
New Cottonseed Is Safe for People to Eat - crunchiebones
https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2018/10/17/658221327/not-just-for-cows-anymore-new-cottonseed-is-safe-for-people-to-eat
======
forgingahead
As always, the lede is buried near the end of the article:

 _Before the seeds can be sold as food or feed, they 'll need approval from
the Food and Drug Administration_

I'm honestly tired of nonsense headlines like this -- officially the FDA has
not approved Cottonseed for human consumption, the only thing that has
happened is that the US Dept of Agriculture has _deregulated_ the growing of
it.[0]

Now, aside from the fact that most people here on HN would be shouting about
the nasty effects that deregulation can have, we have an irresponsible
headline from NPR of all places about how it is "safe". This is patently false
-- nobody has declared this safe except for the typist who wrote this article.

[0]:
[https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/biotechnology/brs-...](https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/biotechnology/brs-
news-and-information/2018_brs_news/texas_am_low_gossypol_cotton)

~~~
marcoperaza
I think you have the concepts upside down here. Safe food is safe even without
FDA approval, it is even safe if the FDA explicitly _rejects_ it (e.g. for
political reasons or by mistake). Safety is not something granted by a
bureaucracy but by the laws of nature.

This article merely explains that a new strain of cotton has been developed
that does not have the qualities that typically make cottonseed poisonous.

FDA approval is still needed, but that doesn’t make the article a lie.

~~~
bad_user
Unsafe is the default. Until a third party confirms its safety, then it’s not
safe because safety needs evidence.

If you like to think in probabilities, the likelihood that this is unsafe is
far greater, if you judge based on other modern, engineered foods.

Heck, judging by the damage of vegetable oils which are still considered to be
“heart healthy”, I wouldn’t be surprised if this were approved only to
discover it was a poison, a decade or two from now, which is about the time it
takes to see the effects at large. Plus another two decades for health
professionals to finally acknowledge it.

The burden of proof is on the inventor, not on the FDA or other organizations.

Given the complete clusterfuck that is nutrition, the though that this new
cottonseed could be fed to the livestock we eat is terrifying.

~~~
your-nanny
could you discuss further why you believe vegetable oils to be ubhealthy?
foods?

~~~
calvano915
Humans require n-3 and n-6 fats in our diet. These tended to be consumed in
equal ratios until the advent of vegetable oils which increased the n-6 intake
dramatically. As the other post mentions, research has found that this intake
pattern leads to high levels of inflammation, which contribute to
cardiovascular disease and other ailments.

~~~
your-nanny
I'm sorry but could you point me to actual research articles. most neta
analyses I've found indicate a cardioprotective effect of n-6 polyusaturated
oils relative to alternatives. eg

[https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/jo...](https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1000252)

------
rmason
The fertilizer plant where I used to work also sold feed. Used to import semi-
loads of cottonseed for use as dairy feed, the cows just loved the stuff.

I think the fact that cottonseed can now be fed to other types of livestock is
far more important than it being used by humans. But unless there is something
that you can specifically see or a very simple test the chance of getting the
wrong kind is high.

Here in Michigan flame retardant got accidentally mixed in animal feed causing
the PBB crisis. As a result most citizens of the state have measurable levels
in their blood. There was even a TV movie with Art Carney and Ron Howard. I
was friends with the farmer who wrote the book upon which the movie was based.

[http://www.michiganradio.org/post/michigans-
toxic-1973-pbb-f...](http://www.michiganradio.org/post/michigans-
toxic-1973-pbb-food-contamination-associated-more-health-effects)

~~~
yellowapple
The article stated that the genetically-engineered-to-be-safe-to-eat versions
are missing some sort of dark glands apparently associated with being toxic.
Kinda wish the article had more side-by-side photos to demonstrate this,
because that sounds like a good way to identify poisonous v. non-poisonous.

------
credo
It is interesting to contrast the U.S system of genetically modified food
(e.g. the "new" genetically modified cottonseed) with how traditional systems
dealt with food (such as cottonseed).

Cottonseed is considered as a nutritious source of food in Madurai, India (and
perhaps in other parts of the world). They don't genetically modify cotton,
but they process cottonseed to create cottonseed "milk", a healthy, nutritious
drink

ddg couldn't find many online references to cottonseed milk (Paruthi Paal in
Tamil). However, here are a couple of links

1\.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlD9gxef5mo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlD9gxef5mo)
Starting from around minute 18:00 onwards, this video shows a vendor talking
about how he makes cottonseed milk. Unfortunately, the video doesn't have
English subtitles, but it might be interesting anyway :)

2\. [http://www.themomandthecity.com/paruthi-
paal/](http://www.themomandthecity.com/paruthi-paal/)

------
m0llusk
Seeds can't defend themselves so they all include some poisons, some well
known and others more subtle. Just to point out one example, Lectins are in
almost all seeds and are associated with gut tearing and autoimmune diseases.
Even with FDA approval eating cottonseed may not be a good idea or truly safe.

~~~
patall
While you may be right that secondary metabolites can be a problem (the
mentioned gossypol being a perfect example), lectins (as any other protein)
are not risk when you heat your food. I would rather worry that removing the
insect toxins from a plant is intended to increase the sale of insecticides.

~~~
gorilla_fight
Consider if lectins were not a risk when heating food, then castor beans would
be completely safe to eat after cooking: the toxic component of castor is
ricin, a lectin.

The most cooking can do is reduce or mitigate the harmful effects to some
extent. Fermentation is another technique but neither reduces the risk to
zero.

"(as any other protein)" is not true either, consider for example peanut
allergies, and related allergies such as tree nuts and soy. Cupins, prolamins,
profilins are known protein families which can cause allergic reactions. Hence
the warning you may see on food labels:

Allergy information: This product was processed in a facility that processes
peanuts, tree nuts, soy, wheat, and dairy products.

even if they are cooked.

------
debatem1
Huh. We used to eat cottonseed and I don't seem to have died. The father of a
friend of mine even made a candy with it, something like peanut brittle.

~~~
NelsonMinar
20-30 years ago my family used to give each other "cotton bolls" from Mary of
Puddin Hill as gifts. They were said to be cotton seed in white chocolate, and
I have no reason to doubt it was genuinely cotton seed. They weren't very
good, the seed added nothing delicious. More of a clever food pun.

------
dvh
Rapeseed also used to be toxic (high levels of erucic acid, which is damaging
to cardiac muscle of animals)

~~~
GlenTheMachine
Yeah, and they developed the nontoxic version a long time before genetic
editing became a thing. IIRC they irradiated seeds until they got one with
just the right mutations. Then they decided “rapeseed” wasn't the best name
for a food product, and renamed it “canola”.

~~~
zeckalpha
Isn’t that still genetic editing, just an inefficient form?

~~~
sharpneli
Yes. However in law there is really specific definition for GMO and that falls
out of it.

Therefore for marketing and legal reasons one may want to still use really
inefficient form of genetic modification just to avoid those additional
loopholes users of the more efficient method must jump trough.

------
ncmncm
The most attractive thing about cotton as a food crop is that the FDA has
approved use of pesticides on it that are not allowed on crops meant for
people. They need these because cotton pests are among the worst.

That cottonseed oil is permitted in food is among the most egregious loopholes
in US food regulation. When you see cottonseed oil in the ingredients you know
that the manufacturer has cut cost and quality of every other ingredient to
the absolute limit.

Cows' tolerance for cottonseed toxin is exaggerated -- recommendations are
that cottonseed meal be no more than 10% of their diet. The attraction for
ranchers has been that cottonseed meal is practically free, because it is
toxic waste.

Growing cotton is terrible for the soil, and cotton needs huge amounts of
water. Anything that increases acres under cotton cultivation is an evil.

------
lovemenot
>> They also roasted a few and ate them. Rathore says they taste like
chickpeas.

The vegetarian equivalent of _tastes like chicken_

------
fiedzia
officer Milo Minderbinder likes this :-)

~~~
woodruffw
Better than chocolate-covered cotton, anyways.

------
dsfyu404ed
If you write an article about how Javascript, UBI and A/B tests will save the
world then it's true by default and it's on the skeptics to disprove it.

If you want to feed an engineered plant seed, which is already being consumed
by some livestock and humans to more livestock than you did previously then
you need to win a Nobel Prize and get Knighted by the Queen of England before
the HN crowd will even consider that there's a remote chance your new
engineered seed is safe.

I'm not sure what this says about HN or human nature in general but it's at
least an amusing contradiction.

~~~
deialtrous
I think it says that people are more concerned about being poisoned than they
are about a website being slightly more or less crappy than it would otherwise
be.

------
village-idiot
I’m dubious. I don’t think we’ve fully grasped the long term health
consequences of introducing new seed oils into the human diet yet, opting to
go further and actually eat cottonseed too seems like a bad call.

~~~
gorilla_fight
> I don’t think we’ve fully grasped the long term health consequences of
> introducing new seed oils into the human diet

We are beginning to understand the effects of seed oils (marketing term:
vegetable oils) and it is not looking good. Excerpt from _Don't Eat The Oil!
The Health Consequences of Consuming "Vegetable" Oils_ by Thomas L. Copmann:

\---

This book is a compilation of two and a half years of research based entirely
on peer-reviewed publications. While I wasn't planning on publishing a book,
the further I looked into the interrelationship of a number of major diseases,
there slowly appeared to be a common denominator - the levels of
polyunsaturated oils in our fatty tissues from consuming vegetable oils.
Finally, the weight of evidence compelled me to write this book.

Polyunsaturated oils are a fairly new addition to the modern diet. Prior to
their introduction at the turn of the century, cooking fats were mostly beef
tallow and butter. Corn oil was introduced in 1911, followed by cottonseed,
soybean, and rapeseed (Canola) oil labeled as "vegetable" oils. The fact is
however, these oils have nothing in common with vegetables, but are the
product of solvent extraction of oils from seeds.

The problem with these oils is their molecular structure. They are rich in
polyunsaturated fats which means they have multiple double bonds between
carbon atoms. Oxygen reacts with the double bonds in a process called _lipid
peroxidation_. The end result is the formation of highly reactive free
radicals which interact with cellular membranes, nuclear DNA, and deplete
cells of their antioxidant defenses.

As you read the following chapters, the important thing to remember is
exposing polyunsaturated fats to oxygen leads to free radical formation, while
saturated fat cannot undergo this reaction because of their lack of double
bonds. During the process of oil extraction, the oil is subject to high
temperatures which accelerate the peroxidation reaction.

Polyunsaturated fats break down as their double bonds are exposed to oxygen.
And heating accelerated this process. Therefore, lipid peroxidation is the
degradation process involving the double bond(s) found in polyunsaturated
fatty acids, causing a deterioration of food quality (odor, flavor, color,
texture, toxicity). This is collectively known as turning "rancid". According
to one analysis, a total of 130 volatile compounds were isolated from a piece
of fried chicken alone!

... In summary, polyunsaturated fats are highly unstable and are readily
oxidized to form toxic compounds that are implicated in most of our modern
diseases (cardiovascular disease, cancer, obesity, immunological disorders,
neurological disease processes, dysbiosis, lipofuscin, and premature aging).
We will explore each of these in detail looking at mechanistic as well as
epidemiological evidence.

\---

Long story short, it took nearly a century to assess the consequences of the
oil of cottonseed, declaring "New Cottonseed Is Safe for People to Eat" is
irresponsibly premature. Only time will tell.

I keep coming back to Nassim Nicholas Taleb's book _Antifragile_, where he
explains how he doesn't eat any fruit that doesn't have an ancient
Greek/Hebrew name, and doesn't drink any liquid that hasn't existed for a
thousand years. Will this new "safe" cottonseed survive the test of time, or
be looked upon hundreds of years from now as another catastrophic dietary
mistake?

~~~
batbomb
So he doesn’t eat corn, tomatoes, peppers, quinoa, etc... from the new world?

Even brussels sprouts doesn’t pass that test.

~~~
village-idiot
Favoring stuff with Greek/Latin names is just a bunch of Euro-centrism, which
isn't really a good look. The Romans also ignored the risks of lead, which is
just ironic in this context.

In general I think it's best, when possible, to stick with foods that have
been around for a long long time. I think a lot of the new stuff we've
introduced this century has some pretty nasty medium to long term
consequences, even if it won't give you acute poisoning right off the bat. If
a food/dish has been around for a few centuries or millenia then chances are
we've already worked those kinks out.

~~~
hollerith
>Favoring stuff with Greek/Latin names is just a bunch of Euro-centrism

I think Taleb's heuristic here is for him to eat only fruits _his ancestors_
have been eating for at least 1000 years. IIUC, his advice to a person of
Chinese ancestry would be to eat only fruits with a Chinese name.

(Also, you changed the "Greek/Hebrew" in the earlier comment to
"Greek/Latin".)

------
yostrovs
Cotton seed oil is used in central Asia for making pilaf and other dishes. Are
they being unsafe or is that oil something else?

~~~
stevenwoo
The article mentions that processing seeds to make cotton seed oil removes the
poisonous element. Also that cows' digestive system can handle the element -
that's why the seeds were relegated to cattle feed and cotton seed oil
previously.

~~~
yostrovs
So I don't understand.. is cotton seed naturally edible, just needs
processing? Lots of things need processing but we don't call them inedible.
Some edible mushrooms have to be boiled to cook out a toxin. Fish needs to be
deboned, some fish can kill you if not prepared properly...

~~~
skinner_
The seeds contain oil, protein, and a poison. Before the genetic modification,
you took the oil, and threw away the valuable protein together with the
poison. (Or gave them to cows.) After the modification, you just eat the whole
seed.

------
cimmanom
Given the negative environmental impacts of growing cotton, why would we want
to grow it just to eat the seeds when there are so many viable alternatives?

------
anon4738383
Brand new GMO. I'll pass.

