Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?

<http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>

--
HB

"Home Baker" > wrote in message
...
> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>
> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>
> --
Of course she 's a highly regarded scientist rather than a gossip monger!
NOT!
Graham

On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:29:21 +1100, Home Baker >
wrote:

>Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>
><http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
You'd be surprised what's in the food that you cook for yourself at
home.
Janet US

"graham" > wrote in :

>
> "Home Baker" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>
>> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-...n-bread-ingred
>> ient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>>
>> --
> Of course she 's a highly regarded scientist rather than a gossip
> monger! NOT!
>
It would be great to share this on the vegan NG.
>
> Graham
>
--B

On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 07:41:39 -0600, Janet Bostwick
> wrote:

>On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:29:21 +1100, Home Baker >
>wrote:
>
>>Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>
>><http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>You'd be surprised what's in the food that you cook for yourself at
>home.
>Janet US

Bread is mostly flour and ALL flour contains animal parts.

"Brooklyn1" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 07:41:39 -0600, Janet Bostwick
> > wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:29:21 +1100, Home Baker >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>>
>>><http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>>You'd be surprised what's in the food that you cook for yourself at
>>home.
>>Janet US
>
> Bread is mostly flour and ALL flour contains animal parts.

Not long ago there was a discussion about plastic gloves in food prep, at
that time I said I had cut out a pic from a paper a few years ago that was
just gross, and it is too. I would sooner find a hair, than some of the
stuff this guy had on his bare hands and arms. Why this bakery allowed this
pic to be taken and published in the newspaper is just anybody's guess, and
the scanned pic doesn't really show how bad it was, but what's shown is bad
enough. Being a low carber, I very seldomly eat bread or things made with
flour. :-)

http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=214pgut&s=8


Cheri

On 3/17/2014 1:19 PM, Cheri wrote:
>
> "Brooklyn1" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 07:41:39 -0600, Janet Bostwick
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:29:21 +1100, Home Baker >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>>>
>>>> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>>>>
>>> You'd be surprised what's in the food that you cook for yourself at
>>> home.
>>> Janet US
>>
>> Bread is mostly flour and ALL flour contains animal parts.
>
> Not long ago there was a discussion about plastic gloves in food prep,
> at that time I said I had cut out a pic from a paper a few years ago
> that was just gross, and it is too. I would sooner find a hair, than
> some of the stuff this guy had on his bare hands and arms. Why this
> bakery allowed this pic to be taken and published in the newspaper is
> just anybody's guess, and the scanned pic doesn't really show how bad it
> was, but what's shown is bad enough. Being a low carber, I very seldomly
> eat bread or things made with flour. :-)
>
> http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=214pgut&s=8
>
>
> Cheri
>
Oh dear! Open sores? Yuk! He'd need evening-length gloves.

Jill

"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
> On 3/17/2014 1:19 PM, Cheri wrote:
>>
>> "Brooklyn1" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 07:41:39 -0600, Janet Bostwick
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:29:21 +1100, Home Baker >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>>>>
>>>>> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>>>>>
>>>> You'd be surprised what's in the food that you cook for yourself at
>>>> home.
>>>> Janet US
>>>
>>> Bread is mostly flour and ALL flour contains animal parts.
>>
>> Not long ago there was a discussion about plastic gloves in food prep,
>> at that time I said I had cut out a pic from a paper a few years ago
>> that was just gross, and it is too. I would sooner find a hair, than
>> some of the stuff this guy had on his bare hands and arms. Why this
>> bakery allowed this pic to be taken and published in the newspaper is
>> just anybody's guess, and the scanned pic doesn't really show how bad it
>> was, but what's shown is bad enough. Being a low carber, I very seldomly
>> eat bread or things made with flour. :-)
>>
>> http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=214pgut&s=8
>>
>>
>> Cheri
>>
> Oh dear! Open sores? Yuk! He'd need evening-length gloves.
>
> Jill

Yes, the scanned pic doesn't really show the small sores on the back of his
hands, but regular food service plastic gloves wouldn't have covered the
higher part of his arm either. Acccch! I wrote a letter to the editor about
it, but they didn't publish it, oh well.

Cheri

Home Baker > wrote:
> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>
> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>


Nowadays they make the same thing also from duck, chicken, and turkey
feathers.

Grody.

The reactions of many of the posters here are quite unfortunate. Don't you
glib idiots care what you eat? What's the line, enzymes derived from human
shit? How about enzymes derived from aborted fetuses?

Sqwertz > wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:29:21 +1100, Home Baker wrote:
>
>> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>
>> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>
> Yet even more sensationalist bullshit reporting - there was no
> evidence that the cystine used in bread comes from human hair, it just
> simply points out that human hair is one of several sources of cystine
> (with poultry feathers being the more likely candidate source).
>
> -sw

I there evidence that cystine is not used in bread? Let's not pretend that
lack of evidence of human derived cystine is evidence of the lack of human
derived cystine in bread. That's pseudo-skeptical Randian type bullshit.

"John J" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 10:39:21 -0500, Sqwertz >
> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:29:21 +1100, Home Baker wrote:
>>
>>> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>>
>>> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>>
>>Yet even more sensationalist bullshit reporting - there was no
>>evidence that the cystine used in bread comes from human hair, it just
>>simply points out that human hair is one of several sources of cystine
>>(with poultry feathers being the more likely candidate source).
>
> L-cysteine is most often sourced from China.

Evidence?
Graham

John J > wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 10:39:21 -0500, Sqwertz >
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:29:21 +1100, Home Baker wrote:
>>
>>> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>>
>>> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>>
>> Yet even more sensationalist bullshit reporting - there was no
>> evidence that the cystine used in bread comes from human hair, it just
>> simply points out that human hair is one of several sources of cystine
>> (with poultry feathers being the more likely candidate source).
>
> L-cysteine is most often sourced from China. Getting L-cysteine from
> human hair is cheaper than getting it from poultry feathers. Guess
> where the Chinese get it from...

I think it is safe to assume the worst about any food additive, even in the
face of fraudulent corporate-sponsored research masquerading as scientific
evidence and reputation management shills with foul little mouths and bad
attitudes. Sadly we see the types even here on Usenet.

My reaction to this is the same as my reaction to foods with MSG, sour
cream thickened with carrageenan, and so forth. I simply have no use for
bread with cysteine added to condition the dough. If the process is so
inferior that strange things need to be added to approximate the flavor and
texture of real food, I can go without. I just don't understand why or how
anybody could defend such disgusting and unnecessary additives!

"graham" > wrote:
> "John J" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 10:39:21 -0500, Sqwertz >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:29:21 +1100, Home Baker wrote:
>>>
>>>> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>>>
>>>> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>>>
>>> Yet even more sensationalist bullshit reporting - there was no
>>> evidence that the cystine used in bread comes from human hair, it just
>>> simply points out that human hair is one of several sources of cystine
>>> (with poultry feathers being the more likely candidate source).
>>
>> L-cysteine is most often sourced from China.
>
> Evidence?
> Graham

This is a fun game. I think that the rules have changed though, in light
of the fact that time wasting, page lengthening, and reputation
assassination are now commonly acknowledged tricks of the trade in the
cyber war. So here's the new rule - anybody asking for evidence can be
safely ignored unless they produce their own evidence first. That way we
can be at least slightly convinced that the person is asking in good faith.

So, Graham, please procure and post evidence both that the cysteine in the
global food chain is not from China, and that it does not contain human
hair. Thanks.

On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:42:05 +0000 (UTC), Oregonian Haruspex
> wrote:
snip
>
>This is a fun game. I think that the rules have changed though, in light
>of the fact that time wasting, page lengthening, and reputation
>assassination are now commonly acknowledged tricks of the trade in the
>cyber war. So here's the new rule - anybody asking for evidence can be
>safely ignored unless they produce their own evidence first. That way we
>can be at least slightly convinced that the person is asking in good faith.
>
>So, Graham, please procure and post evidence both that the cysteine in the
>global food chain is not from China, and that it does not contain human
>hair. Thanks.

I'm not a professional researcher. As far as I can tell this alarum
has its roots in the vegan community from 10 or more years ago. It
refers to the use of artificial L-cystine. Natural L-cystine is
available in meat, fish, dairy, eggs and legumes. The story from 10
years ago, as reported by a vegan group, is that L-cystine is derived
from the floor sweepings of Chinese barbershops. I noticed that the
words artificial and natural were not in use.

Janet US

"Oregonian Haruspex" > wrote in message
...
> "graham" > wrote:
>> "John J" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 10:39:21 -0500, Sqwertz >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:29:21 +1100, Home Baker wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>>>>
>>>>> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>>>>
>>>> Yet even more sensationalist bullshit reporting - there was no
>>>> evidence that the cystine used in bread comes from human hair, it just
>>>> simply points out that human hair is one of several sources of cystine
>>>> (with poultry feathers being the more likely candidate source).
>>>
>>> L-cysteine is most often sourced from China.
>>
>> Evidence?
>> Graham
>
> This is a fun game. I think that the rules have changed though, in light
> of the fact that time wasting, page lengthening, and reputation
> assassination are now commonly acknowledged tricks of the trade in the
> cyber war. So here's the new rule - anybody asking for evidence can be
> safely ignored unless they produce their own evidence first. That way we
> can be at least slightly convinced that the person is asking in good
> faith.
>
> So, Graham, please procure and post evidence both that the cysteine in the
> global food chain is not from China, and that it does not contain human
> hair. Thanks.

Are you a theologian? It's up to you to prove the positive, not me the
negative!
Graham

On 2014-03-17 22:38:46 +0000, graham said:

> "Oregonian Haruspex" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> "graham" > wrote:
>>> "John J" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 10:39:21 -0500, Sqwertz >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:29:21 +1100, Home Baker wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yet even more sensationalist bullshit reporting - there was no
>>>>> evidence that the cystine used in bread comes from human hair, it just
>>>>> simply points out that human hair is one of several sources of cystine
>>>>> (with poultry feathers being the more likely candidate source).
>>>>
>>>> L-cysteine is most often sourced from China.
>>>
>>> Evidence?
>>> Graham
>>
>> This is a fun game. I think that the rules have changed though, in light
>> of the fact that time wasting, page lengthening, and reputation
>> assassination are now commonly acknowledged tricks of the trade in the
>> cyber war. So here's the new rule - anybody asking for evidence can be
>> safely ignored unless they produce their own evidence first. That way we
>> can be at least slightly convinced that the person is asking in good faith.
>>
>> So, Graham, please procure and post evidence both that the cysteine in the
>> global food chain is not from China, and that it does not contain human
>> hair. Thanks.
>
> Are you a theologian? It's up to you to prove the positive, not me the
> negative!
> Graham

You seem to be the skeptical party here, and I think it is up to you to
satisfy your skepticism with the research that a true skeptic wouldn't
shy away from. It would indeed be possible to prove a negative in many
cases, including this one. The claim that one can't prove a negative
may apply in some corner cases, but it is a rhetorical device used
mainly by sophists to avoid having a real discussion.

On Tue, 18 Mar 2014 09:57:58 +1100, John J > wrote:

>On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 16:38:19 -0600, Janet Bostwick
> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:42:05 +0000 (UTC), Oregonian Haruspex
> wrote:
>
>>>So, Graham, please procure and post evidence both that the cysteine in the
>>>global food chain is not from China, and that it does not contain human
>>>hair. Thanks.
>>
>>I'm not a professional researcher. As far as I can tell this alarum
>>has its roots in the vegan community from 10 or more years ago. It
>>refers to the use of artificial L-cystine. Natural L-cystine is
>>available in meat, fish, dairy, eggs and legumes. The story from 10
>>years ago, as reported by a vegan group, is that L-cystine is derived
>>from the floor sweepings of Chinese barbershops. I noticed that the
>>words artificial and natural were not in use.
>
>http://www.uitzendinggemist.nl/afleveringen/1395605
>
>This is in Dutch, but when they talk to Chinese suppliers of
>L-cysteine, it's in English. Starting at 10.58 and further. Also
>contains footage from an L-cysteine factory.

I gave you a synopsis of my findings. I don't do films or tapes.
If you've got something to say, say it.
Janet US

On 2014-03-18 00:00:32 +0000, John J said:

> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 17:48:17 -0600, Janet Bostwick
> > wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 18 Mar 2014 09:57:58 +1100, John J > wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 16:38:19 -0600, Janet Bostwick
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:42:05 +0000 (UTC), Oregonian Haruspex
>>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>> So, Graham, please procure and post evidence both that the cysteine in the
>>>>> global food chain is not from China, and that it does not contain human
>>>>> hair. Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not a professional researcher. As far as I can tell this alarum
>>>> has its roots in the vegan community from 10 or more years ago. It
>>>> refers to the use of artificial L-cystine. Natural L-cystine is
>>>> available in meat, fish, dairy, eggs and legumes. The story from 10
>>>> years ago, as reported by a vegan group, is that L-cystine is derived
>>>> from the floor sweepings of Chinese barbershops. I noticed that the
>>>> words artificial and natural were not in use.
>>>
>>> http://www.uitzendinggemist.nl/afleveringen/1395605
>>>
>>> This is in Dutch, but when they talk to Chinese suppliers of
>>> L-cysteine, it's in English. Starting at 10.58 and further. Also
>>> contains footage from an L-cysteine factory.
>>
>> I gave you a synopsis of my findings. I don't do films or tapes.
>> If you've got something to say, say it.
>
> If you can't be bothered, why should I care?

This is why I don't play the proof game on the internet any more. It's
a huge waste of time.

Sqwertz wrote:
>Brooklyn1 wrote:
>
>> Bread is mostly flour and ALL flour contains animal parts.
>
>Insects, yes. But animals parts? Not really. And certainly not like
>THIS:
>
>http://oi57.tinypic.com/210cbav.jpg

All grains are milled with a percentage of rodent parts, especially
their hair and droppings... comparatively the insects contained
therein are inconsequential. But you know this so why are you playing
dumb, obviously to impress the know nothing newbies. But your bashing
my posts will never fly, you need to give it up and rather do your own
things... everyone who knows anything sees right through your gimpy
attacks on my posts. You make yourself appear an ever dopier dwarf
then you are.

"Oregonian Haruspex" > wrote in message
...
> On 2014-03-17 22:38:46 +0000, graham said:
>
>> "Oregonian Haruspex" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "graham" > wrote:
>>>> "John J" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 10:39:21 -0500, Sqwertz >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:29:21 +1100, Home Baker wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yet even more sensationalist bullshit reporting - there was no
>>>>>> evidence that the cystine used in bread comes from human hair, it
>>>>>> just
>>>>>> simply points out that human hair is one of several sources of
>>>>>> cystine
>>>>>> (with poultry feathers being the more likely candidate source).
>>>>>
>>>>> L-cysteine is most often sourced from China.
>>>>
>>>> Evidence?
>>>> Graham
>>>
>>> This is a fun game. I think that the rules have changed though, in
>>> light
>>> of the fact that time wasting, page lengthening, and reputation
>>> assassination are now commonly acknowledged tricks of the trade in the
>>> cyber war. So here's the new rule - anybody asking for evidence can be
>>> safely ignored unless they produce their own evidence first. That way
>>> we
>>> can be at least slightly convinced that the person is asking in good
>>> faith.
>>>
>>> So, Graham, please procure and post evidence both that the cysteine in
>>> the
>>> global food chain is not from China, and that it does not contain human
>>> hair. Thanks.
>>
>> Are you a theologian? It's up to you to prove the positive, not me the
>> negative!
>> Graham
>
> You seem to be the skeptical party here, and I think it is up to you to
> satisfy your skepticism with the research that a true skeptic wouldn't shy
> away from. It would indeed be possible to prove a negative in many cases,
> including this one. The claim that one can't prove a negative may apply
> in some corner cases, but it is a rhetorical device used mainly by
> sophists to avoid having a real discussion.
>
********! You made an assertion and should be prepared to back it up!
Graham

On Tue, 18 Mar 2014 11:00:32 +1100, John J > wrote:

>On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 17:48:17 -0600, Janet Bostwick
> wrote:
snip
>>
>>I gave you a synopsis of my findings. I don't do films or tapes.
>>If you've got something to say, say it.
>
>If you can't be bothered, why should I care?

Ah. Too lazy to do a synopsis as I already did.
This is information to be shared with the group. I guess you're not
into that. I'm done with you.
Janet US

On 2014-03-18 00:57:03 +0000, graham said:

> "Oregonian Haruspex" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 2014-03-17 22:38:46 +0000, graham said:
>>
>>> "Oregonian Haruspex" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> "graham" > wrote:
>>>>> "John J" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 10:39:21 -0500, Sqwertz >
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:29:21 +1100, Home Baker wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yet even more sensationalist bullshit reporting - there was no
>>>>>>> evidence that the cystine used in bread comes from human hair, it just
>>>>>>> simply points out that human hair is one of several sources of cystine
>>>>>>> (with poultry feathers being the more likely candidate source).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> L-cysteine is most often sourced from China.
>>>>>
>>>>> Evidence?
>>>>> Graham
>>>>
>>>> This is a fun game. I think that the rules have changed though, in light
>>>> of the fact that time wasting, page lengthening, and reputation
>>>> assassination are now commonly acknowledged tricks of the trade in the
>>>> cyber war. So here's the new rule - anybody asking for evidence can be
>>>> safely ignored unless they produce their own evidence first. That way we
>>>> can be at least slightly convinced that the person is asking in good faith.
>>>>
>>>> So, Graham, please procure and post evidence both that the cysteine in the
>>>> global food chain is not from China, and that it does not contain human
>>>> hair. Thanks.
>>>
>>> Are you a theologian? It's up to you to prove the positive, not me the
>>> negative!
>>> Graham
>>
>> You seem to be the skeptical party here, and I think it is up to you to
>> satisfy your skepticism with the research that a true skeptic wouldn't
>> shy away from. It would indeed be possible to prove a negative in many
>> cases, including this one. The claim that one can't prove a negative
>> may apply in some corner cases, but it is a rhetorical device used
>> mainly by sophists to avoid having a real discussion.
>>
> ********! You made an assertion and should be prepared to back it up!
> Graham

I guess you missed John's post above. In any event, I am ready to back
it up, but in order to assure that you are asking in good faith and not
just wasting my time, I will require a down payment in the form of
evidence that Chinese cysteine sourced from human hair has not entered
the food chain.

If you are prepared to provide your evidence, I am prepared engage with
you. But I won't bother until you show some good faith attempt at
proving that you're a good skeptic - after all, a skeptic isn't willing
to just blindly believe anything is he?

The rules have changed. No more time wasting playing the proof game
without some indication that the other party is willing to engage. You
started playing the proof game, it's only fair that you take the first
move.

On 2014-03-18 01:18:01 +0000, John J said:

> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 18:06:37 -0700, Oregonian Haruspex
> > wrote:
>
>> On 2014-03-18 00:57:03 +0000, graham said:
>>
>>> "Oregonian Haruspex" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On 2014-03-17 22:38:46 +0000, graham said:
>>>>
>>>>> "Oregonian Haruspex" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> "graham" > wrote:
>>>>>>> "John J" > wrote in message
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 10:39:21 -0500, Sqwertz >
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:29:21 +1100, Home Baker wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yet even more sensationalist bullshit reporting - there was no
>>>>>>>>> evidence that the cystine used in bread comes from human hair, it just
>>>>>>>>> simply points out that human hair is one of several sources of cystine
>>>>>>>>> (with poultry feathers being the more likely candidate source).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> L-cysteine is most often sourced from China.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Evidence?
>>>>>>> Graham
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is a fun game. I think that the rules have changed though, in light
>>>>>> of the fact that time wasting, page lengthening, and reputation
>>>>>> assassination are now commonly acknowledged tricks of the trade in the
>>>>>> cyber war. So here's the new rule - anybody asking for evidence can be
>>>>>> safely ignored unless they produce their own evidence first. That way we
>>>>>> can be at least slightly convinced that the person is asking in good faith.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, Graham, please procure and post evidence both that the cysteine in the
>>>>>> global food chain is not from China, and that it does not contain human
>>>>>> hair. Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you a theologian? It's up to you to prove the positive, not me the
>>>>> negative!
>>>>> Graham
>>>>
>>>> You seem to be the skeptical party here, and I think it is up to you to
>>>> satisfy your skepticism with the research that a true skeptic wouldn't
>>>> shy away from. It would indeed be possible to prove a negative in many
>>>> cases, including this one. The claim that one can't prove a negative
>>>> may apply in some corner cases, but it is a rhetorical device used
>>>> mainly by sophists to avoid having a real discussion.
>>>>
>>> ********! You made an assertion and should be prepared to back it up!
>>> Graham
>>
>> I guess you missed John's post above. In any event, I am ready to back
>> it up, but in order to assure that you are asking in good faith and not
>> just wasting my time, I will require a down payment in the form of
>> evidence that Chinese cysteine sourced from human hair has not entered
>> the food chain.
>
> When you give them the start of the information, they then demand that
> you spoonfeed them the whole story, up until proof in a court of law.
> But they don't really want to believe it, so you're basically trying
> to spoonfeed a 2 year old that's not hungry and tries to hit the spoon
> our of your hand.

I figure that you could have predicted people's willingness to look at
your information by the responses they inititally gave to the story.
Eyes shut and fingers in the ears, mouth jibber jabbering mockery.

On 2014-03-17 13:41:39 +0000, Janet Bostwick said:

> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:29:21 +1100, Home Baker >
> wrote:
>
>> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>
>> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>>
> You'd be surprised what's in the food that you cook for yourself at
> home.
> Janet US

Are you saying that a meal that a person cooks at home from raw
ingredients is more likely to be tainted with mytery substances and
dubious food additives than that which is made in some anonymous
factory perhaps thousands of miles away? I sure hope not.

On 3/17/2014 9:41 AM, Janet Bostwick wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:29:21 +1100, Home Baker >
> wrote:
>
>> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>
>> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
> You'd be surprised what's in the food that you cook for yourself at
> home.
> Janet US
>

My food has occasional hair, but normally in the form of cat fur. It
gets into EVERYTHING, especially when you have 5 of them and one is a
Maine Coon.

--
ღ.¸¸.œ«*¨`*œ¶
Cheryl

"Oregonian Haruspex" > wrote in message
...

> This is why I don't play the proof game on the internet any more. It's a
> huge waste of time.

If people need proof of anything on the internet, they can research it
themselves IMO.

Cheri

On 3/17/2014 11:39 AM, Sqwertz wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:29:21 +1100, Home Baker wrote:
>
>> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>
>> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>
> Yet even more sensationalist bullshit reporting - there was no
> evidence that the cystine used in bread comes from human hair, it just
> simply points out that human hair is one of several sources of cystine
> (with poultry feathers being the more likely candidate source).
>
> -sw
>
I still forwarded the article to my hair stylist to see if she can make
some extra money.


--
ღ.¸¸.œ«*¨`*œ¶
Cheryl

On 3/17/2014 3:21 PM, Oregonian Haruspex wrote:
> Home Baker > wrote:
>> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>
>> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>
>
> Nowadays they make the same thing also from duck, chicken, and turkey
> feathers.
>
> Grody.
>
> The reactions of many of the posters here are quite unfortunate. Don't you
> glib idiots care what you eat? What's the line, enzymes derived from human
> shit? How about enzymes derived from aborted fetuses?
>

Guess what - you know the water you drink?



Fish peed in it.

In fact, for most of the world's water, humans and animals peed and
pooped in it, too.

Oh noes!

On 2014-03-18 10:04 AM, Moe DeLoughan wrote:
> On 3/17/2014 3:21 PM, Oregonian Haruspex wrote:
>> Home Baker > wrote:
>>> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>>
>>> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Nowadays they make the same thing also from duck, chicken, and turkey
>> feathers.
>>
>> Grody.
>>
>> The reactions of many of the posters here are quite unfortunate.
>> Don't you
>> glib idiots care what you eat? What's the line, enzymes derived from
>> human
>> shit? How about enzymes derived from aborted fetuses?
>>
>
> Guess what - you know the water you drink?
>
>
>
> Fish peed in it.

They did more than pee in it.

On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 18:37:43 -0700, Oregonian Haruspex
> wrote:

>On 2014-03-17 13:41:39 +0000, Janet Bostwick said:
>
>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:29:21 +1100, Home Baker >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>>
>>> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>>>
>> You'd be surprised what's in the food that you cook for yourself at
>> home.
>> Janet US
>
>Are you saying that a meal that a person cooks at home from raw
>ingredients is more likely to be tainted with mytery substances and
>dubious food additives than that which is made in some anonymous
>factory perhaps thousands of miles away? I sure hope not.

Not at all. I meant exactly, precisely what I said. Our food is
never "pure." As to hair in food -- other than that of my family and
dog, I don't know. (please don't think that you are not shedding skin,
hair, bacteria, etc. all over the food you prepare). The food you
prepare has been handled and in the food chain subjected to all sorts
of contamination. Even if you grow that steer and wheat yourself, you
can't avoid some contamination. You might as well accept that and
pick your battles. If you check, you will see that a lot L-cystine
comes from natural sources -- even the L-cystine that is added to your
food can come from a natural source such as meat, eggs, dairy, legumes
or fish. I'm more concerned about the arsenic in rice, the radon in
the ground, and the sanitary habits of the people in the food chain
that led to me.
Janet US

"Moe DeLoughan" > wrote in message
...
> On 3/17/2014 3:21 PM, Oregonian Haruspex wrote:
>> Home Baker > wrote:
>>> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>>
>>> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>>
>>
>> Nowadays they make the same thing also from duck, chicken, and turkey
>> feathers.
>>
>> Grody.
>>
>> The reactions of many of the posters here are quite unfortunate. Don't
>> you
>> glib idiots care what you eat? What's the line, enzymes derived from
>> human
>> shit? How about enzymes derived from aborted fetuses?
>>
>
> Guess what - you know the water you drink?
>
>
>
> Fish peed in it.
>
> In fact, for most of the world's water, humans and animals peed and pooped
> in it, too.
>
That makes it an excellent homeopathic remedy (if you believe in such
twaddle and bunkum).

Janet Bostwick > wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 18:37:43 -0700, Oregonian Haruspex
> > wrote:
>
>> On 2014-03-17 13:41:39 +0000, Janet Bostwick said:
>>
>>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:29:21 +1100, Home Baker >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>>>
>>>> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> You'd be surprised what's in the food that you cook for yourself at
>>> home.
>>> Janet US
>>
>> Are you saying that a meal that a person cooks at home from raw
>> ingredients is more likely to be tainted with mytery substances and
>> dubious food additives than that which is made in some anonymous
>> factory perhaps thousands of miles away? I sure hope not.
>
> Not at all. I meant exactly, precisely what I said. Our food is
> never "pure." As to hair in food -- other than that of my family and
> dog, I don't know. (please don't think that you are not shedding skin,
> hair, bacteria, etc. all over the food you prepare). The food you
> prepare has been handled and in the food chain subjected to all sorts
> of contamination. Even if you grow that steer and wheat yourself, you
> can't avoid some contamination. You might as well accept that and
> pick your battles. If you check, you will see that a lot L-cystine
> comes from natural sources -- even the L-cystine that is added to your
> food can come from a natural source such as meat, eggs, dairy, legumes
> or fish. I'm more concerned about the arsenic in rice, the radon in
> the ground, and the sanitary habits of the people in the food chain
> that led to me.
> Janet US

I'm not sure that the food industry is destroying perfectly good eggs,
milk, legumes, and fish in order to make a food additive when they could
source it from much cheaper waste products like hair and feathers.

Yes, obviously there are contaminants and adulterants in the food supply.
This does not mean we should accept it as ideal, or inevitable, and it
certainly does not mean we should tolerate more and more of this kind of
thing.

Moe DeLoughan > wrote:
> On 3/17/2014 3:21 PM, Oregonian Haruspex wrote:
>> Home Baker > wrote:
>>> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>>
>>> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>>
>>
>> Nowadays they make the same thing also from duck, chicken, and turkey
>> feathers.
>>
>> Grody.
>>
>> The reactions of many of the posters here are quite unfortunate. Don't you
>> glib idiots care what you eat? What's the line, enzymes derived from human
>> shit? How about enzymes derived from aborted fetuses?
>>
>
> Guess what - you know the water you drink?
>
>
>
> Fish peed in it.
>
> In fact, for most of the world's water, humans and animals peed and pooped in it, too.
>
> Oh noes!

This is the kind of glib response I am talking about. You might shock a 12
year old with that kind of talk but I wonder if you'd accept processed
human shit in your food if they gave it a fun name like H-feculine? Shit,
it sounds all safe and sciencey then right? What about F-zygotamine made
from reprocessed aborted fetal tissue?

Eat whatever you like but don't try to convince me to as well.

On 2014-03-18 04:48:46 +0000, Cheri said:

> "Oregonian Haruspex" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> This is why I don't play the proof game on the internet any more. It's
>> a huge waste of time.
>
> If people need proof of anything on the internet, they can research it
> themselves IMO.
>
> Cheri

This is the test that separates people who want information from those
just trying to waste time.

On Tue, 18 Mar 2014 19:30:11 +0000 (UTC), Oregonian Haruspex
> wrote:
snip
>
>Yes, obviously there are contaminants and adulterants in the food supply.
>This does not mean we should accept it as ideal, or inevitable, and it
>certainly does not mean we should tolerate more and more of this kind of
>thing.

and that is why most everything I buy or cook is the original item. No
place in the process for additives . . . I think. You do the best you
can.
Janet US

On 2014-03-18 20:34:40 +0000, Janet Bostwick said:

> On Tue, 18 Mar 2014 19:30:11 +0000 (UTC), Oregonian Haruspex
> > wrote:
> snip
>>
>> Yes, obviously there are contaminants and adulterants in the food supply.
>> This does not mean we should accept it as ideal, or inevitable, and it
>> certainly does not mean we should tolerate more and more of this kind of
>> thing.
>
> and that is why most everything I buy or cook is the original item. No
> place in the process for additives . . . I think. You do the best you
> can.
> Janet US

Aside from the dubious provenance of many additives, they tend to be
added to foods in order to cover up their bland, overly-processed
nature. I never met a piece of unprocessed food that needed autolyzed
yeast extract, MSG, or azodicarbonamide.

It's cheaper to use real food instead of the processed stuff anyway.

On 2014-03-18 20:19:01 +0000, John J said:

> On Tue, 18 Mar 2014 09:04:00 -0500, Moe DeLoughan >
> wrote:
>
>> Guess what - you know the water you drink?
>>
>> Fish peed in it.
>>
>> In fact, for most of the world's water, humans and animals peed and
>> pooped in it, too.
>>
>> Oh noes!
>
> When we're talking about L-cysteine in bread, we're not talking about
> something that just happens to naturally occur in bread, but about
> something that's deliberately being added by the industry as a bread
> improver. A bread improver that's mainly (80% says a supplier) made
> from the hair of Chinese people. "Lower socio-economic dirty people"
> as a Chinese supplier put it. Of course we're PC and we don't talk
> like that. We just eat their hair.

And glibly excuse ourselves for our poor choice of food as well.

On 3/18/2014 3:19 PM, John J wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Mar 2014 09:04:00 -0500, Moe DeLoughan >
> wrote:
>
>> Guess what - you know the water you drink?
>>
>> Fish peed in it.
>>
>> In fact, for most of the world's water, humans and animals peed and
>> pooped in it, too.
>>
>> Oh noes!
>
> When we're talking about L-cysteine in bread, we're not talking about
> something that just happens to naturally occur in bread, but about
> something that's deliberately being added by the industry as a bread
> improver. A bread improver that's mainly (80% says a supplier) made
> from the hair of Chinese people. "Lower socio-economic dirty people"
> as a Chinese supplier put it. Of course we're PC and we don't talk
> like that. We just eat their hair.
>

We aren't eating their hair. We're eating a tiny bit of a chemical
extracted from human hair after the hair has been dissolved in acid.
And we extract pepsin from the glandular layer of hog stomachs to use
in food production for everything from cheese to cereals to snack
foods and beverages. Wanna gross over that, too?

On Tue, 18 Mar 2014 13:43:04 -0700, Oregonian Haruspex
> wrote:

>On 2014-03-18 20:34:40 +0000, Janet Bostwick said:
>
>> On Tue, 18 Mar 2014 19:30:11 +0000 (UTC), Oregonian Haruspex
>> > wrote:
>> snip
>>>
>>> Yes, obviously there are contaminants and adulterants in the food supply.
>>> This does not mean we should accept it as ideal, or inevitable, and it
>>> certainly does not mean we should tolerate more and more of this kind of
>>> thing.
>>
>> and that is why most everything I buy or cook is the original item. No
>> place in the process for additives . . . I think. You do the best you
>> can.
>> Janet US
>
>Aside from the dubious provenance of many additives, they tend to be
>added to foods in order to cover up their bland, overly-processed
>nature. I never met a piece of unprocessed food that needed autolyzed
>yeast extract, MSG, or azodicarbonamide.
>
>It's cheaper to use real food instead of the processed stuff anyway.

I'm not on that bandwagon. It's just the way I learned to cook and my
interest in seeing how things come together and liking the process of
from scratch. But, I sort of have the time now. I never had to pick
up a child from school and drive miles in commuter traffic. Where I
live, all was accomplished within a couple of miles of home. I was
truly lucky. We biked or walked.
Janet US

On Tue, 18 Mar 2014 19:30:13 +0000 (UTC), Oregonian Haruspex
> wrote:

>Moe DeLoughan > wrote:
>> On 3/17/2014 3:21 PM, Oregonian Haruspex wrote:
>>> Home Baker > wrote:
>>>> Do you buy supermarket bread? Are you a cannibal?
>>>>
>>>> <http://blogs.discovery.com/dfh-sara-novak/2012/01/common-bread-ingredient-l-cysteine-derived-from-human-hair.html>
>>>
>>> Nowadays they make the same thing also from duck, chicken, and turkey
>>> feathers.
>>>
>>> Grody.
>>>
>>> The reactions of many of the posters here are quite unfortunate. Don't you
>>> glib idiots care what you eat? What's the line, enzymes derived from human
>>> shit? How about enzymes derived from aborted fetuses?
>>>
>> Guess what - you know the water you drink?
>>
>> Fish peed in it.
>>
>> In fact, for most of the world's water, humans and animals peed and pooped in it, too.
>>
>> Oh noes!
>
>This is the kind of glib response I am talking about. You might shock a 12
>year old with that kind of talk but I wonder if you'd accept processed
>human shit in your food if they gave it a fun name like H-feculine? Shit,
>it sounds all safe and sciencey then right? What about F-zygotamine made
>from reprocessed aborted fetal tissue?
>
>Eat whatever you like but don't try to convince me to as well.

Not to mention the obvious - fluoride and chlorine in many water
supplies.