Science, Social Media, and Sensationalism

March 27, 2014 by 6 Comments

Today I logged into Facebook, and near the top of my newsfeed was a link to an article that caught my eye. It was entitled “8 Beers That You Should Stop Drinking Immediately” from the website www.organics.org. In fact, this article has been shared so many times on Facebook today alone that the website has crashed due to the high traffic volume and has not yet been resorted at the time of this posting. The link was shared by one of my old high school teachers, and below it there were already a few comments thanking him for sharing such valuable information. What toxins could these adult beverages possibly contain—what ingredients could be so harmful to be warranted by such a fear-imbuing title? I decided to investigate—immediately! Lest someone consume one more bottle of these fermented killers.

 

At this time the only form of the webpage to which I have access is a Google cached version of the page from shortly before the website crashed. Here’s a screenshot of the article’s introduction:

Screen Shot 2014-03-27 at 8.06.53 PM

 

The article proclaims, “All the work for your body can be ruined in a weekend out,” apparently as a result of harmful ingredients found in beer—“a HUGE mistake.” A Google search turned up a similar article from a website named foodbabe.com. Both articles enumerate the harmful ingredients we should avoid. Many of the listed harmful ingredients in the article are indeed controversial, from genetically modified organisms (GMOs) to high fructose corn syrup and BPA. But what the article fails to mention is that, although these substances are controversial, they are found in a multitude of other foods that are commonly consumed in much greater quantities than beer. In essence, the premise of the entire article, claiming the harmful ingredients consumed from beer can ruin your body’s well-being, is a bit of a hyperbole with one blatant omission—the ingredient in beer that is most likely to do your body harm is the alcohol itself. So if you’re concerned about the harmful effects of caramel coloring in beer, it might be wiser to worry about getting alcohol poisoning from consuming the enormous volume of beer necessary for the caramel coloring to have an effect. Or just avoid everything else in your diet that has caramel coloring (hint: it would be difficult). So without further ado, let’s take a look at some of the ingredients and where they occur in much high quantities in a typical diet.

 

GM Corn – Do you eat corn or anything made from corn? Yes? Then if you live in the United States you probably eat genetically modified corn, considering the 90% of corn grown in the United States is of genetically modified varieties. Studies on the potential health effects of GM crops are ongoing, but no definitive links to adverse health effects have yet been proven.

 

Fish Bladder – Not as gross as it sounds. The article leaves out the key detail that it is the swim bladder of the fish that is used, not the type of bladder most people think of. The swim bladder in a fish stores air, which helps the fish control how much it floats—not fish waste, as the title might have you believe. Guinness uses it in the form of a powder to clarify their beer—the powder is filtered out after it does its job.

 

Propylene Glycol – The foodbabe.com article describes it as “an ingredient found in anti-freeze.” Well, kind of, but not. The problem with that description is that there is no one substance called “anti-freeze.” Many different chemicals can act as anti-freezes because they don’t freeze—a property that is not directly correlated with their toxicity. Ethylene glycol is a poisonous antifreeze, but propylene glycol is specifically used as a non-toxic anti-freeze. And just because it has properties that enable it to be effective as an antifreeze doesn’t mean it can’t perform other functions as well—it is labeled by the US Food and Drug Administration as GRAS (Generally Regarded as Safe) as a food additive.

 

Caramel Coloring – Another controversial substance as a result of the use of various acids and bases in its production, such as hydrochloric acid and ammonia. It is most commonly found in any type of dark colored beverages, such as colas and root beers, and it is one of the most widely used colorings in food products. It is also used to color breads, chocolate, cookies, liquors, and sometimes potato chips, as well as a long list of other foods, although there are different classes of the coloring that can be used in different types of foods.

 

The safety of some of the listed ingredients is indeed up in the air, and more scientific research is certainly necessary for further investigation—I can’t dispute that. However, it is extremely difficult—near impossible—to prove that a substance is completely safe, and therefore proving 100% safety of a chemical used in foods (or any substance) should not be expected by the public.

 

I do, however, believe that the sources of articles such as these should be taken to task for their incomplete, evidence-lacking, and selective journalistic practices that seem focused solely on attaining shares, likes, and retweets instead of on spreading accurate, fact-checked information. Both articles show evidence of a lack of thorough background research or obvious omission of key details that would lessen the “impact” and “buzz” of the article. I call into question the ethics behind this type of journalism, as I believe that such articles serve to alter the public perception of chemists, the chemical industry, and the entire scientific community in a negative manner. Yes, some ingredients and food additives could potentially be dangerous, but if you’re going to publish a seemingly investigative article, at least for the benefit of your readership and society in general perform the basic background research necessary to cite relevant sources and provide more than two sentences about each substance instead of an (apparently successful) sensationalist attempt to increase web traffic. Or maybe hire a proofreader–take baby steps.

 

Sources:

www.organics.org/8-beers-that-you-should-stop-drinking-immediately/

http://foodbabe.com/2013/07/17/the-shocking-ingredients-in-beer/

http://umpir.ump.edu.my/3162/1/CD5934_KHALIZATUL_RADHIAH_KASIM.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_food

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antifreeze#Ethylene_glycol

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caramel_color

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swim_bladder

 

Filed Under: Passion Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

What’s in your food?

February 6, 2014 by 8 Comments

This week’s passion blog post was inspired by a social media trending topic. Multiple sources are carrying the story that the sandwich shop Subway is eliminating the use of the chemical azodicarbonamide in their breads. The topic was just too hard to pass up—just this past weekend I recorded my “This I Believe” essay, which I wrote about how I bake my own bread. In fact, I even listed the same chemical in my essay to exemplify the unfamiliar, hard to pronounce ingredients that are commonly used in processed breads as further reason for me to bake my own bread. It turns out most news sources are jumping on the fact that azodicarbonamide is also used in the manufacturing of foamed plastics—such as yoga mats.

Ingredient: Azodicarbonamide Source: http://www.studlife.com/files/2013/02/Subway-Bread.jpg

Ingredient: Azodicarbonamide
Source: http://www.studlife.com/files/2013/02/Subway-Bread.jpg

Ingredient: also azodicarbonamide Source: http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/71cwPmthlJL._SL1500_.jpg

Ingredient: Azodicarbonamide
Source: http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/71cwPmthlJL._SL1500_.jpg

 

So today I’m going to further investigate the chemical azodicarbonamide, as well as some other food additives that are used in products other than food.

To start off, azodicarbonamide is indeed approved as a food additive by the US Food and Drug Administration, achieving “generally recognized as safe” status in concentrations below 45 parts per million—that’s 0.0045% by weight. Its use in food is banned in Australia, Europe, and Singapore. It is added to flour as a dough conditioner and strengthener, and it can be found in many brands of commercially produced breads. The ingredient did not become controversial overnight, it seems—while researching the topic I came across all sorts of blog articles about this reportedly dangerous food additive surrounded by attacks on the processed foods industry. It’s hard to figure out which articles are accurate and not just angry venting against artificial foods. I did some research about the chemical itself and some scientific studies conducted to test its safety, and it appears that azodicarbonamide can indeed by harmful in its raw form. Accordingly, the UK does label it as a respiratory irritant, indicating that it can be harmful to workers who inhale the chemical.

Azodicarbonamide Chemical Structure Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Azodicarbonamide.png

Azodicarbonamide Chemical Structure
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Azodicarbonamide.png

Azodicarbonamide in its Powdered Form Source: http://pantryparatus.com/media/wysiwyg/All_Images_2013/Other_Peoples_Photos/azodicarbonamide.jpg

Azodicarbonamide in its Powdered Form
Source: http://pantryparatus.com/media/wysiwyg/All_Images_2013/Other_Peoples_Photos/azodicarbonamide.jpg

However, when used in bread, azodicarbonamide doesn’t actually stay in its raw form. When it is combined with flour and water, studies found that “it is rapidly and completely converted into biurea, which is stable under baking conditions” (www.inchemg.org). Biurea has been found to be rapidly eliminated from the body after consumption. Other by products besides biurea need further investigation to determine how much of a threat they pose to humans, but by all studies it seems that azodicarbonamide, at or below the maximum allowed proportion, does not pose as significant of a threat as some news headlines would have you believe.

 

A main non-food use of azodicarbonamide is in the manufacturing of foamed plastics, such as the material yoga mats are made of. It’s important to note that there is a distinction between the chemical that is delivered to bakers and that which is used in plastics manufacturing—as a food product, the quality and purity standards are higher. But in making a yoga mat, azodicarbonamide is what makes the foamy texture. It produces gases when it is heated, and those tiny gas bubbles are trapped in the material, creating a springy, cushioned foam.

 

But azodicarbonamide is just one of many food additives that is used in other ways besides food. Take, for intense titanium dioxide. It is a chemical pigment and whitener that is commonly found in sunscreens because of its ability to block UV rays from the skin. It is also used in cosmetics. But where is titanium dioxide also used? Sometimes in skim milk and low fat cheeses—products that may not be as bright white due to their decreased fat content. Titanium dioxide is used to make them look brighter and more appealing—closer in color and appearance to their full-fat versions. Titanium dioxide is also an airborne irritant, but is otherwise rather chemically nonreactive and harmless.

 

Ingredient: Titanium dioxide Source: http://pics1.ds-static.com/prodimg/214628/300.JPG

Ingredient: Titanium dioxide
Source: http://pics1.ds-static.com/prodimg/214628/300.JPG

(Possible) Ingredient: Titanium dioxide Source: http://images.wisegeek.com/pitcher-of-milk-cream.jpg

(Possible) Ingredient: Titanium dioxide
Source: http://images.wisegeek.com/pitcher-of-milk-cream.jpg

 

I can definitely understand the public reaction to the use of azodicarbonamide in bread products as well as other artificial ingredients in various food products, and I generally believe that simple and natural is usually better in terms of food. My only concern would be that the food industry will find another chemical to use instead—a chemical that no one will notice until someone investigates and petitions bakeries to stop using it. And who knows how long that would take.

Sources:

http://www.wakingtimes.com/2013/09/11/ingredient-found-cereals-breads-also-found-foamed-plastics-rubber/

http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/06/health/subway-bread-chemical/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanium_dioxide/

http://www.inchem.org/documents/jecfa/jecmono/40abcj28.htm

http://www.wakingtimes.com/2013/09/11/ingredient-found-cereals-breads-also-found-foamed-plastics-rubber/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azodicarbonamide

http://www.inchem.org/documents/cicads/cicads/cicad16.htm#PartNumber:2

Filed Under: Passion Tagged With: , , , , , , , , ,

The Little ID that Could: An Analysis of the Campus Meal Plan

September 27, 2013 by 4 Comments

The Campus Meal Plan. For all students living on campus, the only choice is which of the six levels to pick from. The meal plan is convenient: swipe your card at any of the dining halls and grab as many plates as you can fit on your tray and at a minimum two drinks. Then go back for more. And at a-la-carte dining options your meal plan gets you a 65% discount on prepared items. Sounds like a pretty sweet deal, right?

 

We’ll see.

Below is a table with the prices of Campus Meal Plan levels for this year.

Screen Shot 2013-09-27 at 12.39.38 PM

For each, you pay a base cost of $1,295 plus one dollar for every Dining Dollar. But while this table may seem to indicate that each Dining Dollar is equal to one US dollar, this is in fact a bit misleading. Calculating the total cost per dining dollar (dividing the Total Cost by number of Dining Dollars) yields the following results:

Screen Shot 2013-09-27 at 1.22.05 PM

In fact, you’re actually paying somewhere in the range of two to three US dollars for every Dining Dollar.

 

Now let’s take a look at the prices at the all-you-care-to-eat dining commons.

Screen Shot 2013-09-27 at 12.39.56 PM

At first glance, the Campus Meal Plan certainly looks good; only $1.95 for breakfast! But what if you’re on meal plan Level 1, where each Dining Dollar is equivalent to almost 3 US dollars?

Screen Shot 2013-09-27 at 1.22.11 PM

This table shows the equivalencies between Dining Dollars and US dollars. In fact, the Campus Meal Plan is not much of a discount at all for the lower tiers. For example, dinner with Level 1 is equivalent to $13.01 US dollars–almost the cash price and actually higher than the Lion Cash+ cost (which gives you a 10% discount but has an equal conversion with US dollars). The midrange meal plan tiers offer a modest discount, and as expected the highest tier yields the largest discount.

 

But that’s only for all-you-care-to-eat dining commons. What about those awesome paninis from Redifer? The cash price of a panini is $6.99, but when you use your meal plan it’ll ring up as a measly $2.45. But that $2.45 is equivalent to $7.32 US dollars with a Level 1 plan or $6.44 with Level 3. Not much of a discount after all. With the 10% discount for using Lion Cash+, that $6.99 panini would only cost $6.29 US dollars. A small difference, but significant. Even with the advertised 65% discount, you can pay more than the cash price with your meal plan–that’s not a discount at all.

 

Worse yet, you can use your meal plan Dining Dollars at other places, like the Creamery or the Burger King at the HUB. There’s no discount for meal plan purchases at these locations, so you’re paying anywhere from 2 to 3 times as much for your meal! On one occasion I went to Burger King, unaware that Dining Dollars could be used there. I handed over my student ID, and the receipt came back listing a payment method of Campus Meal Plan, and no one even asked whether I intended to use Lion Cash+ or Dining Dollars. So that $4 egg sandwich really cost me $10.52. That’s an expensive breakfast!

 

So to everyone I simply recommend being conscious of this fact. Yes, the Campus Meal Plan is convenient and required, but it has better uses than others. Unless you have to use up Dining Dollars at the end of the year or you’re in an emergency, never use your meal plan Dining Dollars for anything that isn’t discounted. Your base cost covers the cost of operating the dining commons, so why give that money to somewhere else?

Filed Under: Passion Tagged With: , , , , , , , , ,
Skip to toolbar