Dr. Chris van Tulleken

We used to do that for drugs. And then we realized none of the drugs worked. And so we started regulating the drugs. But this is the system of food additive regulation. So I put a chapter in the book on the US system because- Someone said to me, food additives are not really regulated. Someone I trusted. And I was like, well, that's not true. Of course they're regulated. You've got an FDA.

So I call up Emily Broadlieb, who's at Harvard. She runs the Food Law Policy Center there. And she's like, yeah, no, there's not any real, you know, you have this self-determination system where the companies can decide for themselves. It's astounding. Yeah. So you do have, no one knows how many additives you have because they're also not all formally registered. So yeah, it is, it's a mess.

So I call up Emily Broadlieb, who's at Harvard. She runs the Food Law Policy Center there. And she's like, yeah, no, there's not any real, you know, you have this self-determination system where the companies can decide for themselves. It's astounding. Yeah. So you do have, no one knows how many additives you have because they're also not all formally registered. So yeah, it is, it's a mess.

So I call up Emily Broadlieb, who's at Harvard. She runs the Food Law Policy Center there. And she's like, yeah, no, there's not any real, you know, you have this self-determination system where the companies can decide for themselves. It's astounding. Yeah. So you do have, no one knows how many additives you have because they're also not all formally registered. So yeah, it is, it's a mess.

It's a mess.

It's a mess.

It's a mess.

In terms of what the industry responds to all that is, they say, well, you can't prove harm. The data on emulsifiers, okay, you've got some animal experiments, you've got a bit of human data, you've got some epidemics. There's actually quite a lot of data on some of these emulsifiers now, but you haven't really proven it.

In terms of what the industry responds to all that is, they say, well, you can't prove harm. The data on emulsifiers, okay, you've got some animal experiments, you've got a bit of human data, you've got some epidemics. There's actually quite a lot of data on some of these emulsifiers now, but you haven't really proven it.

In terms of what the industry responds to all that is, they say, well, you can't prove harm. The data on emulsifiers, okay, you've got some animal experiments, you've got a bit of human data, you've got some epidemics. There's actually quite a lot of data on some of these emulsifiers now, but you haven't really proven it.

But the burden of proof should not fall to independent academics to say that adding synthetic molecules to food is harmful. The burden of proof should be the other way around and that the molecules should have to go through a proper stringent regulatory process. We do have a much more stringent process in Europe and the UK, but it's still not very strict.

But the burden of proof should not fall to independent academics to say that adding synthetic molecules to food is harmful. The burden of proof should be the other way around and that the molecules should have to go through a proper stringent regulatory process. We do have a much more stringent process in Europe and the UK, but it's still not very strict.

But the burden of proof should not fall to independent academics to say that adding synthetic molecules to food is harmful. The burden of proof should be the other way around and that the molecules should have to go through a proper stringent regulatory process. We do have a much more stringent process in Europe and the UK, but it's still not very strict.

So we don't assess molecules in combination. We don't often assess the right dosage. And when it comes to food additives, we don't look at long-term effects. We don't have any assays for effects on the microbiome or obesity, for example. So I think one of the things we know is that we can make very good, safe, cheap food without all these additives.

So we don't assess molecules in combination. We don't often assess the right dosage. And when it comes to food additives, we don't look at long-term effects. We don't have any assays for effects on the microbiome or obesity, for example. So I think one of the things we know is that we can make very good, safe, cheap food without all these additives.

So we don't assess molecules in combination. We don't often assess the right dosage. And when it comes to food additives, we don't look at long-term effects. We don't have any assays for effects on the microbiome or obesity, for example. So I think one of the things we know is that we can make very good, safe, cheap food without all these additives.

And their primary function is to save the company's money. We did a paper last year on financialization of the food industry. So instead of working with nutritionists, I worked with a lot of economists. And we just used the food industry's own financial data and compared it to their claims.

And their primary function is to save the company's money. We did a paper last year on financialization of the food industry. So instead of working with nutritionists, I worked with a lot of economists. And we just used the food industry's own financial data and compared it to their claims.

And their primary function is to save the company's money. We did a paper last year on financialization of the food industry. So instead of working with nutritionists, I worked with a lot of economists. And we just used the food industry's own financial data and compared it to their claims.

Because all the big companies will say that they're mainly interested in reducing carbon emissions, cleaning up plastic, improving public health, improving the nutritional profile of the product portfolio and so on, you know, improving women and children's labor rights. And so you just say, OK, well, we've got all these claims. How does this stack up when they make money? What do they spend it on?