Food Babe Responds to Food Science Students’ Open Letter

Last week, an open letter to Vani Hari, the Food Babe, was posted on Science Meets Food. We are pleased that Ms. Hari has engaged with us in this dialogue.  The original letter can be read here, and a portion of Ms. Hari’s response is quoted below.

Check back with Science Meets Food later this and future weeks for posts on the specific topics she addressed. You can subscribe to this blog by scrolling to the bottom of the page and entering your email address.

“Dear Future Science Students In Training, 

Thank you so much for your letter, which I greatly appreciated receiving.

Here are a few guidelines for my work that I hope you will consider.

First, synthetic ingredients in our food should be proven safe before they are put into our bodies. The current system in the United States, unlike Europe, considers most chemicals innocent until proven guilty. Absolute proof of harm is not a moral standard for protecting public health – that is for the realm of theoretical science only. When there is significant evidence, short of certainty, we should protect the public from unnecessary risk. As you know most of the chemicals in our food supply have never been independently tested for safety by a 3rd party or the FDA. Can we join forces to insist they should be?

Meanwhile, I do take issue with your assertion that there is no evidence that organic products are better for health…..”

The rest of Ms. Hari’s response can be read here: http://foodbabe.com/an-open-letter-to-food-babe/

 

Science Meets Food

The IFT Student Association (IFTSA) is a forward-looking, student-governed community of IFT members. Through competitions, scholarships, networking, and leadership opportunities, you’ll set yourself apart from your classmates (unless they’re members too).

16 Comments

  1. So she is calling you all immoral theorists and lobbing novel proteins at you with her fallacious argument catapult.
    Next she will tell you your father smelled of elderberries and your mother was a hamster.

  2. Mark Brittingham Reply to Mark

    Her letter sounds quite reasonable until you realize that many of the points are just outright falsehoods.

    There is “no testing” of GMO foods? Really? If she isn’t aware that this is false then she is purposely maintaining ignorance since the information is both central to her thesis and easily available. If she *is* aware that this is false but repeats it anyway, then the only rational conclusion is that greed is driving her to lie to her followers so they keep buying her products. Either way, she just looks terrible.

  3. In regard to Ms. Hari’s comment on European’s banning chemicals prematurely, might I suggest reading the in-depth investigation of Mr Lu’s ‘Harvard’ Neonics-Colony Collapse Disorder Study? It includes a link to Mr Lu’s study which was heavily relied upon to instill an emergency ban on neonics whose absence is causing crop devastations, available here:
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-entine/post_8761_b_6323626.html

  4. A biotech lecturer Reply to A

    Dear students, great job. Do not loose too much time debunking myths. Do good science also for those that believe to unicorns and foodbabe! Cheers.

  5. The unfortunate part is that by clicking the link to the entire response only feeds the bear and her advertisers. The other part I particularly like is that she conveniently doesn’t have a comment section on her website. Seems like she is totally committed to having open dialogue about the issues…

  6. I don’t think Vani knows what a scientific theory is.

  7. Please note that this comment section will be moderated for inappropriate language.

  8. This whole exchange reminds me of the book I’m currently reading, “Science Left Behind” (which I HIGHLY recommend). Second, I commend the authors of the open letter, (Matt Teegarden, John Frelka, Diane Schmitt, Stephanie Diamond, Jacob Farr, and Diana Maricruz Pérez-Santos) and beg all food scientists (students or ex-students) to keep up the good fight. That said, for those of you that get frustrated by those whose minds are too closed to acknowledge evidence that contradicts their theories, remember, “Never argue with a drunk or a fool”. All you can do is share your knowledge, your findings, your experience and your facts — the message won’t always get through, but don’t get frustrated. greeneyedguide.com

    • Danielle, thanks for mentioning “Science Left Behind” – that kind of thing comes up a lot in any discussions about “climate change” and “environmental” “science.”

  9. Lucia Velasquez Reply to Lucia

    Science or chemicals do not belong in our HUMAN systems. Those who do not believe in nature must be on RX DRUGS, good luck! Ignorance makes for good reading though….lol

  10. Science Meets Food – why would you bother taking seriously someone who calls themselves “Food Babe”? There is no good reason. Would you take seriously someone who calls themselves “Food Handsome Hunk”? Nope, you wouldn’t.

    That woman thinks smiling a fake, saccharine smile and flaunting some jiggles make her a person whose opinions matter. Newflash, one must have a brain to have opinions that matter. She doesn’t.

Leave a Reply