"The Shocking Ingredients In Beer"

I see there is a different opinion, and almost 9 years of thinking about it. And not even any accurate record keeping so that both sides can claim to be right.

The writer admits that both sides have their opinions, but doesn't point out that one side, industry, has a financial incentive not to tell the truth.

IMHO forty years of testing might be necessary to fully decide actual long term benefits or hazards, but apparently there hasn't been any testing, so there is such a wide diversity of opinion. Like I said, I might be wrong, but no one can prove it because not enough testing has been done, and that is what I have a problem with. Nothing seems to be a serious problem. Until it is.

 

You can't stumble if you're at the bottom of a pit.

I get raw-oyster-primed kimchi regularly, so it's hard to get me disgusted with food.

A lot of people are disgusted by the idea of sushi. Ironically, the one thing that might get them hooked is Unagi if they don't know what it is. I broke a lot of defenses by pushing unagi rolls on people who absolutely were opposed to sushi. Once you tell them that's eel, they are often ready to make the next plunge to raw fish.

Here's the fun stuff on those milk commercials:

 

{FACEPALM}

Oh, OK! I suddenly feel all warm and fuzzy... It's a bit early for beer, though...

 

Reason (mag) is not very good about refuting the opposition. They tend to postulate because, well, they know better. Why else would you call your publication "Reason"?

The reality is a bit fuzzier. There are plenty of reasons to exercise caution when releasing GMO products and not because they will turn some animal species into monsters. There are some ecological concerns both from the point of view of displacement (e.g., GMO Atlantic salmon virtually eliminating the wild non-GMO population, some plant species dominated by GMO version because of particularised resistance, etc.) and the possibility of unexpected consequences (e.g., production of unexpected and undesirable byproducts, making some products unavailable for traditional use, unexpected effects of, say, feed corn, on the animals that eat them, etc.). There's also concern over business ethics (e.g., Monsanto deliberately releasing GMO crops to cross-pollinate with non-GMO crops so that they can force all farmers to buy their patented seeds after suing them under false pretense). But these problems should be addressed directly, not through general categorization. Cavedave also got it right about the danger of creating resistant strains--same problem we're no having with antibiotics (that no longer work).

However, this is not what we usually see from the opposition either. These are antediluvian anti-intellectuals ("Frankenstein villagers with pitchforks") who are afraid of scientific progress. You may notice a large overlap with anti-vaccers and anti-nuclear-power protesters. Again, there is always room for legitimate concern, but these wholesale protesters make it too easy to dismiss the objections in toto as coming from a bunch of lunatic zealots.

And, as I said earlier, when it comes to beer, GMO is not the main concern.

 

The EPA/OHSA freaking out over a chemical that can kill someone in small quantities (even smaller quantities for the children that were exposed to it) is not alarmist, it's....being pragmatic and doing their job.

Sorry, where's the straw man again?

 

Not only that - monsanto has engineered plants that yield no seed or that yield seed that fail. That also forces farmers to buy again and again. The reality of earth contradicts this chemical feat of engineering. They could literally be creating doom. It's wise to support nature and natural practices so that you do not get rich, you do not own the earth or all that grows on it and everyone prospers. . . but not with money. . . with food.

 

Correct, to the best of my knowledge. It's my understanding that although it's not technically a law that must be followed, almost all if not all German brewers still abide by it so they can legally put it on their labels. Apparently the belief is no German (or at least very few) will buy a beer if it cannot proclaim adherence to the Reinheitsgebot, so it's more or less a marketing standard than an actual law I believe.

 

Wait... a reasonable opinion? On the Internet? What is this witchery?

Seriously, though, there are legitimate concerns about GMO for ecological, economical, and political reasons. They just don't make the same sexy headlines that come from repeating garbage about GMO foods killing future generations by age 5 or mutant plants taking over or whatever. It's funny you mention anti-vaccers, since as far as I know, no one tested vaccines in long-term studies, and those have proven one of the top life-saving inventions in all of human history. Right up there with sanitation and antibiotics.

The scariest GMO development, to me, is the so-called "terminator seed", which everyone (including biotech companies) recognizes as a Bad Idea. Basically, you could plant one harvest using purchased seeds, but the seeds produced by those crops (second generation) would be sterile. In a long-shot nightmare scenario, those genetics could infect normal crops (or even other plants) and render non-GMO plant life incapable of reproducing. Thankfully, it looks like that technology is regarded the same way that super viruses are regarded: we can do it, but no one really wants to.

So, yeah. Some potentially very bad GMO stuff. But focusing on the unrealistic just makes attacking the real potential issues that much harder.

 

"(I want to ask who ever stops at just one beer?)?"

Um, many responsible adults.

The whole "Food Babe" persona pretty much says everything you need to know about her rigorous scientific curiosity.

 

Let me try this again: "...that if I don't ascribe to some of the overreaching alarmist positions taken by government bureaucrats, then I am OK with drinking toxic quantities of ethylene glycol is most certainly...a straw man argument."

 

That's your strawman right there. For one, toxicity is independent of "government bureaucrats". And "government bureaucrats" are quite often correct about these things, not alarmist. Ever spent any time in Russia? You'd fit right in with this attitude. Must be something in the water... not in the beer.

In any case, have a nice beer and let go of that knee-jerk hate for all things government. It makes you sound no better than people who hate all things corporate...

 

a lot of people are gonna use this in reviews now, hints of fish guts on the nose and very tasty

 

So what do german's think of german wheat beers?

 

German Beer Institute:

PS: Now waiting for marquis and patto1ro go medieval on my ass for quoting someone else referring to these as "ales"...

 

Interesting that you can determine that I hate "all things government" from a few short exchanges on a beer website. I might by the same logic suggest that you and Dracarys think government can do no wrong.

 

Where the law comes in, according to an EU Court decision, is if the beer is labled that it adheres to the RHG, then it must do so. So effectively it’s now a truth in labeling law.

 

Still a tax law also, according to Ron P.

 

Beer brewed with bull testicles.... that's shocking. Fish bladders? Pffft.

 

I guess, that explains the Rocky Mountain Oyster Stout...

 

Beer brewed with yeast from this man's beard.... that's shocking. What will the next brewer do to top this guy....use yeast from their ballsack?