Let me start off this thread by saying I am not a shill being paid by Orgain or any other company. I am legitimately interested in this topic.
With that said, has anyone tried Orgain's Creamy Chocolate Fudge nutrition shake? It tasted like fucking cocoa pebbles milk. I remember a few years ago Naked Juice was sued for 9,000,000 for not being "natural" and lying about its ingredients. I only bring that up because I find it so highly unlikely that Orgain is actually good for you considering how good it tastes.
Furthermore, why aren't any of the competing nutrition shake brands anywhere near as tasty?
>>7679174
Organic and natural does not mean healthy.
It tastes like that because its pumped full of sugar.
>>7679185
11g of sugar in 11 ounces. is that a lot?
12 oz of soda has like 42 so that's like a quarter of a sodas worth of sugar and considering these nutritional drinks are meant to at least partially supplement food, that sounds fine.
The problem is it is probably loaded with some kind of fake food like stevia and sweet things can cause you to eat more sweet things so basically it's all and well unless you start eating more because of it.
Commercial nutritional drinks are rarer than zircon
If you're looking for nutrition then you wouldn't buy commercial produced pasteurized, filtered, etc
Also organic has been shown to generally have equal or less nutrient content than non organic across the board
>>7679198
That put's it at 4g sugar/100ml putting it on par with whole milk, which is average to high in sugar. Not a lot but it's certainly not low.
le nestle milo faec
>>7680400
>Also organic has been shown to generally have equal or less nutrient content than non organic across the board
pretty sure it's just the opposite. organic has significantly more nutrients for the same amount of calories or biomass
>>7680422
>pretty sure it's just the opposite. organic has significantly more nutrients for the same amount of calories or biomass
So sure you've completely ignored the evidence showing the inverse and bought the marketing sticker on the side of the product?
Good critical thinking there Johnny
>>7680400
soy milk has only 10 calories less than whole milk per cup you fucking vegan shill
>>7680443
there are rarely "marketing stickers," as you call them on the side of my "products." i buy food from a farmer's market or grow it myself. there is no anti-organic "evidence" you keep bringing up.
but you're right. pesticides magically grant special high-nutrient powers to gmo corn!!!! keep shilling, bitch.
>>7680454
If you're going to shitpost at least pick something not immediately disprovable by evidence
>>7680480
The image in OPs pic says organic right on the front, what the fuck are you talking about farmers markets for
Ignore the studies all you like, doesn't make organic food any more magically nutrient dense by amazing genetic properties or magical special dirt or whatever other retarded ideas you have.
Keep shilling for autists anonymous bitch
>>7680480
There isn't a single reason to choose organic beyond that yeah it may taste better but that doesn't justify the price.
Real reason you and your snobby friends spend so much money on that shit is to get together and laugh at the poor
>>7680487
I demand to know where does this screencap comes from, how does other soy milk brands compare and why does this not correlate with what Google shows me
>>7680487
You also bid the star review in the soy milk I demand you disclose that
>>7680512
>the price
the fuck are you talking about? most of the organic stuff i buy is cheaper, equal price or, at most, very slightly more expensive than conventional. its a total toss-up in my experience
>>7680503
>the studies
riiiiiiight. stick to your script, shill. "the studies," "the evidence," keep it nice and vague. earn your 0.02 per post.
>>7680525
You dropped something, it's labelled truth
>>7680527
what is cherry picking????
great job. you proved the prices at ONE STORE in ONE CITY on ONE DAY.
you people are a piece of work
>>7680525
this is bait.jpg
Organic label is primarily a marketing platform used by supermarkets and producers to sell the same product in a field 200 metres to the left for twice the price, and hapless ignorant spastics who shitpost without thinking like yourself are their customer base
Pay more for perceived value all you like, but if you're going to pretend you're somehow magically getting more nutrients and better value then you can't act surprised when people call you out on your nonsense
Stop talking out of your shitter on imageboards and read a book once in a while
>>7680552
Very rarely will you ever see "organic" produce for equal or lesser price than regular produce.
Often times, it is significantly more expensive and it's not worth the extra cost unless you're one of those people that gets a false sense of superiority from needlessly paying more for the same thing.
But hey, if wasting money gives you a warm fuzzy, more power to you and keep it up.
>>7680565
>pay more for perceived value
so your script just tells you to ignore certain arguments when they don't fit the narrative, i get it.
like i said: I DON'T PAY MORE
let me repeat that:
I
DON'T
PAY
MORE
if a particular food is significantly more expensive as "organic," then i don't buy it. what part of that doesn't make sense?
>>7680595
You keep calling people shills while repeating the same false nonsense every post. If you're not baiting you really need to reconsider your life and social skills because they're going nowhere.
Adding more nonsense to facilitate your outrage whenever someone calls you out on your nonsense doesn't make it any less bullshit, you're like an angry edgy 12 year old and you need to chill out
>>7679174
Why not just go all the way and order a giant box of Soylent + Confectioner's Sugar/Cocoa Powder Hershey's Syrup?
>>7680606
you people are the ones "repeating the same nonsense every post," namely
>organic food has less nutrients than conventional
that is patently false.
impressive, though you used the word
>nonsense
3 times
and the words
>edgy
>12 year old
>chill out
>angry
that will really distract people from the fact that you are the one making ridiculous claims. nice work
>>7680627
because that would be WAY more sugar.
>>7680629
>>organic food has less nutrients than conventional
>that is patently false.
It's demonstrably true, try again.
>that will really distract people from the fact that you are the one making ridiculous claims. nice work
This is still bait.jpg
Less nonsense, more research, come back once you've read a book.
>>7680503
The point of eating organic aren't the nutrients dickweed, it's avoiding all the pesticides, fertilizers (when it comes to veg) and antibiotics, hormones etc (when it comes to dairy and meat) as well as other chemicals found in non-organic produce. The nutrient density argument against organic food is a strawman.
>>7680654
It's also much tastier (according to me and my non-scientific study of buying both organic and non-organic produce at the same supermarkets for the purposes of comparison).
>>7680654
No, his argument was that organic label food has more nutrients. Though the lower pesticides and processing argument was also debunked fairly early on in the bellcurve of organic labelling too.
>>7680634
You can always adjust the sugar content to taste or use something like agave or even blend in some dates/raisin instead which a great whole food sweetener.
>>7680400
>>7680422
>>7680443
So the thing about convention vs. organic (with respect to produce at least) is that they are basically the same micro-nutrient wise, but they do contain substantially more phytonutrients (anthocyanins, flavonols, polyphenol, etc.) which give them them their antioxidant effects. But while they are up to 40% more nutrient-dense in that way, they are also up to 40% more expensive so it's basically a wash dollar per ounce of nutrition.
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/are-organic-foods-more-nutritious/
The effects of such antioxidants on cancer protection though are dubious. So much so that a few years ago the USDA took down a chart they had ranking food total antioxidant capacity.
http://nutritionfacts.org/2015/04/07/food-antioxidants-and-cancer/
http://www.ars.usda.gov/Services/docs.htm?docid=15866
>>7680654
>>7680669
Organic produce does contain less pesticide residue resulting in less detectable pesticide content in urine samples of consumers within a week of converting to an organic over conventional diet. BUT no studies have been done to look at whether the dietary exposure to pesticide content we get from conventional foods is enough to promote disease. Farm workers and residences near farms where exposure is much MUCH higher did show a rise in birth defects and child developmental problems.
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/are-organic-foods-safer/
>>7680654
Then why is it labelled as more nutritional?
Maybe there is a market for shitty food that rots faster but it's a tiny one, that's why it's all pumped full of bullshit. Same shit when American marketers (highest form of American authority) decided they wanted to sell gluten free to everyone
>>7680644
it's actually demonstrably false. try again.
i'm now convinced you actually are a paid shill. whoever's paying you is wasting their money.
>inb4 HURR DUR TINFOIL CRAZIES NO CORPORATION WOULD EVER PAY PEOPLE TO INFLUENCE OPINIONS ONLINE
What's your opinion on ZICO drinks, /ck/?
