Do you agree with this directive I've read time and again?

It’s not meant to be taken absolutely literally, it is encouraging people to eat more whole foods and less processed things with additives.

I agree with @canidmajor. Most people would struggle to pronounce phenylalanine, but it is a fundamental amino acid you cannot live without (though you can synthesise it from other amino acids and proteins).

As someone who has studied organic chemistry, human biology, and mandatory packaging regulations when people re-quote this, I learn something about the person and it makes me a little sadder every time.

exactly. I have no idea how to pronounce the labels above produce at a vegetable stand in Tokyo. I just grab the broccoli.

It’s a rather simplistic statement meant for the masses. It’s not to be, and shouldn’t be, taken literally.

Basically, it’s the sort of directive that is a-propos for people who watch Fox News.

I’d say don’t be so literal. Whole foods are a good way to go in my opinion, but I don’t think everything that “sounds” like a chemical is necessarily a bad thing. You would have to really study up to make an educated opinion about it. The actual Latin names of plants are often complicated and difficult to pronounce.

No, if you know what the ingredient is and how it is used correctly, who cares if you can say it?

I just love the taste of marpizan.

I’ve seen this directive multiple times through the years, and I still disagree with it. It strikes me as the kind of rule of thumb dreamed up by someone in need of attention who got through school without taking a single chemistry course.

Case in point: how many people would see a prepared food listing dihydrogen monoxide on its label as healthy? What is dihydrogen monoxide? Water.

The other point repeaters of this directive fail to grasp is that many of the naturally occurring molecular components of fruits, vegetables, nuts & the like carry chemical names that can be quite long & difficult to impossible to pronounce. So just because an ingredient on a label has a seemingly unpronouncable name does not mean it is unhealthy.

I think it’s just a way of saying don’t eat anything loaded with added chemicals.

I just ate Huitlacoche last week, so no, I wouldn’t rely on that statement, although I do try to eat more whole foods and less processed foods which often contain lists of hard to pronounce ingredients that I have no idea what they’re for or made of.

@Adagio

Hard to avoid when basically everything is chemicals.

@Darth_Algar sure, but I’m talking about unnecessary added chemicals, such as artificial preservatives and the like.

@Adagio

If you looked at a list of ingredients on a food package would you even recognize the “real” from the “artificial”?

I can. and I also know the so-called ‘natural ingredients’ one should try to avoid. Problem is, they are allowed to be extremely vague. Like just write, ‘vegetable fat’.... Well, there is a HUGE difference in vegetable fats and I want to know, which damn one it is… specifically. The labeling culture gets away with too much shit as it is and misinformation like the proclaimation of ‘don’t eat what you can’t pronounce’ is not helping the cause of knowing what the hell is in processed food. Unless you like red herrings.

@Darth_Algar I don’t really buy packaged food, but I understand your point.