janny a subhuman mulatto spix and "he" will seethe for the next week and ban half the thread.
It simply hits too close to home.
>the label says it doesn't contain poison
Whoever the mod is on this board must have the most painful constipation of all time. The literal moron bans for the most harmless shit. It's fricking stupid.
the israelites in the corn lobby paying for anti-sugar advertising, research, and legislation are pretty solely to blame for this.
Corn lobby israelites + Corn farmers are unstoppable, do not frick with them
>attention grabbing image about a hot topic, big brand name and OP question of "is [thing thats been proven to be bad for you] good for you?" that amounts to nothing but fodder about an incredibly controversial and outrage inducing topic
no (you)s for (you)
have sex
Meds
No, but neither is sugar you fat moronic slob
>soybean oil
burgersisters, I don't feel so good...
it's over
delete this thread
>rapeseed
>rape
no thanks
try consuming less soy the next time
>try consuming less soy next time
Try comprehending what you reply to next time.
The "France version" is labeling their Corn Syrup / HFCS as "Sugar".
you're still eating the soy, homosexual
>The "France version" is labeling their Corn Syrup / HFCS as "Sugar"
You understand we just don't have as much corn derived sugar over here? We get it from beets and shit, it's not because corn freaks us out or something.
>You understand we just don't have as much corn derived sugar over here? We get it from beets and shit
Of course. But that isn’t what’s expressed by 98% of euros on this board. It would seem it’s “common knowledge” that corn syrup is banned by benevolent caring EU politicians, rather than simply being a simple matter of domestic economics.
Let's see if I'm banned or just warned, hmm?
>Here let me tell you about the EU, which basically has 27 different regulation systems in its 27 different countries with different cultures and states of development, by showing you some horseshit from Australia
This is what a peak American post looks like
>Can’t read past EU
Peak European “education”
Must be all the chemicals that aren’t listen on your food. But sure, I can say the same with you making generalizations
>Uhhh I mentioned Australia and etc. in my post, that means your accusation of me talking shit about Europe is invalid
>Also just trust me bro Australia is literally the same as the EU
The moment you rather attacked a little flaw in my post than having an argument I knew you were just a shitposter.
Here in Germany products are required to show literally every single chemical and additive, meaning instant trash usually has a wall of E###s on its back.
Face it. He blew you the frick out.
With what?
He blew nothing the frick out. In France too it's required by law to list all the ingredients. Take the L and quit the thread.
Cope, seethe and dilate
MSG is safe tho. It was a meme started by moronic vegans
Dumbass here, what makes corn syrup the literal devil? It and sugar are basically the same unhealthy shit ultimately.
>Dumbass here, what makes corn syrup the literal devil?
CS / HFCS is cheap so it's added to things more often than it should be.
>It and sugar are basically the same unhealthy shit ultimately.
Table sugar (sucrose) is literally a glucose molecule and a fructose molecule joined together. So yeah, there's very little reason to consider them distinctly.
There are legitimate differences in the way your body processes the different sugars, but at the end of the day excess sugar is bad for you plain and simple and any moron should be able to understand that
>UK regs mean they don't have to list specifically every ingredient
>US regs mean they do
This bait is 4 gays
>Polydimethylsiloxane
We have a fan of condom lubricants in "vegetable oil blends", people. But don't worry, it's all natural. And we know why.
Meds
>rapeseed
Corn syrup or glucose syrup is actually healthier than sugar, because it doesn't have any fructose, meaning your liver doesn't have to break it down, causing less inflammation. High fructose corn syrup is the thing that's bad for you but it's like 50% sweeter or something, so they use that instead.
It's all bad for you moron
You're the moron if you don't understand that there's degrees of bad.
The main pathway how sugar and HFCS damage your body aside from insulin spikes and excess calories, is the existence of fructose without any fiber to slow its release into the bloodstream (which is why fruit is fine in almost any quantity). Fructose can't be readily used by your body and needs to be broken down in your liver, causing inflammation and has even been proven to lead to non-alcoholic liver cirrhosis, even in kids.
Pure glucose syrup still makes you fat and spikes your insulin, but it can be almost directly absorbed into your muscles as glycogen or through a process that's a little bit more complicated be turned into fat if you consume excess calories. In the end it's not much worse than eating white flour, except the insulin spike is a bit worse.
>causing inflammation and has even been proven to lead to non-alcoholic liver cirrhosis, even in kids
Got a source for that?
Source: The Bible
>https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1365-2036.2012.05080.x
It's got some limitations but there's clear evidence.
CLEAN IT UP, JANNIES
Fun fact: HFCS was once touted as a healthy alternative to sugar, since fructose has a very low Glycemic Index
Fun fact: people that say fun fact are fricking homosexuals that have nothing interesting to say
>this cope about imaginary lenient EU labelling laws again
Frick's sake.
EU Regulation 1169/2011 Article 18
>The list of ingredients shall be headed or preceded by a suitable heading which consists of or includes the word ingredients. It shall include all the ingredients of the food, in descending order of weight, as recorded at the time of their use in the manufacture of the food.
Code of Federal Regulations Title 21, § 101.4 (a) (1)
>Ingredients required to be declared on the label or labeling of a food, including foods that comply with standards of identity, except those ingredients exempted by § 101.100, shall be listed by common or usual name in descending order of predominance by weight on either the principal display panel or the information panel in accordance with the provisions of § 101.2, except that ingredients in dietary supplements that are listed in the nutrition label in accordance with § 101.36 need not be repeated in the ingredient list. Paragraph (g) of this section describes the ingredient list on dietary supplement products.
And no, there isn't a secret footnote in the EU regs that says
>ps. don't actually list everything, leave a few things out so we can make fun of the americans :^)
It would be funny though especially the ":^)"
>The reading comprehension to understand this hurts the slopposters
That paragraph g you conveniently left out is where the difference is.
>And no, there isn't a secret footnote in the EU regs
>what are e-numbers
>except those ingredients exempted by § 101.100
in case someone wants to read it, because i dont
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/cfrsearch.cfm?fr=101.100
Holy shit you are the stupidest motherfricker on this board right now.
Imagine googling that and thinking “well this is the law. I read the law. This is what it is.”
You have about 5000 more pages to read, staring with how “ingredients” are defined for the purpose of said regs.
Cope, that's just what lawyers say to justify their rates and long hours. Sometimes legislation really is crystal clear. And no, you don't have to read "5,000 pages" to find out one specific thing, at worse you have to jump between two or three sections that reference one another.
>you don’t have to read the rules to know the rules
Okay zoomc**t.
>I’m not going to prove my point
>You prove me wrong!
You didn’t post a point though. You read a paragraph and decided you understood the subject.
Cope
I work with legislation every day and correctly surmise specific rules about subjects. I've never been wrong and I haven't actually "read" acts and regulations in years. I go in, ctrl+f, jump between a few sections, that's it. 15 minutes max.
You're the one that's claiming some mythical difference. I'd even be tempted to agree with you if you were arguing about enforcement.
Yeah, I'm really gonna post a thousand pages of legislation in a Culinaly comment. US federal and EU regs are literally based on the same source, they're just worded and ordered slightly differently and the US set is way more autistic about label graphic design. If there's such a glaring difference why don't you post it?
>fries have hydrogenated trans-fatty oil and natural beef flavor
frick....
looks like I can't eat them anymore...
so genuine question:
do people here actually think there is some grand conspiracy to poison everyone with cheap oils? or do you think it's just because these shit oils are cheap as frick and makes them the most money?
or both?
It’s just a handful of dedicated shitposting schizos. Calling them “people” is very generous of you.
Cheap shit oil peddled by burger government to offload corn and soy crops. They probably know it's unhealthy but don't give a shit since it's massively profitable.
Seed oils are cheap to mass produce and have a long shelf life. This is why they're pushed so hard. That they have negative health consequences is irrelevant to companies who just want to make money and governments who take underhand payments to ignore said health consequences. Not a conspiracy, just buttholes who don't give a frick.
RAPE SEED
I am triggered
Stop asking funny questions goyim. Here take your happy pills and oh look there’s a big juicy cheeseburger over there, better grab it while it’s fresh!
>Germangay got BTFO in his own thread
Lol, best Culinaly threads
The very words "high fructose corn syrup" disgust me, because it represents a company that's willing to cut whatever corners possible. It's why I just drink mexican sodas.
>In 2013, a Mexican Coca-Cola bottler announced it would stop using cane sugar in favor of glucose-fructose syrup.
Oh, no, no, no, moronbros...
You're actually moronic.
I drink Jarritos and other random brands I find at the local mexican market.
>36g added sugar
¡Que buenos son!
>>Not legally required to show all ingredients in EU countries, Australia, etc
kek you are an butthole Read and understand the list of ingredients
This list, which itemises the components used in the food’s manufacture that are still present in the finished product (agricultural raw materials, spices, additives, etc.), is an important source of information for people who need to monitor their diet or who have allergies or intolerances to certain products. The Regulation specifies the substances and products causing allergies or intolerances that must be highlighted in the list of ingredients, for example using specific colours for the printing characters.
sauce https://www.anses.fr/en/content/labelling-information-protects-consumer
>meanwhile here in Kiwiland
Mmmm... Yummy 105d... Oh, and 338! Like mum always used! And it even has FLAVOUR!
You need a fricking encyclopedia to decipher some of these fricking ingredient lists meant not to "dissuade consumers from safe ingredients".
Food acid 338.. what kind of vegetable is that again?
It's got phosphorus in it. Gotta be healthy. Need that phos; it's an electrolyte.
Thx bro, I'm going to drink two liters a day from now on!
Look, nobody voluntarily admits they've been coerced into shopping at Pak'n'save. Now, I'm not reporting you to the local commissar just yet (Trev's having his nap), but you delete this post, alright?
Its basic science.
General food labelling is mandatory and must comply with the European regulation on food information to consumers. This Regulation, which aims to ensure a high level of protection of consumer health and interests, determines the information that must appear on packaging. The list of mandatory information includes:
the identity of the commodity (trade name, list of ingredients, country of origin, etc.);
how it should be used (use-by date, preparation instructions, etc.);
its nutritional characteristics.
I want to make the American food situation better so fricking bad. We could do so much better, but I swear everytime someone brings it up on this board the boomers and cross board tourists get so livid. Why are they so defensive of eating literal garbage? They post china webms like that makes me feel any better. This shit is making normies and good natured american morons sick and fat. And worst of all, it makes our food taste worse. Our base staples, like fricking BREAD, are fricked with sugar and corn syrup. Corn is unavoidable. Can we fix it?
abolish corn subsidies. we pay an absolute frickton of our tax money to subsidize corn to make it cheap, which in practice just makes high fructose corn syrup cheap, which makes it the most profitable to shove into all food as a sweetener. corn subsidies might as well be obesity subsidies and free paychecks to soda manufacturers
Frick you you fricking b***h I'm going to eat french fries and burgers slathered in mayo and there's fricking nothing you can do about it and if you try to touch my shit I will beat you to death with my ham fists.
It's not because there is an issue in the USA, it's because gays pretend it's the only place with similar issues and somehow Europe isn't facing the same shit. Then they get proven wrong and have b***h fits
They flat out will allow inedible plastics in their chocolates in Europe it's fricking insane
>Rapeseed oil
If you aren't Rapemaxxing then NGMI
>he thinks the histrionic nannystates are extra lenient with food for some reason
Unironically refute these, Americhokes
>American food is full of food dye
>food dye causes ADHD
This is starting to add up
Fricking hell. I was wondering why when I went to America so much food tasted "wrong" like the chicken, eggs and milk. Probably because it's covered chlorine, food dye, and brain damaging nerve gas. This video makes me sad. If I were American I would be scared to feed my kids anything
>IT'S THE LABELLING LAW!!!
Why can't they admit they're being poisoned
American exceptionalism is main character syndrome on a country wide scale.
you're tellin me bongistans fastfood is healthier than ours and they're STILL getting fat?