Food & Nutrition

Popular Science has joined the ranks of mainstream outlets that shill pesticide propaganda. Last week, the magazine published a story about glyphosate so atrocious that it could have been written by an activist at the Environmental Working Group.
The USDA's "bioengineered" (GMO) food label is expensive and pointless, facts widely disseminated by the science community. The media has been critical of the new labeling regulations as well, though for the wrong reasons. Here's a textbook example from NBC News.
The 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) required large food chains to post the calories along with the prices for their food. According to the Center for Science in the Public Interest [1], this costs food chains roughly $45,000 each to create that information; producing the changes in menus is an additional cost. A new study shows what we got, calorie-wise, for all that fuss and bother. 
It's time for another installment of the "Health Ranger Chronicles," where we critically examine the strange ideas promoted by Mike Adams' wildly popular website Natural News. This time we investigate a story about Monster Energy's "Satanic" plot to poison our children with sugar and caffeine.
Are GM crops a tool of "neocolonialism"? The answer is "no." I joined Dr. Kevin Folta on episode 325 of the Talking Biotech Podcast to explain why.
Scientific American's descent from respected publication to ideological tabloid is nearly complete. The magazine is now promoting anti-GMO activism under the guise of "social justice."
A recent Newsweek report on the toxicity of ultra-processed foods was based on a carefully performed study comparing the responses of 20 individuals to both unprocessed and ultra-processed foods. It is worthwhile, as citizen-scientists, to look at the study for ourselves. We cannot argue the dots but may disagree with how they connect.
Some social justice activists have alleged that Western companies use biotechnology to "colonize" the developing world. There isn't a bit of evidence in support of this popular but very dangerous accusation.
Fruitcake aficionados, look away. It's holiday time and some of you will receive a re-gifted fruitcake that is ??? years old. How old? We'll show you how to figure it out in this Christmas Special Chemistry Lesson From Hell. We will also explore whether the fruitcake is the worst gift ever. And more!
Starting next month, many grocery store products will have to carry the USDA's bioengineered ("GMO" in the vernacular) food labels. Here's what you should know about this pointless, costly regulation.
I’ve written several times about taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages. While the public health goal has always been to reduce obesity, nearly every publication has looked at the effect of taxes and the subsequent higher prices on purchasing those drinks. Today, we finally have some research on how well those taxes reduce our weight; we already know they reduce the weight in our wallets.
One of our loyal readers brought a recent Newsweek cover story to our attention. It is titled, Americans Are Addicted to 'Ultra-Processed' Foods, and It's Killing Us. In addition to cherry-picking words to favor “natural” over “ultra-processed,” whatever that means, the article raises but does not resolve or necessarily clarify some crucial issues. Are our foods addictive, like fentanyl? What does processed and ultra-processed really mean to our health? What does “the science” reveal or not fully comprehend? It is time to take a deeper dive.