Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by bryanlarsen | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

bryanlarsen

The comparison between American and Canadian Froot Loop cereal is illuminating:

https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinteresting/comments/uc265y/a...

View on HN

It's the same from most things, I wonder why americans are ok with that

mcdonalds fries: https://boingboing.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/McDonalds-...

fanta: https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/ab2mWVvJ_Tp7.UWQpFd.pQ--/Y...

oats: https://foodbabe.com/app/uploads/2019/02/U.S.-vs.-Uk-quaker-...

chips: https://foodbabe.com/app/uploads/2019/02/U.S.-vs.-Uk-doritos...

I agree with you until you bring foodbabe into this. She’s notorious for hand-picking things that meet the MAHA agenda. For example, the oats argument, yes there is a ton of crap in the ultra processed Quaker oats, but that’s an old recipe. Here’s what they sell at target:

https://www.target.com/p/quaker-fruit-38-cream-instant-oatme...

STRAWBERRIES & CREAM INGREDIENTS: Whole grain oats, sugar, dried strawberries, salt, dried cream, natural flavor, nonfat dry milk, sea salt, dried vegetable juice concentrate (color), tocopherols (to preserve freshness).

There’s not always a one-to-one comparison, and I agree shady companies in the US have free rein over what crap they add to our foods, but this has already been debunked.

It wasn’t debunked, it worked.

They changed the recipe after it received significant attention. Before then the company was happy to use food coloring on Apples to pretend it had strawberries while actually providing strawberries in another country.

The thing is you can’t bring attention to every single product, which is the point of regulations around deceptive packaging.

One ingredient, oats. https://www.quakeroats.com/products/hot-cereals/old-fashione...

I don’t know for sure but it looks like in the image the oh so simple is a different product line. Seemingly similar to all of Lays chips which come in normal and the healthier line.

> that’s an old recipe

It's also an old image from 2019. What was the recipe like in 2019? (I don't know the answer, genuine question)

The McDonald's fries are the exact same ingredients, the FDA just requires more granular specifications which look "scary". Those are the bracketed "sub"-ingredients you see versus just "Vegetable Oil" for the other side.

As to the additional anti-caking ingredient, I can't tell you. No idea if it's omitted from the UK side due to regulatory reasons or it's actually included but has no requirement to be listed, since it's included in a plethora of British foods in the same places that it's used in the US (things like powdered/confectioner's sugar):

https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2020...

Either way, it's not particularly nefarious (despite her scary red highlight added to it).

As an aside, saying this as someone who's tried McDonald's in probably 60+ countries. It's all the same thing (except a few countries in Asia; Korea and Japan notably), especially like for like (Double Cheeseburger for Double Cheeseburger). I have no idea where this "European McDonald's is healthier/better" idea sprang up, outside of European superiority complexes (probably due to the need to self-justify how insanely busy McDonald's are in Europe). Especially in a country who's most famous takeaway item is overgreased fried chicken/fish and fries/chips tossed together in a bag, then covered and shaken in even more salt and condiments; possibly with a handful of cheese tossed on for good measure.

The "scary red" polydimethylsiloxane is in basically everything, and it's inert, non-toxic and non-flammable. It's permitted in the EU as E900. It's an anti-foaming agent used in trace quantities to prevent oil from splattering on the employees.

There were no negative effects on rats at over 2g/kg. [1]

[1] https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2020...

Also: canola oil is a rapeseed oil. You can imagine why a lot of people are more comfortable calling it "canola" than "rapeseed" (and hence why it's written that way on US packaging).

Canola was also originally a trademark (name comes from "Canada oil low acid") - it's made from rapeseed that was specifically bred for low erucic acid. It definitely made it easier to market.

They are not the exact same ingredients in the fries. Why are you claiming this as it's clearly untrue?

Because I can read.

I’m wondering, what are we seeing here? Actual difference in ingredients used, or a difference in regulations requiring listing all ingredients?

Yeah, take the Doritos as an example: the UK bag lists "Cheese Powder", the US bag lists "Cheddar Cheese" with sub-ingredients in parentheses (plus Whey and Skim Milk).

What is in the UK Doritos' "Cool Original Flavour" (read: Ranch) ingredient? Maybe something like Tomato Powder, Onion Powder, Garlic Powder, Buttermilk, Natural and Artificial Flavors?

Orange fanta is not really a good example because they are totally different flavored drinks. It’s less about chemical rules than the flavor design

Protip: neither of those are oats.

protip: do not drink fanta, do not eat mcdonalds fries, do eat oats (but just buy real oats and throw in raspberrys or whatever), do not eat chips. Doesn't matter whether you are in the US or UK :)

Food Babe is a terrible source with an agenda. If you actually look at the safety profile of the things involved the differences are minimal. The real risk comes from all the sugar and simple carbs in both.

- The fry ingredients are exactly the same, the US just requires more granular labelling. PDMS is used in oils in Europe too. Maybe in McDonalds oil maybe not, unclear. It's authorized for use in the EU as E900, and it is inert, non-toxic and non-flammable. It's added to stop the fryer oil from spraying on the employees.

- Both Fantas are bad.

- The oats are comparing two different products. 1/4 the label in the US is mandatory breakdowns not required in the UK. 1/4 of the label is the "creaming agent" (starch, whey protein, casein protein, some oil -- nothing a bodybuilder wouldn't consume) and 1/4 is the added vitamins and minerals not present on the UK label. The only meaningful difference appears to be using strawberry-flavored apple chunks. Does it make a difference? Probably none.

- The doritos in the UK list an ingredient that's just "Cool Original Flavour" lmao that FB somehow decides not to highlight. The US requires a breakdown of the components of said "flavor." And the use of annatto vs FD&C dyes which there's really very little conclusive evidence one way or the other. But fine, I guess we can stop using Azo dyes.

The real question is: does swapping Azo dyes for anatto make Doritos measurably healthier or is the problem that you are eating Doritos.

As an oatmeal connoisseur, I'd be remiss not to point out that the two oatmeal products being compared there are not the same. The American product is specifically "Strawberries and Cream," which looks like it was deliberately picked because it adds a few extra scary-looking ingredients from the creaming agent; whereas the UK product is just "Heaps of Fruit," sans cream.

The UK product contains freeze dried strawberries and raspberries. The USA market "strawberries and cream" contains no strawberry, instead it has freeze dried apple dyed red with added strawberry flavor.

I don't believe natural is inherently good nor artificial inherently bad but the USA product is objectively lower quality. IMHO it is cheaply made crap to fool people that do not read the ingredients.

to fool people that do not read the ingredients?

I say if your product mentions strawberries and you get dyed apples instead the problem is not the person failing to read the ingredients list, something has gone wrong at the legislative level.

Here's the American version of "heaps of fruit," "fruit fusion."

https://www.walgreens.com/store/c/quaker-oats-instant-oatmea...

Ingredients

Whole grain oats,sugar,dried raspberries,dried strawberries,natural flavor,tricalcium phosphate,salt,beet juice concentrate (color),iron,vitamin D2 (ergocalciferol).

The American version is identical to the UK version until "natural flavor." The US version then adds some vitamins plus tricalcium phosphate, salt, and beet juice concentrate. The only "scary" ingredient is tricalcium phosphate, which appears to be an anti-caking agent.

Edit: on Quaker's website

https://www.quakeroats.com/products/hot-cereals/instant-oatm...

It says "Tricalcium Phosphate is a source of phosphorus that also provides the essential mineral calcium." Which is actually what I suspected, it's another added vitamin that has the benefit of also being an anti caking agent.

Why does our version need an anti-caking agent when theirs doesn't? And why do we need to get calcium from checks notes oat meal (the non-cream version, mind you) when people in other countries can get it from things it's in naturally, like milk?

There may be ostensible reasons why some of the extras we get are theoretically useful, but I'd still wonder why we're the only ones who go to all the trouble (when we don't seem to come out ahead for it, health-wise).

The UK versions all seem to have calcium phosphate in them too.

https://www.britishcornershop.co.uk/quaker-oat-so-simple-hea...

https://www.sainsburys.co.uk/gol-ui/product/quaker-oats-high...

For some reason, the quaker oats uk website doesn't list it though, perhaps they're new formulations.

I imagine it's used to keep the fine powders (powdered salt or milk powder depending on the product) from caking. If the previous version didn't have any salt, then it might not have needed it.

I find this particularly interesting because it is due to market conditions, not legislation, that many Canadian foods have switched to colors from natural ingredients.

These companies appear to believe that Canadians prefer fewer artificial ingredients, and that Americans don't seem to care. Very curious.

It is happening, albeit slowly, here in the USA as well. Trader Joe’s generally has no added artificial dyes, fruit by the foot now is naturally colored, Whole Foods of course, and Wegmans bakery products.

Its just that there still are so many products you don’t expect- marshmallows with blue dye to make them more “bright white”, candies/sprinkles, any children’s medicine in syrup form (although you can now get some in dye free form finally)

I don't think Froot Loops ever used red 3. They use red 40.

It's more of a commentary about how food in the US is overly colored for no other reason than it looks cool, sometimes at the detriment of the health of the consumer.

Are you sure that Canadian version is less detrimental to the health of the consumer? It too looks artificial color-loaded to me.

I wouldn't consider Froot Loops a health food, but the Canadian version have all natural flavour and colour-

"Concentrated carrot juice (for colour), Anthocyanin, Annatto, Turmeric, Natural flavour, Concentrated watermelon juice (for colour), Concentrated blueberry juice (for colour), Concentrated huito juice (for colour)" etc

From their ingredients.

> food in the US is overly colored for no other reason than it looks cool

My understanding is that a lot of food is colored to look "natural" for uniformity. A good example of this is applesauce.

Another item is sprayed for coloring is ORANGES (Citrus Red No. 2 is the color)

https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidan...

Neither color of Fruit Loops is natural. American food is colored to look cool, because cool sells better with Americans. Canadian food is colored to look dull, because dull sells better with Canadians.

Is that your guess or were you in the marketing research department at Kellogs?

It's just how cereal is made. Before fruit loops are loops, they are grain mash. That grain mash is mostly uniform in color and brown-ish. In order to have a bowl filled with loops where some of the loops are yellow and others are green and others are blue, they add different colors of dye. It's the same whether it's neon green or organic green - the dye is added at the end for appeal to the consumer.

Why would they not just use less dye to reduce the colors in Canada then? Surely its more effective to produce them in one way instead of two.

It's colored so some set of people can make more money.

Hot Cheetos, outside the US and parts of LATAM, aren't red:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDOFPuy33m4

It's kinda jarring having grown up with that association.

The Canadian cereal was the same colour as in the US until a few years ago. I'm not sure what prompted the change.

Working towards getting the Canada European-Union Comprehensive Trade Agreement (CETA) ratified perhaps?

Those companies ought to be sued. They know that their die is cancer-linked and they still use it in the US even though they don't do it in Canada/EU.

We, as humanity, should sue all this big companies (nestle, coca-cola, etc.) for poisoning our lives for profit.

I looked into it, and from what I can tell the only link to cancer they've found so far is in male rats exposed to high levels of it, but they haven't found evidence that it causes cancer in humans or other animals.

What's odd to me is that it's still fine to sell food like bacon, where the link to cancer in humans appears to be much, much stronger.

…or cigarettes, which are available for sale everywhere.

If unhealthy foods are to be banned, we must also ban cigarettes and alcohol. If we are to let people be bodybuilders, or body destroyers, then all of these things should be available for purchase.

Ultimately it is a special kind of arrogance to tell people what they are or are not allowed to do to the one thing they unambiguously own and control: their own body.

the difference is that you are aware and are told about tobaco (which I would ban) and alcohol, food you are not told.

Keep in mind that the negative effects (beyond the coughing and diminished lung capacity) of cigarettes have only been publicly admitted to and explicitly taught only very recently in the history of tobacco.

The tobacco industry fought tooth and nail against any suggestion that tobacco products are linked to cancer and even advertised cigarettes as healthy.

I agree with you in principle. I would caution against taking for granted what we know today to be very clearly unhealthy and cancer-causing. It is often an up-hill decades long battle against incredibly wealthy interests to get to the truth.

Ok, well then, I’m sure no Americans are eating high levels of foods that contain dyes. So, surely there are long term 20 year plus studies on cumulative effects, right?

The only rats that developed cancer more than baseline in the study had a diet that was 4% red #3. Pretty sure no Americans are approaching that lol

Depends on the definition of high level. Was the amount given to the rats equivalent of 5x fruit loop bowls, or 5,000,000x?

in the US, priority #1 is fiduciary duty to shareholders. if customers are buying, and we make it more expensive to make, then shareholders will be mad!

Not causing cancer falls under fiduciary duty.

Azo dyes, in the quantities used in food, do not cause cancer. What causes diabetes and cancer is obesity which you're likely getting from consuming the food -- dyed naturally or artificially. The dye is ancillary. People need to eat less of the Doritos, the azo dyes aren't the problem.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com