4 thoughts on “Frankinfood William Lawrence Sr Omnibit 2-28-18”

  1. I wonder if the USDA, or any other body, has conducted research to see how the human metabolism handles the compounds found in a genetically engineered food, as opposed to its natural counterpart. I really suspect that a lot of the food allergies that people have today, and which weren’t as widespread when I was a kid in the late Sixties and through the Seventies, come in a large part from reactions to such food.

    1. My first suspicion would be in the additives after processing rather than the crops itself. I think a lot of health problems would go away if everyone did something as simple as stop drinking diet soda. What is the point of it anyway?

      1. Well, I wonder about enzymes, proteins, etc, and whether genetically engineered forms are put together in such a way that our bodies can’t metabolize them the same way as naturally occurring counterparts. I agree with you, additives are also an issue. They represent the second step in the model I picture: We start with a product containing compounds that don’t quite fit into our metabolisms, say-process it and add the additives. By the time it gets to the table, it’s not the same product as the original, natural product.

        Even before we applied chemistry to producing food, we had examples of natural foods versus processed or refined foods. Sugar is the one that comes to mind most often. Before we began to cultivate sugar on a large scale, the most common natural sweetener was honey. And though glucose is glucose, I think that we digest and metabolize it differently when we take in a teaspoon of honey, as opposed to a teaspoon of refined sugar. Volume makes a difference in this particular case, too. Once refined sugar became easier to produce and ship, we started eating a lot more of it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.