What's the deal with E330 lemon acid?

Edward Turner27 said:As far as I know, saccharin is carcinogenic on its own.

I'm not trying to prove that lemon lime soda is inherently carcinogenic. My point is simply highlighting the possibility that trace amounts of additives used during industrial production could potentially be carcinogenic...

It's not about the soda itself, but rather the additives and impurities that might arise during the manufacturing process.

Citric acid is also found in all sorts of poisonous wild berries! Oops! I guess they must be toxic because of the citric acid!!! 😁 🙂

Edward Turner27 said:As far as I know, saccharin is carcinogenic on its own.

Man... You don't know jack shit! 😁The thing is, saccharin isn't considered carcinogenic by itself. The old suspicion was actually about impurities that might show up during the manufacturing process...

I'm not trying to PROVE that Limeade is carcinogenic, I just want to point out the possibility that tiny amounts of impurities could exist in mass-produced Limeade that might be harmful...
It’s not the juice itself, but the additives or contaminants that might crop up during production...

But what are you actually basing this on? Is there any real reason to suspect that? No? Then you could claim any industrial product is carcinogenic because, technically, they all might have traces of something... Even ascorbic acid—Vitamin C. Or Aspirin. Or Advil. Or... Look, you're tripping. Just stop with the nonsense before you dig yourself even deeper into this hole...😉

Oh, please...

Fine then.😳 😁

Edward Turner27 said:I just can't wrap my head around how citric acid—which is found in almost all fruit—could possibly be one of the most dangerous additives??? And apparently, it causes cancer....

How is that even possible?????

Honestly, those claims are just nonsense... I spent some time searching for data on this online a few years back (you’ve probably seen those lists of harmful substances floating around). While citric acid is indeed E330, the reality is that it DOES NOT CAUSE CANCER!
Allow me to offer a few biological facts:
Our bodies undergo a process known as cellular respiration. It is quite a complex mechanism, and during the complete oxidation of glucose (specifically via pyruvic acid, which results from glycolysis—the breakdown of glucose within cells), we engage in the Krebs cycle. During this cycle, a series of organic acids are produced, one of which is citric acid; consequently, this whole process is often referred to as the citric acid cycle. Therefore, if citric acid were truly CARCINOGENIC, then every single one of us (and all animals, for that matter) should have been dead a long time ago because of it. Furthermore, why would the vast majority of fruit contain such a "carcinogenic" compound? I suppose nature's goal is for an animal to eat the sweet part of the fruit while leaving the seeds behind for reproduction. If that holds true, why would plants store a "carcinogenic" substance just to kill off the very animals they need? Those animals facilitate reproduction and, well, provide fertilizer through their waste... it wouldn't make much sense for such a "defense" involving citric acid to evolve, as it would ultimately harm both the animals and the plants themselves!

If you find this hard to believe... here is a link regarding the subject: http://www.ukfoodguide.net/e330.htm
Take a look at the penultimate paragraph on that site! Citric acid DOES NOT CAUSE CANCER; it is one massive misunderstanding (it seems people mistakenly associated the German scientist named "Krebs" with cancer, leading them to misinterpret the "Krebs cycle" as some sort of cancer cycle)

The headlines in these news outlets and online articles are incredibly thin on actual substance. It feels like they’re just trying to sneakily promote some book, probably without even realizing they're doing it because they couldn't be bothered to dig up any real facts...

From what I've managed to dig up in a few places, there are all these different types of citric acid, like E330, 331, 332, and 333, but nowhere did it say they were actually harmful.

But here is the real kicker... recent studies have suggested that various emulsifiers can be dangerous. Now, I'm no expert—I don't deal in medicine or chemistry or whatever it is they call it—so I haven't a clue if citric acids fall into that "emulsifier" category. That’s the part I'm actually wondering about.

Then you look at things like E338 in soda or E334 in mayonnaise...
I suspect that's what they were implying was hazardous...
even though both of them are just acidity regulators.
And honestly, it's just sickening to look at those labels and see that massive list of E-numbers staring back at you!

Look, I have absolutely no idea how any of this connects... it would be great if someone could actually break this down for us laypeople...

Here’s right here the full list of additives and what they actually do

Where can one actually find a TRULY OBJECTIVE guide detailing which additives are harmful and which aren't?

In my view, the most reliable approach is to consult the lists of substances that have already been banned in other countries.

It says right here:

E330 lemon
with higher doses, allergic skin reactions are possible

Hmm.

If this acid is already produced naturally by our own bodies, how on earth can we have an allergy to a fundamental product of the Krebs cycle?

The EU banned Sodium nitrite back in 1996, yet you'll still find it lurking in our local salamis at concentrations reaching as much as 1%.

It’s all about the aesthetics; that additive gives the meat a more vibrant color and helps it retain moisture during the cooking process.

😲 😲 😲

In both the EU and the USA, almost EVERYTHING is banned👍

Unlike those of us left behind in the dust, who couldn't care less... as long as the bologna looks a pretty enough shade of pink😠 😠

Edward Turner27 said:It says right here:

E330
possible allergic skin reactions when consuming large doses.

Hmm...

If this stuff is actually produced naturally within our own bodies, how can you be allergic to a product that's just part of the Krebs cycle?

For instance,
a friend's husband started dealing with really flaky skin. He ended up seeing his doctor about it, and during the visit, they realized he’d become obsessed with drinking Tang over the last three months! He was knocking back at least 3 liters of it every single day, mixing it at one tablespoon per small glass of water. His doctor's take was that the massive amounts of artificial E330 lemon acid were causing the skin irritation. It sounds like she hit the nail on the head, too, because his skin cleared right up once he cut back to just one or two glasses a day.

Also, sausages in the EU always seem to have such a much prettier color than what we find locally here in the States.

Tang is packed with more than just citric acid...

It strikes me as bizarre, though. How can citric acid affect the body when the system just ends up producing its own anyway?

And what about those people who go overboard eating actual lemons???

jadesailor14 said:For instance,
A friend of mine told me her husband started dealing with some serious skin flaking. He ended up seeing a doctor, and during the consultation, they realized he’d developed a massive obsession with Tang over the last three months. He was drinking at least 3 liters of it every single day, mixing it at a ratio of one tablespoon to about half a cup of water. The doctor’s take was that the excessive amounts of artificial citric acid were causing his skin issues. It looked like she hit the nail on the head, because the flaking stopped completely once he cut back to just one or two glasses a day.

Also, sausages in the EU always seem to have a much better color than the ones we get here at home.

Has anyone actually bothered to read the label on the Tang bottle regarding the recommended daily intake? 😵 And citric acid isn't even the only culprit here!!! Quite the opposite!

😂

Of course... there's a whole laundry list of ingredients in Tang.

Sarah Gomez52 said:Has anyone actually taken a look at the warning label on the Tang bottle regarding daily intake? 😵 It’s not just about the citric acid, either... it's actually the opposite!

Honestly, citric acid isn't even the main issue here. 😉 The real deal is that you can easily overdose on certain vitamins, especially the fat-soluble ones...

Tang is pretty low-quality stuff filled with synthetic vitamins, plus dyes and other additives that could trigger allergic reactions.

dustycanyon6 said:The whole point is that you can actually overdose on certain vitamins—especially the ones that aren't water-soluble.

So, which fat-soluble vitamins are even in Tang? And how exactly are we supposed to ingest them... like, am I supposed to eat the powder with a spoon or just dissolve it in some olive oil? 😉

Anyway, citric acid is totally harmless, for crying out loud... people really need to chill.

Tang is absolute garbage. It’s packed with synthetic vitamins, artificial dyes, and a cocktail of other additives that are just asking for an allergic reaction.

Frankly, whether the vitamins are synthetic or natural is a distinction without a difference; the chemical makeup remains essentially identical anyway.
😉

dustycanyon6 said:It doesn't even matter if the vitamins are synthetic or natural... the chemical makeup is basically identical anyway.
😉

Are you sure about that? Like, really sure? Because for certain stuff, the composition isn't actually the same. There are all these different forms of a single vitamin—sometimes the version we get from actual food is super beneficial, while the synthetic version can actually be toxic. Plus, when you're talking about "natural" vitamins, they come packaged with a whole host of other nutrients in food that help your body soak them up better. With supplements, you're often just getting these "naked" vitamins sitting there by themselves. vitamin a vitamin D vitamin a vitamin D

violent_femmes9 said:Which fat-soluble vitamins are in Gatorade? And how am I supposed to take them... like, by eating the powder with a spoon or dissolving it in some oil? 😉

Jesus and Christ! 😁 http://www.brianmac.demon.co.uk/vitamins.htm

Anyway, citric acid isn't harmful, for heaven's sake people

We settled that one ages ago. The argument died out a long time ago too, so I have no idea why this is still dragging on in this thread...

Max said:Citric acid isn't even the issue here... 😉 It’s more about how you can actually overdose on certain vitamins, especially the ones that aren't water-soluble.

Starbucks is total garbage filled with synthetic vitamins, plus dyes and all sorts of other junk that could trigger an allergic reaction.

The only thing that's garbage here is what's going on inside your head, Max, just a massive pile of accumulated ignorance... Seriously, please go out and actually educate yourself, read a book or something, maybe even start with that one website you mentioned. There is absolutely zero difference between a natural vitamin and a synthetic one because if there were, they wouldn't be defined by the exact same chemical formula. There's no difference between natural and synthetic CO2, and there's no difference when it comes to any specific substance obtained through isolation or synthesis.
How on earth are you supposed to overdose on Vitamin A, D, E, or K—the fat-soluble ones you're rambling about—just by drinking a Starbucks drink? How? Ooooh, tell me how?... You can't, that's how. Except for Max, I guess, because for him, anything is possible.
😁 😉