Food Babe. Sigh.
I’m not going to rehash what everyone else has written about the Food Babe. Several people have done a very good job of explaining why I think she’s detrimental to consumers and the food industry. You can read these excellent posts for yourself here – all are, in my opinion, well worth your time:
- 10 Things I Wish the Food Babe Knew – via MN Farm Living
- Fraud Alert: Food Babe – via The Farmer’s Daughter
- Is The Food Babe More Dangerous Than Pumpkin Spice Lattes? – via Zach Bussey
What I am going say is this:
I am so very tired of seeing the Starbuck’s pumpkin latte infographic from the Food Babe – who has no background in either nutrition or food science, by the way. It pains me deeply to post it here because it goes against every fiber of my being to do so, but I feel I must show it to you in case you haven’t seen it yet. (And this is better, at least, than actually sending you to Food Babe’s website. Shudder.)
I’m saddened that some media outlets will give her air time, despite the fact that what she says and writes about is sensationalism at best, designed to create fear over what you are eating, and often not true at all. I’m too old school, I suppose – as a journalism major in the late 1980s, I actually remember learning about the importance of fact checking stories and proving that my sources were indeed reputable and credible.
Those days are apparently gone, at least for some media outlets. (Fox News, which so gleefully gave the Food Babe air time to talk about those “toxic” Starbuck’s pumpkin lattes this week, I am indeed talking to you. )
And I’m scared that so many people don’t seem to have a clue about food and the science behind food and take her posts at face value. Does anyone really think a pumpkin spice latte should have actual pumpkin in it? Then please, by all means, pick a pumpkin from my parents’ garden (they grow plenty on their farm), cut it open and see how that’s going to work. I’m guessing it won’t go very well.
Snopes.com has an excellent breakdown here of the different areas Food Babe attacks Starbuck’s pumpkin spice latte and what is really truthful.
To me, if there is anything to be concerned about in that pumpkin spice latte, it might be the amount of sugar – but to call it toxic? I guess that’s an extra tablespoon of fear to go along with my occasional gourmet coffee.
I agree with Kantha Shelke, a food scientist with a background in organic chemistry and a spokesperson for the Institute of Food Technologists, who had this to say in Time magazine:
“This conversation about chemicals in food requires a certain amount of responsibility, which I think some of these elitist writers and bloggers and speakers have somehow forgotten,” she says of the backlash against pumpkin spice flavoring. “I think it’s very irresponsible to be ignorant to such a level as to lead others astray and tell them to eat chemical-free food.” After all, she says, water and salt are chemicals.
I encourage you to reach the entire article from Time magazine – it helps explain, among other things, that there are perfectly safe chemicals part of nature and there’s no reason to vilify them. Have you seen a list of ingredients that are actually in an egg, banana or blueberries? Crazy-sounding names but all natural parts of the product.
Egg graphic courtesy of io9.com.
As for me, I’m staying away from sensationalism and fear marketing of food, and I plan to enjoy, guilt-free, a pumpkin spice latte if I so choose to have one this fall. I hope you will join me.
Food Babe rant over. For now.