Sender: |
|
Date: |
Thu, 4 Sep 2003 17:23:39 +0200 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed |
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Fredrik Murman wrote:
>Christy <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>
>
>>There are more innocent ones such as E160a made from beetjuice as a
>>coloriser. Still best to avoid them since nearly every one of them is
>>not for human consumption. I keep wondering why they are allowed as
>>food-additives in Europe. Nah, not really wondering, the answer is
>>obvious...
>>
>>
>
>The answer is not obvious to me. What is it?
>
>Fredrik
>
>
>
Because they make lots of money of foods that stay fresh longer, look
better and taste "better".
A meat that is eaten cold on bread here is called "American Filet" and
is infamous for it's additions of nitrates. But the meat stays red and
looks fresh so we stupidly eat it anyway eventhough it's been in the
news since the 80s.
And for the really suspicious amongst us, yep that's me, some of the E's
might be addictive as well.
Some bad foods are known to give a little buzz, like sugar, and some of
the E's can have the same affects.
Christy aka the non-believer of governments and their bosses.
|
|
|