Why are so many people suddenly questioning what's in our food?
- Mike Simone
- 3 minutes ago
- 6 min read
A few years ago, conversations about glyphosate, food dyes, heavy metals, microplastics, and seed oils mostly lived on the fringes of the internet.
Today they’re everywhere.
Podcast hosts are talking about them. Politicians are talking about them. Parents are talking about them. Even people who never paid much attention to ingredient labels suddenly seem interested in what they’re eating and where it came from.
Part of that shift is undoubtedly driven by social media. Fear spreads quickly, outrage generates clicks, and “everything is poison” is a far more compelling headline than “the evidence is complicated.”
But I don’t think that’s the whole story.
Rates of obesity, metabolic disease, and digestive issues have risen dramatically over the last several decades. Researchers have documented an increase in colorectal cancer among younger adults. More people seem interested in how food is grown, processed, preserved, and manufactured than at any point in my lifetime.
Some of that concern is probably exaggerated, but some of it may also be entirely justified.
The challenge is figuring out which is which.
After spending far too much time reading studies, regulatory guidance, investigative reports, and arguments from both sides, I’ve landed somewhere in the middle.
I don’t think everything in our food supply is dangerous, but I also don’t think every concern should be dismissed as an internet conspiracy.
Here’s where I currently land.
Why Europe vs. the US keeps coming up
One reason these conversations continue to gain traction is that consumers eventually discover that some ingredients allowed in the United States are restricted, require warnings, or are banned in parts of Europe.
The difference often comes down to philosophy.
The European Union generally follows a more precautionary approach. If there are unresolved questions about safety, regulators may choose to restrict or limit an ingredient until more evidence becomes available.
The United States relies heavily on the FDA’s GRAS framework, or “Generally Recognized As Safe” designation.
That doesn’t automatically mean Europe is right and America is wrong, but it does make you ask:
If two developed regions can look at the same ingredient and arrive at different conclusions, how settled is the science really?
The concerns that deserve attention
Ultra-processed foods
If there’s one issue that seems difficult to argue against, it’s the rise of ultra-processed foods.
These products now make up a substantial portion of the average American diet. They are designed to be inexpensive, convenient, shelf-stable, highly palatable, and easy to overconsume.
To be clear, not all processed foods are the same. Frozen vegetables, yogurt, canned beans, and protein powder are technically processed foods.
I’m talking about foods that are industrially formulated, heavily engineered, and often contain long lists of additives, stabilizers, emulsifiers, sweeteners, and flavoring agents.
Of all the topics in this article, this is probably the one I take most seriously.
Heavy metals
This is another area where I think the concern is legitimate.
Lead, arsenic, cadmium, and mercury can be found throughout the food supply. Depending on the food, they may come from soil, water, pollution, agricultural practices, or manufacturing processes.
Chocolate, rice, spices, seafood, and certain supplements have all faced scrutiny at various times.
What makes this topic interesting is that exposure is cumulative.
A single serving of a food may fall below a regulatory threshold. But people don’t eat a single serving once. They eat patterns of foods repeatedly over years and decades.
This is one reason California’s Proposition 65 warnings generate so much debate.
The warnings are intentionally conservative and often criticized for being overused. At the same time, they highlight something that many consumers rarely think about: low-level exposure to potentially harmful substances exists throughout modern life.
That doesn’t mean panic is warranted, but it does mean the conversation is worth having.
Glyphosate
Glyphosate is probably the most controversial substance in modern agriculture.
Supporters point out that it has been extensively studied and remains approved by regulators around the world.
Critics argue that its widespread use, environmental impact, and long-term exposure deserve greater scrutiny, especially since IARC classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans.”
Personally, I think this is one of the areas where the public’s concerns are often dismissed too quickly.
That doesn’t mean glyphosate is responsible for every chronic illness people blame it for, but it does mean I understand why people are asking questions.
When a chemical is used on such a massive scale throughout the food system, curiosity about its long-term effects seem completely reasonable to me.
Microplastics
Microplastics may be the most unsettling topic on this list. And not because the evidence is strongest, but because it’s still developing.
We know microplastics are present in our environment. And we know they have been detected in human tissues. In fact, one 2024 review found microplastics to be detected in 8 of 12 human organ systems. And we also know EPA researchers are actively studying potential health effects.
What we don’t know is exactly how significant those effects may ultimately be. That’s why I think certainty in either direction is premature.
The concerns where the evidence is mixed
Artificial sweeteners
Artificial sweeteners are a perfect example of how difficult these conversations can become.
Depending on who you ask, they are either one of the greatest public health tools ever developed or a chemical disaster waiting to happen. And the truth is probably somewhere in between.
Aspartame, sucralose, stevia, monk fruit, acesulfame potassium, and other sweeteners all have different research profiles.
Some studies have raised questions about gut microbiome effects, appetite regulation, or long-term metabolic outcomes.
At the same time, many regulatory agencies continue to consider approved levels safe.
If I had to rank them personally, I generally feel more comfortable with stevia and monk fruit than sucralose or aspartame though, the research remains far from settled.
Food dyes
Food dyes are another area where nuance matters.
The strongest concerns are not necessarily around cancer or catastrophic health outcomes.
The better evidence suggests that certain children may be sensitive to some synthetic food colorings, potentially affecting behavior or hyperactivity.
That doesn’t mean every brightly colored food is harmful, but it also doesn’t mean questions about their widespread use are unreasonable.
The concerns that may be receiving more attention than they deserve
Seed oils
This is where I part ways with much of the internet.
The online discussion often treats seed oils as a primary driver of chronic disease.
I’m not convinced the evidence supports that.
Most people aren’t consuming seed oils in isolation. They’re consuming them alongside fast food, fried food, ultra-processed food, excess calories, and poor overall dietary patterns.
That doesn’t make seed oils a health food, but it does make them difficult to separate from the broader context in which they’re typically consumed.
High-fructose corn syrup
High-fructose corn syrup falls into a similar category.
I don’t go out of my way to consume it, but I also don’t think it explains the modern chronic disease epidemic by itself.
The bigger issue is excessive added sugar consumption in general.
Whether that sugar comes from corn syrup, cane sugar, or another source, the broader dietary pattern matters more than the specific ingredient.
So what do I actually do?
After reading all of this, people usually want a simple answer.
What should I avoid? What should I limit? What don’t I worry about?
Here’s where I’ve landed.
I actively try to avoid
Ultra-processed foods whenever possible
Excess added sugar
Foods with long lists of unfamiliar additives
Frequent fast food consumption
Highly processed snack foods
I try to limit
Foods that are known sources of heavy metals
Products containing artificial dyes
Artificial sweeteners, depending on the type
Highly processed breads and baked goods
Foods that rely heavily on preservatives and stabilizers
I don’t spend much time worrying about
The occasional ingredient that social media is panicking about this week
Seed oils in reasonable amounts
Eating perfectly
Single exposures
Individual foods in isolation
Most health outcomes are driven by patterns, not one-off decisions.
The internet often wants a villain like a single ingredient or chemical, but the boring reality is that it’s usually more complex than that.
My view is that some of the concerns people raise about our food supply are absolutely legitimate. Others are probably overstated. Most deserve more nuance than they typically receive online.
Maybe the biggest lesson from all of this is that it’s possible to care about what’s in your food without becoming consumed by it.
Exercise regularly. Get enough sleep. Manage stress as best you can. Eat mostly whole foods and keep added sugar in check.
The science around many of these debates will continue to evolve.
Those fundamentals probably won’t.
-Mike
Comments