BHA is made from 4-methoxyphenol and isobutylene, both natural chemicals

While there is not much life on earth that prduce or metbolizes right-handed sugars, and it is rare on earth, it is still a natural chamical

I stopped reading from " They take DNA from something else " - which means that the DNA they inserted into another DNA is a natural product



edit - just to re-itterate, the opposite of natural is super-natural. everything on earth is made from natural materials and have natural origins. even things that are man-made is natural, as they are not super-natural, and everything we make is made from natural materials and has natrual origins

Maybe the individual parts are; But like goats that have spider silk in their milk, it is not natural nor naturally occurring no matter how much you suggest it is because it came from the DNA of two natural things.

Nor glow in the dark cats. None of these things would have evolved or adapted to do these things.

Naturally occurring chemicals, and coming from 'mother nature' are two different things. As mentioned the whole of the ecosystem has decided to produce left-handed sugars, and never right handed ones. Why? Simply, there's no need to produce a right-handed sugar if you're already making left-handed sugars, so they don't. And because they produce left-handed sugars everything that wants to use sugars are adapted to use and process left-handed sugars. As such right-handed sugars (on earth) are not made by 'mother nature', even if it may be naturally occurring in some instances, but that's not exactly an abundance.

If something is in abundance and not requiring intervention by humans, i'd call it naturally occurring. Humans playing god and modifying a plant so they can sell pesticides to use with the plant is not of nature either, regardless if it successfully grows. It may be alien, but it's not from nature. Plus the long term effects of GMO's probably won't be known for a few more decades yet, long after it may be too late to reverse course.

That's more just saying 'it exists as molecules naturally, so everything is natural'. No, i don't think that's right.

it miight be that I have a little of a science bias, but -
"Ad agencies might try to sell us on “all-natural whole grain goodness,” “natural homeopathic remedies,” or “non-toxic, all-natural household cleansers” — but what does ​​natural really mean? In everyday language, the word natural is often used to describe goods that are wholesome or not made by humans, but in the language of ​​science, natural has a much broader meaning. Within science, the term natural refers to any element of the physical universe — whether made by humans or not"
https://undsci.berkeley.edu/whats-natural/

if you want to use the definitin that it is eveyrhing in nature, but not man-made, there is very little food left except eating things raw

You'd be surprised the sheer amount of raw food i process and make daily meals with.

Regardless, premade/precooked food vs raw food I'd kinda see as the same thing, long as it's not heavily adulterated.

If it can be made in a kitchen, mixing and cooking said food doesn't innately change the ingredients. Take a lasagna (or pizza), it's frozen and layered and all the individual ingredients are still there. At that point you're paying convenience rather than spending the time to make it all yourself.

Because a huge definition, such as "nature" can become extended to the size of a whole universe... it means it is vulnerable to a relative truth of the same size. What "natural" really means, in this term, we can only tell by our heart; as our mind simply can not tackle something as big as something "potentially" as big as a universe and it will simply freak out.

First we will have to understand mother nature and how it is acting. One thing i can say for sure: The human is acting like a parasite although... in the end humans still remain part of the nature and the health of the earth will become the health of the human. As long as humans try to "avoid" this hard truth... it is acting "less or non natural" and in term they understand this whole thing... it can be considered natural.

Fire, and in this term "cooking" is a pretty natural thing and it was part of the nature for almost a eternity. However, if you create "microwaves" in a shape that will never exer exist this way... you know what it means "not a lot of nature inside". Yes, radiation... all kind of... is part of the nature, but the nature knows "its shape" and what really matters for everything else is THE SHAPE. A natural shape is a "wise shape" with lot of knowledge of anything "interconnected". If you lack this knowledge it is usually considered non or less natural.

Not exactly, the arsenic you find in almonds or rice is a organically "bound" shape, while the arsenic you usually use for industrial use is the elemental type, highly toxic. Same will count for aluminum which is part of many food because this element is part of the soil almost everywhere. However, the type we usually have inside our food is a naturally "bound" type and without certain chemical procedures we will not get the elemental shape which is bad for consumption and bad for our body. Aluminum is very reactive in a sense that is is very hard to "split it apart" from other minerals, unless with a certain type of ore which is used for, mainly Bauxite.

So you see... shape is playing a huge role in nature and you have to closely watch it in order to understand.

Of course, to much organically bound arsenic is not good for health but we still need a little bit of this arsenic for our enzymes in our body because this element, in the right shape, is part of certain enzymes. Enzymes are kinda some sort of "organic-reactors" and very very very critical for our body. Without enzymes we are almost unable to digest any food and even washing your clothes is very inferior without the use of enzymes.

So, arsenic is not generally poisonous, what can make it toxic is the shape and to some extend the amount (which can be said for everything.... not specific to arsenic at all).

-____-

Actually it was never cheap in my country... maybe US or other countries, yep, but it seems like inflation is finally hitting every single place... more or less.

However, in some countries they are trying to put up a price cap on certain foods, for example sunflower oil or wheat flour.... and sugar of course... which is not a healthy food at all and i would recommend not to use valuable tax money in order to boost foods able to wipe out poor humans even faster... pretty mean if you ask me.

Instead they should boost TRULY healthy food, for example millet... but this one is very expensive in my country, for no real reason other than "It is considered a luxury and not a healthy basic food".

The food they are financially boosting is highly refined and with almost no valuable nutrients anymore: Which is used for animals in order to produce more flesh for the rich. The "leftovers" is then used for human consumption... at a bargain price, which is almost entirely the materials used on fast food-chains.

How bout a bread, cheese, and wine bar?((--;))

Bread is not "boosted" anymore... and way to expensive in my country. Which is not the biggest loss because i do recommend crafting your own bread. Unfortunately it can become difficult if only inferior flour is truly cheap but not any flour with a lot of nutrients.

As with cheese... it is already "boosted" a lot because this food is not cheap to produce. There is just way to much of work involved crafting a "fine cheese" and it is possible buying a pretty decent cheese for around 10 to 15 coins a kg. Some luxury cheese may cost twice of that but this is purely optional.

Wine? Not a price matter... some pretty good wine is maybe around 10 coins, and yes, a SINGLE glass of natural wine can be considered good for health. Just dont drink it before driving a car, else the police may feel like destroying your almost innocent driving-life.

Reminds me of 'Wonderbread' which used to boast 14 incredible benefits, which slowly went down over time. Due to the sheer number of preservatives people called it 'edible Styrofoam'.


I make my own bread; A bread machine certainly makes it a lot easier not having to mix it myself, or set timers and handle the oven, especially if i forget the bread for too long.

With regular flour, you can replace a third of the flour with something else and not compromise the bread's structure too much. Other fillers can be just about anything. Potato is suppose to be pretty good and helps hold moisture. You'll have to experiment.

Other breads may not include regular flour at all, corn bread for example.

Lastly, i have a slightly modified regular bread recipe to make pizza dough. Or pull regular dough out when it's mixed and keep it moist and let it grow more than normal before baking after stretching out to make breadsticks or hamburger buns. In raw ingredients it's like 75 cents per 2lb loaf. Compare to $3-$4 in the store.