Looks pretty healthy to me! The wife says otherwise. Tell me why I’m wrong. It’s just such a great deal at Costco.
She’s actually right…53.8%
…looking at the stats, not too shabby!15.4%
The deal at Costco is pretty good.0.0%
Happy wife, happy life.30.8%
13 votes \ poll ended
this territory is moderated
health doesn't really factor in when you're adding it to your mac & cheese
You're right there. The wheat is likely gmo and covered in glysophate with no nutritional value and the cheese is only slightly better, you might get some calcium out of it. Bon appetit
It depends on what you define as healthy. If you think anything sold in a supermarket with decent macros is healthy, this is healthy. On the other hand if you think eating historically large amounts of things like calcium phosphate, sodium phosphate, and natamycin might not be good, then this isn't healthy.
The phosphates are what make processed cheese melty fyi. I went down a rabbit hole figuring out how to make processed cheese awhile ago.
Anything with the word "modified" in it should be avoided at all costs for a kick off. These things as I'm sure you know deep down are processed crap. There's two types of colourings 😂, why two? It has cheese in it so, why not make do with that natural cheddar cheese colour?
OK, so I follow this (and your conclusion is probably very correct in this case), but have to push back a little on the reasoning. This argument has always bugged me on a certain level because so much of what we consider "natural" was just genetically modified by the ancients. I can't find my book that specifically credits the Olmecs with breeding what we call "natural" corn today, but this is still an interesting passage.
Anyway, I feel like there's always this weird line drawn when something is chemically altered by a guy in a lab with a notebook trying to use a method to do his best from a guy chemically altering something with the heat from a stove or campfire. One's a science and the other an art, but I don't see why the scientific approach would be necessarily be more unhealthy than the artistic one. I get there might be an incentive issue that is often at play, but just saying something being modified from it's natural state doesn't seem to me to imply a necessary detriment to health.
I also think of Paw Paws that I find when out hiking. I'm technically modifying them (albeit not genetically) when I peel off the skin, but the skin is poisonous and the flesh is nutritious.
Maybe not “bad for you” but it shares a lot of physical traits with its plastic wrapper