**Deciphering Chemical Alarmism: An In-Depth Examination of Azodicarbonamide and Food Babe’s Health Advocacy**
It’s widely acknowledged that contemporary food manufacturing often meshes scientific principles with industrial practices in ways that can provoke concern. It’s entirely reasonable for the public to be wary of what goes into their food, particularly when terms like “azodicarbonamide” or “polyamide-epichlorohydrin resins” emerge in conversations regarding our daily meals. Yet, in an era defined by viral reactions—frequently rooted in incomplete information—it becomes paramount to distinguish genuine issues from exaggerated claims. Few areas of the Internet illustrate this divide better than the realm of health and food bloggers, especially figures such as *The Food Babe*.
Let’s delve into one of her highlighted examples—azodicarbonamide in Subway sandwich bread—and examine how it symbolizes both legitimate concerns and the misinformation that muddles public understanding.
—
### The Yoga Mat Chemical Alarmism: Azodicarbonamide
Azodicarbonamide, or ADA, rapidly gained notoriety when it was outed as an ingredient in Subway’s bread. The uproar initiated after *The Food Babe* criticized the substance for its simultaneous use in baking and in the creation of foam-based products such as yoga mats, suggesting that this dual purpose inherently made it unsafe for eating. The debate even attracted the attention of *The Daily Show’s* Jon Stewart, whose comedic take solidified ADA’s status as one of the most disparaged food additives in popular culture.
However, the truth is more complex. ADA acts as a dough enhancer, improving bread’s elasticity and decreasing production time. While the analogy to yoga mats provokes a visceral reaction, it’s important to acknowledge that shared applications do not automatically render a substance harmful. By that logic, gypsum, a food-approved additive (found in items like tofu), would be outlawed simply because it’s also utilized in drywall. Likewise, common table salt is a component in producing chlorine gas—a dangerous substance—but no one is shunning pretzels.
At the FDA-regulated maximum of 45 parts per million (ppm) in bread, credible evidence indicating azodicarbonamide’s danger is minimal. In significantly higher quantities, studies show it could create carcinogenic byproducts such as semicarbazide during baking. But, similar to many substances, the potential for harm often depends on the dosage. Subway’s choice to eliminate ADA from its bread was more about public image than scientific necessity.
—
### The Food Babe: A Dubious Health Advocate
Food Babe writes about unnoticed and often esoteric ingredients in staple foods, a mission that is commendable in its purpose, but weakened by frequent leaps in logic and insufficient scientific rigor. Her commentary regarding azodicarbonamide isn’t the only case where genuine issues intersect with extreme reasoning.
Consider her critique of tea bags. Food Babe remarks that some tea bags contain synthetic materials like nylon or polylactic acid plastic, while others treated with polyamide-epichlorohydrin resins may release small amounts of 3-MCPD, a chemical deemed a probable carcinogen by the State of California. These concerns are valid—monitoring exposure to 3-MCPD is indeed warranted. Nevertheless, Food Babe’s portrayal lacks depth. She overlooks the chemistry, providing her followers with oversimplified snippets that suggest the mere presence of chemicals like epichlorohydrin automatically renders products dangerous.
Equally concerning is her dismissal of polylactic acid (PLA)-based tea bags because they originate from genetically modified corn, which she characterizes as “unnatural.” While PLA is biodegradable and arguably more eco-friendly than nylon, her sweeping rejection underscores a broader trend where anything vaguely linked to genetic modification—even if scientifically valid—is vilified.
—
### Sensationalism Obscures Sound Science
A notable aspect of Food Babe’s advocacy is her reliance on “appeal to nature” fallacies. If something isn’t “natural,” it’s instantly suspicious. While her followers might find solace in this simplicity, it’s a flawed framework for evaluating risk. The belief that “natural equals good” and “chemical equals bad” is unequivocally incorrect.
For example, Food Babe highlights potassium sorbate, a preservative, as dangerous due to its “unnatural” status. Yet potassium sorbate is simply an unsaturated fatty acid that the body processes as energy. It is also considered safe by major regulatory authorities globally. Conversely, some of the most powerful toxins known, such as aflatoxins from spoiled peanuts, are entirely natural.
This inclination to alarm individuals without considering context has repercussions. For instance, her opposition to flu vaccines—a preventative strategy supported by decades of thorough research—centers on the presence of trace amounts of formaldehyde and aluminum salts. Her stance disregards well-documented safety information, including that the human body produces far more formaldehyde.