snopes.com

snopes.com (http://message.snopes.com/index.php)
-   Food (http://message.snopes.com/forumdisplay.php?f=11)
-   -   Mmmm, Tasty Chemicals (http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=4460)

snopes 05 March 2007 05:13 PM

Mmmm, Tasty Chemicals
 
A new book 'deconstructs' a Twinkie and analyzes all 39 ingredients.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17303919/site/newsweek/

snapdragonfly 05 March 2007 05:16 PM

Blech. I've tasted spitballs that were better than Twinkies. Gross.

Now, on the other hand, I could be tempted with a Ding Dong...love that waxy chocolate. :p

Doug4.7 05 March 2007 05:30 PM

Just because it is a "chemical" does not make it bad/good. You should see what goes on to make your morning sausage.... :eek:

BringTheNoise 05 March 2007 05:34 PM

You could probably scare a few people by "deconstructing" an orange. Nothing but scare tactics.

Spam & Cookies-mmm 05 March 2007 05:39 PM

I think it's taking the "mmm - tasty chemicals" joke a bit too far when they push this comment about cornstarch:
Quote:

Cornstarch is a common thickener. But it's more often used to make cardboard and packing peanuts
Just because a food item is used in manufacturing other products doesn't make the food icky.

Doug4.7 05 March 2007 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BringTheNoise (Post 85024)
You could probably scare a few people by "deconstructing" an orange. Nothing but scare tactics.

True, it contains citric ACID! :eek:

Nick Theodorakis 05 March 2007 05:42 PM

The opening paragraph is more than a bit disingenuous. It describes a mine in which baking soda is being mined (as if it's horrifying to eat something that came out of the ground), yet that ingredient is commonly used in baking "from scratch." It's even one of the "six ingredients" you use when you bake a cake at home.

Nick

BringTheNoise 05 March 2007 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug4.7 (Post 85032)
True, it contains citric ACID! :eek:

My thinking exactly! *Puts in tinfoil gumshield*

ETA:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick Theodorakis (Post 85037)
(as if it's horrifying to eat something that came out of the ground), Nick

That's why all my vegetables are cloned in a sterile labratory!

Aud 1 05 March 2007 05:58 PM

To be fair the article does say
Quote:

Ultimately, all food, natural and otherwise, is composed of chemical compounds—and normal ingredients like salt have industrial applications, too.

matches 05 March 2007 06:00 PM

Do twinkies contain artificial of natrual vanilla? Are they ever manufactured in Mexico?

http://gourmetsleuth.com/vanilla.htm

"Artificial Vanilla Flavoring
U.S. manufactured artificial vanilla is produced from synthetic "vanillin", Lignin Vanillin, which is made from a by-product of the paper producing industry. This by product is chemically treated to mimic the flavor of vanilla. The product help take care of a ecological problem with paper producers and created an "affordable" vanilla flavoring for the public.

The other synthetic common in Mexican artificial flavorings is Ethyl Vanillin derived from coal tar. "

Actually I don't find this at all disturbing...Coal (and paper for that matter) are made up of formerly organic compounds, so it wouldn't surprise me if many of the byproducts of the processing of these items are technically edible if not tasty.

I remember a book out not to long ago, the name escapes me, discussing this common misunderstanding of chemicals, and the notion of "natural good" "Artificial bad" and More Chemicals = More Bad.

Some of the examples from the book that stick out in my memory included the fact that Natural Strawberry flavor had more chemicals than artificial strawberry flavor, and that artificial almond flavor was a dirivitive of peach pitts and contained arsenic.

Nick Theodorakis 05 March 2007 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BringTheNoise (Post 85045)
...
That's why all my vegetables are cloned in a sterile labratory!

It might amuse you to know that the word "clone" is derived from a word describing the process of propagating plants by grafting.

Quote:

I had imagined that the etymology of clone was a corruption of colony, but it is actually derived from the Greek, klon, meaning a twig or small branch. This etymology reveals the original use of the word clone to describe vegetative reproduction of plants by taking cuttings. Because higher plants, unlike animals, do not sequester a germline distinct from somatic cells, plant cells remain pluripotent; reproductive cloning of plants, for example potatoes, occurs naturally and has been practiced for millennia by horticulturists in the propagation of vines and fruit trees. The new plants derived from cuttings or grafts are genetically identical to the parent, and the term clone came to be used for any form of artificial, asexual means of replication.

Although the word clone was introduced botanically in 1903, the first use that I have found to describe replication from a single progenitor was in 1954 when Theodore T. Puck and colleagues cloned human cells in culture. However, the word clone did not appear in general dictionaries until later. My 1964 Oxford Concise Dictionary restricts the definition to “a group of plants reproduced vegetatively from one original seedling or stock,” whereas my wife’s 1992 Chambers Pocket Dictionary gives two meanings: (1) (anyone of) a group of identical organisms reproduced by a non-sexual process from a single cell of the parent; (2) (colloq. or derog.) a person or thing that looks like a replica of someone or something else. The “single-cell” restriction in Chambers implies that it no longer refers to vegetative propagation of plants.
cite:
Robin A. Weiss. "Robert Koch: The Grandfather of Cloning?" Cell:Volume 123, Issue 4 , 18 November 2005, Pages 539-542.

Avaliable here, but you may need an institutional subsciption to access it.

Nick

snapdragonfly 05 March 2007 06:11 PM

Scare tactics or not, they still taste like cellophane.:lol:

matches 05 March 2007 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by snapdragonfly (Post 85090)
Scare tactics or not, they still taste like cellophane.:lol:

Which again, as it is derived from cellulose (at least what used to be called cellophane was) it is entirely edible (though indigestable).

However, I do like twinkies, when they are fresh...although they have a long shelf life, near their sell by date, you really don't get your monies worth.

IF you pick one up however, right after you see the stocker put them on the self, snatch em up, you'll find they tastes like a sticky sweet dream.

candy from strangers 05 March 2007 08:23 PM

I know this is a weird way of thinking, but Twinkies gross me out because to me they are the flavour version of the mysteriously sticky hands toddlers always have. A result of doing too much babysitting, I expect.

snapdragonfly 05 March 2007 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by matches (Post 85173)
Which again, as it is derived from cellulose (at least what used to be called cellophane was) it is entirely edible (though indigestable).

However, I do like twinkies, when they are fresh...although they have a long shelf life, near their sell by date, you really don't get your monies worth.

IF you pick one up however, right after you see the stocker put them on the self, snatch em up, you'll find they tastes like a sticky sweet dream.

When my daughter was younger, we were at a birthday party and the cake was really cute - it was a sunflower, made of a one layer round chocolate cake covered in Kisses for the center, and Twinkies for the petals. Another mom and I said, "boy, those Twinkies look good, don't they?" (I hadn't had one since the Johnson administration.) The mom in charge said "oh, please, have one!" so we did...and then said to each other, "you know, these just...aren't that good."

Dunno if they weren't fresh or if I'm just a food snob. (Well, I am a food snob, so that could be it. Yes, I'm a food snob. I admit this ugly truth!)

snopes 06 March 2007 03:28 AM

http://www.snopes.com/photos/wedding...hillbilly2.jpg

Singing in the Drizzle 06 March 2007 05:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by snapdragonfly (Post 84990)
Blech. I've tasted spitballs that were better than Twinkies. Gross.

Now, on the other hand, I could be tempted with a Ding Dong...love that waxy chocolate. :p

Somewere I saw a waxy chocolate covered Twinkie. I do not remember what the name was. Would that make the Twinkie any better?

Sylvanz 06 March 2007 05:59 AM

Twinkies always make me feel like my teeth are wearing furry little jackets, but I do love Ding Dongs.

P&LL, Syl

Bryan With a 'Y' 06 March 2007 06:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BringTheNoise (Post 85024)
You could probably scare a few people by "deconstructing" an orange. Nothing but scare tactics.

To say nothing of the well known perils of dihydrogen oxide...

rlobinske 06 March 2007 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug4.7 (Post 85020)
Just because it is a "chemical" does not make it bad/good. You should see what goes on to make your morning sausage.... :eek:

Mmmmm...sausage.

(Yes, I've made sausage, so I have an excellent idea of what goes into it.) :D


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:55 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.