A 100% All Natural Topic

[BeFell]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/diet.fitn ess/11/07/whats.natural.ap/index.html

Apparently food companies are fighting because they have different views of what constitutes natural foods.

Could someone please explain to me how anything on this planet could consist of something other than all natural ingredients? If by natural you mean no human has touched it then how do those chicken breasts or salads end up shrink wrapped on the shelves of my local grocery store?

Should we simply murder anyone anal enough to contemplate his or her food's state of existence (hippies) and go watching the obesity rate as well as the average lifespan continue to climb in a mess of contradiction?

[Imperator]

"debate over definition of natural"

Damn you Bill Clinton.....set the precedent for challenging the definition of words!
First planet and now this.

Genetic food, natural food, unnatural food, Soylent Green: I'll eat it all, as long as it's edible and somewhat tasty.
I don't mind if people want to know what they're eating but this is going a bit out of line if we're debating definitions of natural now......

[MortifiedPenguins]

At 11/7/07 07:54 PM, Xtesh wrote: Natural food would be food from plants and animals that haven;t been tampered with past breeding(i.e. messing about with genes to make the crops grow faster). But that's just my opinion.

It could mean that the burger you eat was raised in a field instead of a warehouse or whatever.

A burger raised in a field.

You mean, a soyburger.

[SolInvictus]

everyone seems to have forgotten the joys of the natural. damn silicone.

[Drakim]

Well, he does have a point in a way.

If a tree grows up to be large, would you call that natural? Of course.
If a bird builds a nest, would you call that nest up in a tree natural? Of course.
If a crab built a shelter out of mud, would you call that mud house natural? Of course.
If a human grows up to be large, would you call that natural? Of course.
If a monkey uses a stick to get some ants out of a log, would you call that natural? Of course.
If a human builds something out of plastic, would you call that natural? NOT?

Why not exactly? Are humans the only being capable of producing unnatural things? aren't we part of nature, and everything we result in part of nature too?

[fli]

There is no such thing as natural...
The most fair way to label food is "no-spray" or "made with 100% fruit juice" or whatever or "Organically grown" or whatever.

[Drakim]

At 11/8/07 03:29 AM, fli wrote: There is no such thing as natural...
The most fair way to label food is "no-spray" or "made with 100% fruit juice" or whatever or "Organically grown" or whatever.

Yeah, agreed. Labeling something natural is like labeling something "good". It's too relative of a term to be used for anything within food.

[morefngdbs]

At 11/7/07 07:47 PM, BeFell wrote:

Should we simply murder anyone anal enough to contemplate his or her food's state of existence (hippies) and go watching the obesity rate as well as the average lifespan continue to climb in a mess of contradiction?

;
The use of 'natural' is just another misleading ploy advertiser use to fool the public.
Like one gas company calling its gas , The best gas.
Since all gasoline is produced to certain standards all 'gas' is so similar any of them can get away with calling there's 'the best'.

Natural is being touted, in my opinion, to go up against the 'organically' produced foods.
When you can't say its 'organic' , you can probably get away with 'its natural'.

Just a cheater word for advertising & misleading the buying public in doing so.

So Befell, instead of murdering those pondering what they are going to call their food, maybe its time that advertisers were taken to task & no longer allowed to make claims that are marginally true at best.

I love the New & Improved claims made by advertisers, often the improvement, is a new way to open the box. Or even better, the package can be resealed more easily... hence its better !

But the actual product your buying hasn't changed at all.
So unless there is a change or improvement to the actual product, you cannot make a claim of better or new improved, unless you state what that improvement is.

[tony4moroney]

At 11/7/07 07:51 PM, Imperator wrote:

Damn you Bill Clinton.....set the precedent for challenging the definition of words!
First planet and now this.

First rule of the GOP club, Clinton done it first. The second rule of the GOP club, Clinton done it first. Any questions?

[stafffighter]

For a while I worked under the assumption that since humans and thus our human minds were products of anture anything we created was a natural byproduct. But byproduct dosen't sound very appatising either.

[SolInvictus]

hemlock is natural, and Socrates loved it. score!

[Christopherr]

If corn wasn't genetically modified forever ago, then it would be hard as rocks and nearly inedible to humans. Think deer corn.

So if you're into organicrap, stick away from all corn products... Fat chance, with corn starch being everywhere.

[Durin413]

Unnatural food would be if came from Cthulhu, or Satan, or something like that. It would have to come from an unnatural source. And even then, whats so bad about unnatural foods?

It it tastes, good eat it.

[bluedemonspeedracer]

I don't see why all natural really matters, ricin is natural and it will kill you. Even if ricin was made synthetically it would still be ricin. So should we label natural ricin "100% all natural chemical warfare agent"?