316
FDA proposes ban on additive found in sodas
(www.cnn.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2023
316 points (99.4% liked)
News
23259 readers
1616 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Just because the EU does something first doesn't mean they were right to
Erroring on the side of public safety seems a whole lot better than erroring on the side of companies only interested in profit.
Fearmongering ain't freedom. This is America. We don't trade freedom for safety like bitch ass Europeans, we ride rockets like bucking broncos for fun. Life is cheap, freedom is priceless.
But genuinely, sometimes the EU is just overly cautious. And in the case of the point I was making, again, just because the EU made a regulatory decision doesn't mean they were right to do so.
You can't use MOST of our candy flavorings in the EU. Do you genuinely think our candy is poisoning just because it's artificial, or is that just the naturalistic fallacy talkin
Aside from a few World Wars, they've been right more often than the US.
Regarding public safety restrictions? Or are you just making the mistake that anything the EU does is progress that we will catch up to eventually?
Your phrasing implies that you're looking to pick a fight. You can do that elsewhere, I've got more important things to do.
clearly not
Also, I'm never looking for a fight. I'm looking for people to say "yes sir" and do what I say
Absolutely, I mean just look at the new privacy bill, which the very latest revision has them hijacking website certificates so they can spy on people as they please.
However, when it comes to food safety, the EU has been far ahead of the US. The US basically dismissed a bunch of concerns back in the 1970s, and outside of California they're only now just reviewing them and accepting that they aren't that great. Things under the classification "Generally Recognised As Safe", or GRAS, which are unlikely to cause accute harm when taken in normal doses, however for many of them there is strong evidence of harm when taken frequently over a long time.
Suffice it to say, food in Europe is generally of a higher quality and standard than the US, because the EU has better regulations in this field.
Don't worry about the downvote, this is true, especially with their harder stances against GMOs and nuclear power that are based on fearmongering rather than science. We need GMOs and nuclear to reduce climate change.
That said, this isn't a comment on whether or not BVOs are bad, just that the EU banning something isn't alone a reason to ban it here
While it's true that their stance against GMO was largely unfounded, they've generally made better calls with most things when it comes to food safety. In some sense, their stance against GMO was still valid, given that it was new technology - the real issue is how readily they move back on that when more evidence comes out.