Maciel 1

Martha Gisela Maciel

Professor Jamie McBeth Smith

ENGLISH 1010-28 (Synthesis)

13 April, 2015

Natural or Processed Foods

There is so much confusion when it comes to nutrition and so many options to choose

from, consumers often don’t know the difference between natural, organic, processed and

GMO’s, with such little knowledge about the matter we often have to rely on the Government

and federal regulators to make those decisions for us. As we get more curious about the subject

we find that organic food is strongly regulated by the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) and

the USDA (Department of Agriculture) making organic a fairly reliable source. On the other

hand there seems to be a problem when it comes to natural food, some say natural food is better,

others say it is safe to consume processed foods, some including GMO’s (Genetically Modified

Organisms). In some cases natural food requires some processing, that includes cooking or

adding simple ingredients such as sugar, oil and vinegar. I personally don’t think all processed

food is bad as long as food labels clearly states what additives were used and companies stop

using natural as long as artificial ingredients are present.

Many of us strive for a healthier diet, but what makes a healthy diet? In most cases

consumers believe that natural foods are better than processed, but what are their differences?

According to The Merriam Webster dictionary, the word natural is defined as existing in nature,

coming from nature, not containing anything artificial. In a recent survey 61 % of consumers’

understanding was consistent with the dictionary, and yet there are numerous claims that

companies use “natural” in their labels, even though their products contain additives and
 Maciel 2

preservatives. By using the word “natural” companies create bigger profits from the confusion

the public, people continue to purchase these products with the belief that they are consuming as

the product describes as “natural.” Consumers are in some cases are unaware of the artificial

ingredients in food.

As we decide to pay closer attention to what we eat, we begin to see a difference of

opinion, and variety of different diets in which to focus when making nutritional choices.

Contrary to what most of us think, Rachel Laudan author of “Modern Industrialized Food Is

Nutritious” states that until recently natural foods were unappealing to people, she mentions that

for past generations these foods often tasted bad and they were unreliable. In her opinion

without some careful processing foods often spoiled and in some cases they were indigestible,

that’s when people began to cook and process foods with ingredients like (sugar, oil, vinegar and

lye). In my opinion this is a new perspective in food, but how does the public feel about other

types of processing?

In addition to preservatives and additives, GMO’s (Genetically Modified Organisms) are

another concern for consumers. On the one hand author Professor Gregory E. Pence expresses

preference towards a modern industrialized approach to food, while he claims that genetically

engineered foods are safer to eat that traditional foods, he states that these foods undergo

numerous test that ensure that they are safe to consume, he says that genetically engineered

bovine growth hormone (rBGH) contains little possibility of infection with contaminated prions,

viruses, and bacteria, as opposed to naturally delivered BGH. He also argues that although some

plants produce toxins, traditional crops have not been tested at all. According Pence GM fruits

and vegetables show miniscule risk and no one has been harmed from eating it, on the other hand

former biotech research scientist whose job was to reassure the public about the safety of
 Maciel 3

genetically modified (GM) crops has reconsidered his position, and is now speaking out strongly

against GM foods. Thierry Vrai reports that GM foods have not been studied properly, and

could have significant health risks. He believes that genetic engineering is based on a flawed

understanding of how gene transfer works. He then adds. that there are scientific studies in

Europe and Russia showing that rats fed engineered food die prematurely, these studies show

that proteins produced plants are different than they should be and that engineered corn and soya

contain toxic and allergenic proteins. Vrai insists that the US has not conducted any long term

feeding studies that demonstrate that engineered foods are safe.

Due to the difference of opinion in the matter, some states have already introduced a bill

that would mandate GMO labeling. This bill would allow transparency between industry and

consumer, with full disclosure and label clarity from corporations and laboratories the public

would be able to make informed decisions. As of now, the FDA (food and drug administration)

and the USDA (US department of agriculture) do not have formal definition to “natural” foods,

and in regards to this matter Allyson Weaver and Mathew Mientka share the same views.

Mientka blames the lack of legal bounding definition for federal regulators and jurists weighing

claims of false advertisement, using not only civil action but also a newly introduced bill in

Congress that for the first time would legally define the word natural. He states “already some of

the biggest names in food and beverage manufacturing are tiptoeing away and have quietly

deleted the natural label from products.” There has been more than one hundred lawsuits for

misrepresenting products as natural, although some of those lawsuits have been demolished,

others have led to multimillion-dollar settlements. Mientka declares this will continue to be

problematic for consumers if the FDA does not enforce the proper use of the word. In

corroboration to this, Allyson Weaver argues that due to the fact that companies are only focused
 Maciel 4

on rapid mass production at the lowest possible price is the reason they continue to use “natural”

on their labels, she believes that corporations should stop deceiving the public and should not

label their products as “natural” if their products contain ingredients that are artificial or

genetically modified. GMOs and HFCS ( high fructose corn syrup) are commonly used in

processed foods, Weaver reminds us that GMOs involve injecting plant or animal cells with

foreign DNA to create new hybrid plant and animal species, which contain “unprecedented

combinations of characteristics.” she states that GMOs are not existing in or produced by nature,

and for that reason consumers should be have full disclosure in order to decide if a what products

to purchase based on their needs and affordability, but with a conscious mind of what they are

taking home to their families.

Whether we decide on processed or natural, GMO’s or organic, I think the better question

is can we trust our food sources? If not then what are we going to do about it? As companies

continue to profit from the confusion of the public, and federal regulators are not making any

progress in the matter, I believe it is up to us to see a difference. As previously stated due to

civil lawsuits, some companies are starting to realize that we are not just going to let this happen

anymore. As consumers we have choices, but the lack of regulation is limiting our options for

healthy foods. If we could enforce this and labels became clear and transparent, then we would

have a fair way to decide what is best for us. I am not stating that given the right information

about the products in the labels would keep anyone from consuming it, but at least this way we

can all make informed decisions. There are many different ways to see food and it should be our

choice if we want to include unnatural ingredients, not a company or federal regulators. It’s our

health and we have the right to protect it.

 Maciel 5

Cited Work

Laudan, Rachel. "Modern Industrialized Food Is Nutritious." Nutrition. Ed. David Haugen and

Susan Musser. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2012. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "A Plea for

Culinary Modernism: Why We Should Love New, Fast, Processed Food." The Gastronomica

Reader. University of California Press, 2010. 280-292. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 5

Apr. 2015.

Mercola, Joseph. "Genetically Modified Foods Are Not Safe to Eat." Genetically Modified Food.

Ed. Tamara Thompson. Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press, 2015. At Issue. Rpt. from

"Former Pro-GMO Scientist Speaks Out on the Real Dangers of Genetically Modified Food."

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/05/28/gmo-dangers.aspx. 2013. Opposing

Viewpoints in Context. Web. 14 Apr. 2015.

Mientka, Matthew. "The Unnatural Death Of 'Natural'." Newsweek Global 161.42

(2013): 1-4. Academic Search Premier. Web. 5 Apr. 2015.

Pence, Gregory E. "Genetically Modified Foods Are Safe." Designer Food: Mutant Harvest or

Breadbasket of the World? Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2002. Rpt. in Food. Ed. Laura

K. Egendorf. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2006. Opposing Viewpoints. Opposing Viewpoints in

Context. Web. 5 Apr. 2015.

Weaver, Allyson. "'Natural' Foods: Inherently Confusing." The Journal Of Corporation Law

39.(2014): 657. LexisNexis Academic: Law Reviews. Web. 5 Apr. 2015.

Maciel 6