Food Scares (page 50)

In the Los Angeles Times, Greg Critser pooh-poohs the $7 billion organic foods industry’s contention “that the only vegetables and fruits that are truly safe and conscionable to eat are…

This is how Dr. Henry Miller (of the Hoover Institution) describes the fat-substitute Olestra, in an article written for the Cato Institute’s magazine, Regulation. Despite the product’s repeatedly demonstrated safety…

The American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) blasts the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) for its continued complaining about the removal of saccharin from the federal "carcinogen list." ACSH speculates that CSPI is concerned that saccharin could be the first of many alleged carcinogens cleared. "Is CSPI afraid that common sense and science will prevail and drown out their frequent, strident warnings about alleged poisons and carcinogens in our food?"

The Detroit News editorializes that it is time for the Food and Drug Administration to remove warning labels from products containing olestra because there is no danger from the fat substitute. The only group that seems to be against removing the labels is the Center for Science in the Public Interest. Does the $20,000 CSPI received from the Helena Rubinstein Foundation in 1997 to vilify Olestra have something to do with its position?

National Public Radio gives a thumbs-up review of the no-calorie, no-cholesterol fat-substitute Olestra. However, the Center for Science in the Public Interest appears in the story, citing questionable statistics that disparage a product that millions of consumers could benefit from. Does the $20,000 CSPI received from the Helena Rubinstein Foundation in 1997 to vilify Olestra have something to do with its position?

The American Council on Science and Health's Ruth Kava attacks the Center for Science in the Public Interest's campaign to force labeling for products that contain added sugars. Kava says, "Labeling foods or ingredients as 'good' or 'bad' is simply an unhealthy red herring - it is quite possible to avoid added sugars and still have a poor diet!"

Next week’s Newsweek makes no bones about the abundance of calcium being added to many common foods, a food-fad that was spurred in part by the Center for Science in the Public Interest’s on-going tirades over the years to add calcium to our diets. CSPI’s attacks on soda pop accuse the popular beverage of offsetting other calcium sources. But in an attempt to play both sides of the net, CSPI whines to Newsweek, “Everywhere you turn, it seems another food has added calcium.” Nobody told them to be careful what they wished for, either!

Despite the fact that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration continues to affirm that olestra is perfectly safe, Canada has banned the use of the fat substitute. The "Don't eat fat, but don't eat fat substitutes either" nannies from the Center for Science in the Public Interest support the action, saying Canada's ban should prompt the FDA to follow suit or at least strengthen the label currently on all olestra-containing products.

Lynn Goldman, former head of the EPA pesticide and toxic chemicals office, is apparently now working with activists to promote organic agriculture and restrict other food choices. Goldman, listed as a sympathizer by the anti-chemical Children's Health Environmental Coalition Network, repeats her erroneous "Organic is your best bet when it comes to safe fruit and vegetables" message to U.S. News & World Report.

Who would be crazy enough to dispute the findings of the American Cancer Society, American Medical Association, American Dietetic Association, and the American Diabetes Association? It could only be anti-choice nannies Michael Jacobson of CSPI and Mr. Samuel "All Chemicals Cause Cancer" Epstein. They seem to be the only ones left who still think saccharin is a health threat.