Chick-Fil-a-sandwiches contain anti-space chemicals that are used in joints, adhesives and polishes
Chick-Fil-a-sandwiches contain anti-space chemicals that are used in joints, adhesives and polishes
The chick-fil-a chicken sandwiches were recently examined due to the existence of anti-hole chemicals that can have negative health consequences. The ingredients used in these sandwiches are listed on the company's website, and a closer look reveals concerns about their effects on health.
One of the potentially harmful ingredients is dimethylpolysiloxan, an anti -hood remedy used in the oil that is used to roast the chicken. While the FDA considers it safe, studies have associated it with negative effects on the immune system and the hormone balance (1).
"Dimethylpolysiloxan is often used in the silicone seals, adhesives and aquarium seals that smell of vinegar, a component in silicone fat and other lubricants based on silicone fats, as well as in deferior, shaping agents, damping fluids, heat transmission liquids, polishes and cosmetics, hair rinsing and
in our food
”
Another worrying ingredient is mononatrium glutamate (MSG), which is added to improve the taste of the chicken. MSG was associated with a headache, nausea, nausea and allergic reactions, and some studies indicate that it can contribute to obesity and other health problems (2, 3).
potassium sorbate is another ingredient found in chick-fil-Fil-a chicken sandwiches and was associated with allergic reactions and toxic effects on some organs in animal experiments (4). Similarly, sodium aluminum phosphate was associated with kidney damage and bone loss (5) and DATEM was associated with breathing problems (6).
In addition to these potentially harmful ingredients, the chicken sandwiches from Chick-Fil-A also contain several instances of sugar, soybean oil and palm oil as well as citric acid and ascorbic acid (2 chemical preservatives recognized by the FDA), palm kernel oil, commercial natural aroma, soy alecithin, monoglycerides and complete Peanut oil. While some of these ingredients can be harmless in small quantities, an excessive consumption of these ingredients can lead to health problems such as obesity, heart disease and diabetes by fast food products.
In addition, the chicken Deluxe Sandwich at Chick-Fil-A American cheese, which contains sorbic acid, contains an additional ingredient that was associated with allergic reactions and toxic effects on some organs (7).
It is important to note that the Chick-Fil-A website wrongly claims that your chicken sandwich is served "on a butter roll". In reality, the roll contains soybean oil and palm kernel oil with butter taste, without real dairy products. This incorrect statement of ingredients is worrying because it misleads customers through the nutritional value of their products.
There are healthier alternatives to the chicken sandwiches from Chick-Fil-A, which can be easily prepared at home. Grilled chicken sandwiches made of wholemeal buns, fresh vegetables and lean protein are a nutritious and filling option. In addition, the air roast of chicken instead of deep -frying can help reduce the absorption of harmful chemicals.
In summary, it can be said that the chicken sandwiches from Chick-Fil-A contain several ingredients that can have negative health consequences. These ingredients include anti -hood, MSG, preservatives and excessive amounts of sugar and oils. As a consumer, it is important to pay attention to what we eat and to make well -founded decisions about our food selection in order to maintain good health.
sources:
- Yang, J., Wong, H. O., Zhang, Y., Wu, Q., & Kannan, K. (2017). Polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) and Its Degradation Products in Food Contact Materials: A Review. Environmental Science & Technology, 51 (7), 3832-3841.
- Obayashi, Y., & Nagamura, Y. (2019). Neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity of monosodium glutamate. Toxicology Reports, 6, 596-601.
- Hermanussen, M., & García, A. P. (2015). Obesity, Voracity, and short sture: The Impact of Glutamate on the Regulation of Appetites. European Journal of Pediatrics, 174 (6), 719-725
Kommentare (0)