this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2025
388 points (97.3% liked)

196

4040 readers
2027 users here now

Community Rules

You must post before you leave

Be nice. Assume others have good intent (within reason).

Block or ignore posts, comments, and users that irritate you in some way rather than engaging. Report if they are actually breaking community rules.

Use content warnings and/or mark as NSFW when appropriate. Most posts with content warnings likely need to be marked NSFW.

Most 196 posts are memes, shitposts, cute images, or even just recent things that happened, etc. There is no real theme, but try to avoid posts that are very inflammatory, offensive, very low quality, or very "off topic".

Bigotry is not allowed, this includes (but is not limited to): Homophobia, Transphobia, Racism, Sexism, Abelism, Classism, or discrimination based on things like Ethnicity, Nationality, Language, or Religion.

Avoid shilling for corporations, posting advertisements, or promoting exploitation of workers.

Proselytization, support, or defense of authoritarianism is not welcome. This includes but is not limited to: imperialism, nationalism, genocide denial, ethnic or racial supremacy, fascism, Nazism, Marxism-Leninism, Maoism, etc.

Avoid AI generated content.

Avoid misinformation.

Avoid incomprehensible posts.

No threats or personal attacks.

No spam.

Moderator Guidelines

Moderator Guidelines

  • Don’t be mean to users. Be gentle or neutral.
  • Most moderator actions which have a modlog message should include your username.
  • When in doubt about whether or not a user is problematic, send them a DM.
  • Don’t waste time debating/arguing with problematic users.
  • Assume the best, but don’t tolerate sealioning/just asking questions/concern trolling.
  • Ask another mod to take over cases you struggle with, if you get tired, or when things get personal.
  • Ask the other mods for advice when things get complicated.
  • Share everything you do in the mod matrix, both so several mods aren't unknowingly handling the same issues, but also so you can receive feedback on what you intend to do.
  • Don't rush mod actions. If a case doesn't need to be handled right away, consider taking a short break before getting to it. This is to say, cool down and make room for feedback.
  • Don’t perform too much moderation in the comments, except if you want a verdict to be public or to ask people to dial a convo down/stop. Single comment warnings are okay.
  • Send users concise DMs about verdicts about them, such as bans etc, except in cases where it is clear we don’t want them at all, such as obvious transphobes. No need to notify someone they haven’t been banned of course.
  • Explain to a user why their behavior is problematic and how it is distressing others rather than engage with whatever they are saying. Ask them to avoid this in the future and send them packing if they do not comply.
  • First warn users, then temp ban them, then finally perma ban them when they break the rules or act inappropriately. Skip steps if necessary.
  • Use neutral statements like “this statement can be considered transphobic” rather than “you are being transphobic”.
  • No large decisions or actions without community input (polls or meta posts f.ex.).
  • Large internal decisions (such as ousting a mod) might require a vote, needing more than 50% of the votes to pass. Also consider asking the community for feedback.
  • Remember you are a voluntary moderator. You don’t get paid. Take a break when you need one. Perhaps ask another moderator to step in if necessary.

founded 6 months ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] pseudo@jlai.lu 5 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

"Chemical" is now used with the meaning of "ultra-processed ingredient with either unknown origin or unknow effect on your body". It is not the first meaning of the term but I guess it is a meaning now and we have to deal with it.

[–] myrrh@ttrpg.network 4 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

...in the context of processed foods, i've always considered 'chemicals' synonymous with industrially synthesised ingredients, by contrast to naturally-occurring foodstuffs...

[–] pedz@lemmy.ca 10 points 10 hours ago

They put chemicals in everything now. I heard they even put dihydrogen monoxide in the water!

[–] rizzothesmall@sh.itjust.works 6 points 10 hours ago

Everything is made of chemicals

[–] megopie@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 9 hours ago

A better question is “is this ultra processed”

Like, is this a product comprised mostly highly refined and modified ingredients? And thus is it likely to have had important nutritional components removed?

In all likelihood, none of the actual ingredients are actively bad for you in moderation, but, it’ll be nutritionally lacking.

[–] coffeetastesbadlikecoffee@sh.itjust.works 7 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Chemicals can also be non vegan. Side note: for a long time (might still be) camera film wasn't vegan, since it used bovine gelatin. Kodak Eastman even had their own cow ranch to supply all the bones. (Goes to show chemicals don't have to be vegan)

[–] pseudo@jlai.lu 2 points 9 hours ago

Goes to show chemicals don’t have to be vegan

There is a lot of them. In the EU classification of food additif, anything under the E47 categorie can either be animal or vegetal. E471 for example could be either pork skin, beef bones, fish bones, palm or coconut oil derivative. Nicely wrapped and served in so many bread and brioche product to Jews, Muslims, Hindus, vegetarians and vegans.

And there is so many more that are straight up animal products but presented in a latin name. In France, industrials even started to used Canadian french terms to confuse people when the insect additives for colours and textures started to gross out to many people.

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I saw a bumper sticker that said "Do you eat GMO food?" me being smart ass and liking history said yes. Damned near all food humans eat at scale has been modified through artificial selection, at least if it's in a lab we are less likely to inbred the plant so badly that they are effectively a clone species. Also I thought of cows when I read that sticker a notable downgrade from the might aurochs.

[–] ndru@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

But nobody means selective breeding when they say GMO. That term emerged specifically to describe the products of genetic engineering. There a plenty of legitimate concerns.

Sure but I've legit heard people call selectively breed things GMO because it was exceptionally specific and broad in its effects. Also I am not going to take some of these bumper sticker types seriously until I stop seeing non-GMO stickers on inorganic products like salt or water.

[–] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 5 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Okay, look. Atoms, in all their wonder make up pretty much everything known to exist in the universe. Chemistry, the science of chemicals, is just taking that understanding we have of atoms and applying it to how the atoms interact based on what atoms are there, their charges, bonds, etc.

Thus unless it's on the periodic table, where it would be an element, then it's a chemical.

Even assuming that instead of "chemicals", people mean synthetic chemicals.... To that I say... Who cares?

Synthetic chemicals come in two forms: a synthesized version of a chemical that is naturally occurring, where synthesis is a more commercially viable way to obtain that chemical, or a chemical that isn't found naturally, which undergoes significant scrutiny before anyone is allowed to put it in your food and sell it to you.

We generally give "natural" chemicals less scrutiny than synthetic chemicals. And I'll remind everyone that cyanide is a naturally occurring chemical. Though it's natural, we don't general add that to our food. Some food contains cyanide naturally, like cherry pits, but that's usually a part we don't eat.

The WHO has a whole article about toxins in food... https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/natural-toxins-in-food

So yeah, it might be made of synthetic chemicals, which have been researched, scrutinized, and peer reviewed before being approved for consumption and being put in my food. I can't say the same for literally anything "natural". We just ate that shit and if you died from eating a thing, nobody else ate that thing. And that was the way of things before modern science and chemicals...

So fuck you, and the horse you rode in on.

[–] sobchak@programming.dev 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

As someone wholly uneducated on these kinds of things, I just choose to use the heuristic of defaulting to using/ingesting natural substances, as much as practical, because we evolved with them and it would seem more likely our bodies (and the ecosystem) know how to deal with them. I also don't trust the government to be discerning/uncorruptible enough to not allow stuff to pass that shouldn't, especially now. Peer review is more trustworthy though, and gets more trustworthy the longer something has been around and studied more.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 5 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

I feel you're mixing stuff up here, don't eat processed food, buy "bio"/"ecological" if you'd like less bad stuff in your food.

Belladonna is natural and saves lives, take too much and you die. This whole "natural" thing is so infested with scammers, it's just not "the government".

[–] sobchak@programming.dev 2 points 9 hours ago

Oh yeah, true. Forgot about the the supplement grift.

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 15 points 19 hours ago (3 children)

Literally everything is made out of chemicals. Naturaphiles are loonyburgers.

[–] ndru@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

I think it helps to understand that when some people say “chemicals” in the context of highly processed foods, they mean “industrial additives”.

[–] Fuck_u_spez_@sh.itjust.works 9 points 19 hours ago

Also: botulinum toxin, ricin, lead, uranium, ebola, the fucking sun... The list of completely natural things that can kill us in the most horrific ways imaginable is almost endless.

[–] 18107@aussie.zone 2 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

No thanks. I only eat photons.

[–] Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 20 hours ago

Me, crushing up blood-cruelty cocaine in a tiny one-cent plastic baggie: “I really hope this baggie doesn’t have PFAS in it…”

[–] angrystego@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

People don't seem to understand that even chemicals are made of something. They're not synthesized out of thin air. It is not stupid to ask what they're made of. The resources can be very diverse.

[–] vithigar@lemmy.ca 3 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

The "something" in question is elements. Barring the very inadvisable edge case where you're ingesting some kind of pure metal or degenerate matter there is not anything you can eat that does not contain chemicals.

Complaining about a food containing "chemicals" makes about as much sense as calling out the software you use for being compiled from "code".

[–] angrystego@lemmy.world 3 points 13 hours ago

Yes, but what I meant was, for example, artificial vanilla flavour is a chemical, which used to be made from cloves oil, now is made from wood compounds. The processes and ingrediences needed to produce it are also diverse and interesting.

[–] ThorrJo@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

I live with two junkfood vegans and oh my god dude. I'm literally broke and eating from food banks and my diet is less bad than theirs.

Junk vegans are truly majestic creatures

[–] moosetwin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 27 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I'm confused. I thought veganism was about animal welfare, what does it have to do with food being made out of chemicals?

[–] Sunrosa@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago

The same exact compounds found in food and other products can either originate from an animal or a non-animal source. Veganism is about avoiding the animal sources. The compound itself is mostly irrelevant.

[–] chocosoldier@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 18 hours ago

it is but it's also hitched to "crunchy" culture, which has some weird braindead threads running through it about body purity and "nature = good".

[–] OldChicoAle@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago

Hi Vegan 1!

[–] LordWiggle@lemmy.world 28 points 1 day ago (6 children)

So I'm a vegan. The 2 types of vegans I see are these:

  1. The terror vegan: "Everyone who isn't 100% vegan is a genocidal nazi and I'll make sure to tell them constantly." aka the ones that give veganism a bad name.

  2. The normal vegan: "When it comes to pollution, the mega corps are at failt. But when it comes to animal product consumption, the consumer is the driving factor. I can't expect everyone to become a vegan, but it would already help a lot if everyone would start to consume a bit less. Like once or twice a week no meat. But if you won't I wouldn't hold it against you, we're still friends after all." aka the vegan I'd like to be.

Sadly there's extremism in every field.

[–] Apytele@sh.itjust.works 5 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

I actually had a super chill vegan patient the other day who was aging remarkably gracefully into trailer-trash (my own cultural roots), complete with 40 pack-year smoker's voice and skin that belongs in a cancer PSA. They told me they aren't completely married to the idea but that they do their best and would like to be able to read the labels on what they get if possible. They pointed out that their breakfast tray arrived with biscuits and sugar and commented that the biscuits were almost certainly made with eggs and butter, and that the sugar was probably bleached using animal products (not sure about that one). I definitely didn't have anything decent to say about the biscuit thing. For them it was definitely more about the animal welfare thing than the chemical thing. They were pretty frank about not being too fussy about the chemicals that went into their body.

[–] LordWiggle@lemmy.world 0 points 11 hours ago

To me it's 3 things why I'm vegan (although I do eat cheese sometimes, there's no proper substitute and I'm a Dutch cheese head).

  1. Animal cruelty
  2. Health
  3. Enviroment

So I prefer to substitute meat with beans for example, instead of heavily processed fake meat. Although sometimes a proper vegan burger, like the BeyondBurger, is nice (unhealthy) comfort food. Also on holiday to Cambodia I did eat some meat as I wanted to experience the original Cambodian cuisine. That was the first time in 12 years I ate meat and it got me food poisoning which resulted in a heavy stomach infection. Worth it though, the Cambodians know how to cook!

[–] frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don't think I've met #1 in real life, besides knowing more than a few of #2. The first one just gets really loud on the Internet.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] volvoxvsmarla@sopuli.xyz 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm a meat eater. I like meat. I consider myself someone who eats meat regularly. That means I eat, like, one slice of ham and 5 köttbular in a month. And I might treat myself to a salad with chicken breast in a restaurant when I manage to quiet down the voice in my head complaining about the chicken most likely not being farmed very well. Whenever I read a sentiment like "try to not eat meat 1 or 2 days in a week" I am reminded that there are really people out there who just, like, buy meat every single time they are in the grocery store and cook it daily. That seems so nuts to me.

[–] adminofoz@lemmy.cafe 4 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

Depending on the location, I'm pretty sure the norm is meat every day. In the Midwest, it's not just meat every day. It's meat every meal.

[–] pseudo@jlai.lu 1 points 9 hours ago

That's crazy but I also notice that amongst people eating crazy amount of meat there is a lot of people that only eat a few types of meat (pork, beef, chicken, turkey and always the same cut).
I eat meat once every 10 days plus on party days. But I eat so much more diversity than these canivorous eaters. What about lamb, veal, mutton, duck, rabbit? What about tongues, giblets and so on? They say they love meat taste but it is like it is only when the taste is mild enough.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Rachelhazideas@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The whole 'duh, everything is made of chemicals' argument is a corporate attempt at downplaying the prevalence of unnecessary and even harmful additives in US foods that have long been banned in the EU.

Next time you see a meme about a woman asking 'is this ham processed?' with a response ridiculing her about it, look up Ractopmine.

[–] Nalivai@lemmy.world 3 points 16 hours ago

This terminology people use without knowing anything about anything is actually corporate thing. It might originated from uneducated scared hippies, but it became popular and prevalent after corpos discovered that this kind of language allows them to greenwash the shit out of their products for free. "Other ham is made of chemicals, but ours is organic!" is technically correct phrase that is insidiously lying right to your chemistry-101-failed-face.
All this bullshit just stops the conversation about corporate accountability, or about actual implications of a specific diet, this conversations are impossible to have when your starting point is "chemicals bad".

Next time you ask "if this ham processed", remember that the only correct answer to this is yes, otherwise the ham os oinking and tries to run away when you're trying to bite it.

load more comments
view more: next ›