At first glance, they look identical.

乍一看，它們一模一樣。

But if you take a look at their ingredients list, you'll notice some key differences.

但是，如果你看一下它們的成分表，就會發現其中的一些關鍵區別。

The American version contains several food dyes that don't appear in the Canadian version.

美國版中含有幾種食品染料，而加拿大版中沒有。

It also contains a substance called BHT, a preservative that faces stringent restrictions for food use by the European Union.

此外，它還含有一種名為 BHT 的物質，這種防腐劑在食品中的使用受到歐盟的嚴格限制。

I think it's indicative of how much more lax the rules are here in the U.S.

我認為這說明美國的規則要寬鬆得多。

So there are ingredients that may be used in U.S. products that aren't allowed in the EU or in Canada.

是以，美國產品中可能會使用一些歐盟或加拿大不允許使用的成分。

While not all additives are inherently bad, experts have long raised concerns about the lack of regulation over harmful additives in America's food supply.

雖然並非所有添加劑都是天生有害的，但專家們長期以來一直對美國食品供應中缺乏對有害添加劑的監管表示擔憂。

The Food and Drug Administration announced today that it is banning red dye number three.

美國食品和藥物管理局今天宣佈禁用三號紅色染料。

That's the synthetic additive that gives certain products their bright cherry red color.

這種合成添加劑使某些產品呈現鮮豔的櫻桃紅色。

Europe defaults at protecting the population.

歐洲在保護人口方面存在缺陷。

The U.S. defaults at actually letting ingredients in and kind of allowing the food industry to police itself.

美國在允許食品成分進入和允許食品行業自律方面存在缺陷。

We know from prior research that over spans of decades, thousands of ingredients are added to the food supply without the FDA knowing about it.

我們從之前的研究中瞭解到，在幾十年的時間裡，成千上萬種成分被添加到食品供應中，而食品及藥物管理局對此毫不知情。

It's impossible to quantify because we don't actually know which ingredients are added.

這無法量化，因為我們實際上不知道添加了哪些成分。

In 2019, 59.5 percent of foods bought by American households contained some form of additives, an almost 20 percent increase from 2001.

2019 年，美國家庭購買的食品中有 59.5% 含有某種形式的添加劑，比 2001 年增加了近 20%。

Chemicals and additives in the food supply are not as well regulated as they can and should be.

食品供應中的化學品和添加劑並沒有得到應有的監管。

And I think consumers have a right to expect that they are.

我認為，消費者有權期待他們這樣做。

So how are companies getting away with adding potentially dangerous additives to America's food supply?

那麼，在美國的食品供應中添加具有潛在危險的添加劑的公司是如何逃脫懲罰的呢？

And can anything be done to stop it?

有什麼辦法可以阻止它嗎？

Not all food additives are bad.

並非所有食品添加劑都是壞的。

Many of them are approved and widely consumed in other parts of the world.

其中許多食品在世界其他地區得到認可並被廣泛食用。

The U.S. is a little unique, though, in how our regulatory process works, which has led to a lack of oversight over a lot of these chemicals.

不過，美國在監管程序的運作方式上有些獨特，這導致我們對很多化學品缺乏監督。

The Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, is responsible for regulating food and health related products to ensure they're safe for public health.

美國食品和藥物管理局（FDA）負責監管食品和健康相關產品，以確保它們對公眾健康安全。

Today, it's estimated to oversee 80 percent of the U.S. food supply.

如今，據估計，美國 80% 的食品供應都由它監管。

So the way that it is supposed to happen, based on the law that Congress passed in 1958, is if you, a company, want to introduce a new food additive into the food supply, you would file a petition with the FDA and that petition would trigger an FDA investigation of that chemical.

是以，根據國會 1958 年通過的法律，如果一家公司想在食品供應中引入一種新的食品添加劑，就必須向食品及藥物管理局提出申請，該申請將引發食品及藥物管理局對該化學物質的調查。

FDA scientists would look comprehensively at the safety of that ingredient.

食品及藥物管理局的科學家將全面研究該成分的安全性。

There would be a public process where the application would be filed publicly and other scientists and experts and citizens would have the opportunity to weigh in.

這將是一個公開的過程，申請將被公開提交，其他科學家、專家和公民將有機會參與其中。

And only at the end of that process would you get approval or disapproval from the FDA determining whether or not that ingredient can be used in Congress.

只有在這一過程結束時，你才能獲得美國食品及藥物管理局的準許或不準許，以決定該成分是否可以在國會中使用。

And its wisdom at that time said, you know, we know there's all these like ingredients used in food like flour or olive oil or pepper or salt.

當時的智慧說，你知道，我們知道食物中會用到麵粉、橄欖油、胡椒粉或鹽等成分。

We don't need FDA to review all of these common substances.

我們不需要 FDA 來審查所有這些常見物質。

So they made this exemption to that requirement for additives for substances that are generally recognized as safe.

是以，他們對公認安全的物質的添加劑要求做出了豁免。

What we have seen over time is that companies are creating new ingredients, having their own scientists or hiring outside scientists to make their own determinations that an ingredient is safe.

我們看到，隨著時間的推移，公司正在創造新的成分，擁有自己的科學家或聘請外部科學家來自行確定成分是否安全。

And then once they self-declare that their ingredient is safe, they don't have to go through that pre-market process.

然後，一旦他們自我聲明其成分是安全的，他們就不必通過上市前的程序。

Between 2011 and 2021, only one new chemical went through the petition process for pre-market approval.

2011 年至 2021 年期間，只有一種新化學品通過了上市前審批申請程序。

Meanwhile, the vast majority of companies use the GRASS pathway to determine safety on their own. 756 new food additives have been introduced into the food supply through this loophole by the food and chemical industry between 2000 and 2021.

與此同時，絕大多數公司利用 GRASS 途徑自行確定安全性。從 2000 年到 2021 年，食品和化工行業通過這一漏洞向食品供應中引入了 756 種新的食品添加劑。

However, that number only includes additives that companies have voluntarily notified the FDA about.

不過，這個數字只包括公司自願向食品及藥物管理局通報的添加劑。

When a company submits a GRASS notice to the FDA, there are three things that can happen.

當一家公司向 FDA 提交 GRASS 通知時，可能會發生三種情況。

The FDA can look at it and say, we have no questions, and they will issue a no questions letter.

食品及藥物管理局看了之後可以說，我們沒有問題，他們會發出一封無問題信。

They can determine that your ingredient is not actually generally recognized as safe and make that statement.

他們可以判定你的成分實際上並不被公認為安全，並做出這樣的聲明。

Or FDA scientists can start asking questions.

或者，食品藥物管理局的科學家可以開始提問。

And what typically happens when the FDA starts asking questions is the company can ask the FDA to stop their evaluation.

當 FDA 開始提出問題時，公司通常會要求 FDA 停止評估。

They can withdraw their notice.

他們可以撤回通知。

I call this the take backsies provision.

我稱之為 "收回條款"。

And then there is nothing further that the FDA can do really to stop that company from moving forward in marketing.

然後，食品及藥物管理局就再也無法阻止該公司繼續進行營銷了。

Between 2015 and 2024, the FDA ceased to evaluate 113 notices at the notifier's request based on a calculation by CNBC.

根據 CNBC 的計算，在 2015 年至 2024 年期間，FDA 應通知人的要求停止評估了 113 份通知。

There are also countless companies out there that are just putting food on the market without that notification.

此外，還有無數的公司在沒有通知的情況下將食品投放市場。

And it's technically not illegal.

而且從技術上講，這並不違法。

Previous research has estimated that about 1,000 substances have been added to food without the FDA ever being notified.

據先前的研究估計，大約有 1000 種物質被添加到食品中，而食品及藥物管理局從未接到過通知。

Many of these ingredients may be safe, but we have functionally created an honor system and we shouldn't have an honor system determining what goes into the food that we eat every day, that we feed to our families and that we may be consuming over the course of our lifetime that could potentially contribute to our own chronic disease risk.

其中許多成分可能是安全的，但我們在功能上創造了一個榮譽系統，我們不應該由一個榮譽系統來決定我們每天吃的食物、我們餵給家人的食物以及我們一生中可能攝入的食物中含有哪些成分，這些成分可能會增加我們自身的慢性疾病風險。

However, supporters of the food additive industry argue that gross ingredients are tested with the same rigor as additives that go through the pre-market approval process.

不過，食品添加劑行業的支持者認為，對毛成分的檢測與通過上市前審批程序的添加劑一樣嚴格。

The food industry is highly regulated, and the only way that food and ingredients can come into market is to follow the laws that are in place.

食品行業受到嚴格監管，只有遵守現行法律，食品和配料才能進入市場。

Both processes require the exact same requirements.

這兩個過程的要求完全相同。

There's a plethora of scientific evidence needed to ensure that those ingredients are safe, reliable and effective.

要確保這些成分安全、可靠和有效，需要大量的科學證據。

As more additives enter the market, the global food additives industry has seen immense growth, with some research estimating that its market size could reach $106.8 billion by 2029.

隨著越來越多的添加劑進入市場，全球食品添加劑行業出現了巨大的增長，有研究估計，到 2029 年，其市場規模將達到 1,068 億美元。

Food additives are what make food possible.

食品添加劑使食品成為可能。

There are additional benefits such as extended shelf life, consistency, longevity of products.

此外，它還具有延長保質期、產品一致性和壽命長等優點。

Everything is very transparent.

一切都非常透明。

There's no cause for concern.

不必擔心。

And the last thing that we should be doing is trying to say that consumers should be scared about the foods that they're eating.

我們最不應該做的事情，就是試圖說消費者應該對他們吃的食品感到恐懼。

The FDA's regulatory shortcomings don't end there.

食品藥物管理局的監管缺陷還不止於此。

Unfortunately, there's a lot of ingredients in the food supply that FDA had evidence was unsafe and it remained in the food supply for decades.

不幸的是，食品供應中有很多成分是食品及藥物管理局有證據證明不安全的，而這些成分卻在食品供應中存在了幾十年。

So it's a quite haphazard post-market review process as well.

是以，這也是一個相當雜亂的上市後審查過程。

The FDA today banning a controversial red dye found in so many foods sold in the U.S.

美國食品和藥物管理局（FDA）今天禁止在美國銷售的許多食品中使用一種有爭議的紅色染料。

Red 3 has been around since the early 1900s.

紅 3 早在 20 世紀初就出現了。

It has been in the food supply for a very long time.

它在食品供應中存在已久。

But it took them 34 years to actually take any action after they acknowledged the carcinogenicity of red dye 3.

但在承認紅色染料 3 的致癌性之後，他們花了 34 年時間才真正採取任何行動。

There is a clause in the law that just says very clearly if there is a link to cancer, you cannot use it.

法律中有一項條款明確規定，如果與癌症有關聯，就不能使用。

And so just based on the availability of those studies, the FDA could have banned it right away.

是以，僅憑這些研究結果，食品及藥物管理局就可以立即將其禁用。

I think it just wasn't an agency priority.

我認為這不是機構的優先考慮事項。

And the vast majority of chemicals in America's food supply haven't been reviewed for safety in decades, according to the Environmental Working Group.

據環境工作組稱，幾十年來，美國食品供應中的絕大多數化學物質都沒有經過安全審查。

For example, EPA, which regulates pesticides or toxic substances, they have these regular queues where they're like, OK, everything needs to be reviewed again after 10 years or every year we're going to have a list of 40 things we're going to review.

例如，負責管理殺蟲劑或有毒物質的美國環保署（EPA），他們會定期排查，比如，好的，每樣東西都需要在 10 年後再次審查，或者每年我們都會有一份 40 種要審查的東西的清單。

There's not a process like that with FDA.

食品藥物管理局沒有這樣的程序。

In response to CNBC's request for comment, the FDA responded that it has issued a pause on mass communications and public appearances that are not directly related to emergencies or critical to preserving health.

在迴應 CNBC 的評論請求時，食品及藥物管理局迴應說，該局已發佈暫停與緊急事件無直接關係或對維護健康至關重要的大眾傳播和公開露面。

During the transition to a new team, as the science is evolving and as more studies come out about particular chemicals, it just makes sense for the government to periodically look back and make sure that those chemicals are still safe.

在向新團隊過渡的過程中，隨著科學的不斷髮展，以及對特定化學物質的研究越來越多，政府定期回顧並確保這些化學物質仍然安全是非常合理的。

FDA shortcomings have real impact on consumers' health.

食品及藥物管理局的缺陷對消費者的健康造成了切實影響。

In 2022, a food product from daily harvest caused sickness in hundreds of consumers.

2022 年，日常收穫的一種食品導致數百名消費者患病。

An internal investigation revealed the cause to be an ingredient known as taro flour.

內部調查顯示，原因是一種名為芋頭粉的配料。

They were told by the manufacturer that taro flour was grass, but no one had ever notified FDA.

生產商告訴他們，芋頭粉是一種草，但沒有人通知過 FDA。

But again, it wasn't illegal.

但同樣，這並不違法。

Ultimately, it took the FDA almost two years to announce that taro flour does not meet grass standards in May 2024.

最終，美國食品和藥物管理局花了近兩年時間，於 2024 年 5 月宣佈芋頭粉不符合草料標準。

I think there are a couple of problems.

我認為有幾個問題。

The most generous explanation to the FDA is that this part of the FDA is underfunded.

對食品及藥物管理局最寬鬆的解釋是，食品及藥物管理局的這一部分資金不足。

Within the Food and Drug Administration, food program accounts for just 17 percent of the total budget, half as much as the budget for human drugs program.

在食品藥品管理局內部，食品計劃僅佔總預算的 17%，是人類藥物計劃預算的一半。

It's one of the areas where they don't get something called user fees.

這是他們沒有收取所謂使用費的領域之一。

They get user fees from other areas that they regulate, not food.

他們從監管的其他領域獲得使用費，而不是食品。

User fees refer to payments from manufacturing companies that help fund the FDA's operations.

使用費是指生產企業為幫助食品及藥物管理局的運作而支付的費用。

Nearly 69.2 percent of the budget for drug programs comes from user fees, compared to just one percent for food programs.

藥品計劃近 69.2% 的預算來自用戶付費，而食品計劃的這一比例僅為 1%。

You also have typically over time seen more FDA leadership and commissioners come from a drug background and have a lot more leadership and experience with those products.

此外，隨著時間的推移，FDA 的領導層和委員中通常會有更多的人是藥品專業出身，在這些產品方面擁有更多的領導力和經驗。

As a result, sometimes the F in FDA is referred to as the silent F.

是以，有時 FDA 中的 F 被稱為無聲 F。

Experts say the priority is closing the grass loophole.

專家表示，當務之急是堵住草地漏洞。

Make grass more transparent and remove secrecy from that equation so that the FDA actually knows what's in our food supply.

讓草場更加透明，消除等式中的祕密，讓食品及藥物管理局真正知道我們的食品供應中含有什麼。

I think FDA should be notified of all of them so they can be the one making the decision, like, is this the right pathway?

我認為應該把所有這些情況都通知食品藥品管理局，這樣他們才能做出決定，比如，這是正確的途徑嗎？

And then at least knowing they're in the food supply, which would make post-market review much more efficient.

然後至少知道它們在食品供應中，這將使上市後的審查更有效率。

And then we need to support the states that have really done a great job recently to step up and start banning ingredients of concern.

然後，我們需要支持那些最近做得很好的州挺身而出，開始禁用令人擔憂的成分。

And those state bans might be the most powerful political move.

而這些州級禁令可能是最有力的政治舉措。

In 2023, California became the first state to ban four harmful chemicals and eventually six more dyes before some of them were banned at the federal level.

2023 年，加利福尼亞州成為第一個禁用四種有害化學物質的州，最終又禁用了六種染料，而聯邦一級也禁用了其中的一些。

California did a huge service to America by banning four ingredients that were already banned in Europe because the food industry is not going to create new food just for California.

加州禁用歐洲已經禁用的四種成分，為美國做出了巨大貢獻，因為食品工業不會只為加州創造新的食品。

It's one of the biggest economies in the world.

它是世界上最大的經濟體之一。

The confirmation of RFK Jr. as the next health secretary could also bring meaningful change, given his outspoken stance on the dangers of chemicals in America's food supply.

鑑於小肯尼迪對美國食品供應中化學物質危害的直言不諱的立場，確認他為下一任衛生部長也可能帶來有意義的改變。

Should I be so privileged as to be confirmed, we will make sure our tax dollars support healthy foods.

如果我有幸得到確認，我們將確保我們的稅收支持健康食品。

It was scrutinized the chemical additives to our food supply.

我們仔細檢查了食品供應中的化學添加劑。

As someone who has worked on this issue for a very long time, we welcome the national attention.

作為長期關注這一問題的人，我們歡迎國家的關注。

We welcome the bipartisan interest in this issue.

我們歡迎兩黨對這一問題的關注。

I certainly think there's no like putting the genie back in the bottle.

當然，我認為不能把精靈放回瓶子裡。

I think there's going to be this moment of urgency to make some of those changes.

我認為，現在是做出一些改變的緊迫時刻。

But until real changes are made, consumers who are concerned will be left to fend for themselves.

但是，在做出真正的改變之前，有顧慮的消費者只能自求多福。

One of the ways to avoid these type of industrial ingredients is to eat more whole foods, less industrially produced foods.

避免這類工業成分的方法之一是多吃全食品，少吃工業化生產的食品。

I know we all know that they are more expensive.

我知道我們都知道它們更貴。

And so that is a real problem that it's not always easy to substitute.

是以，這確實是一個不容易替代的問題。

But there are things like the potato chip example where you're picking a potato chip that's made out of just potatoes, oil and salt versus one with 18 ingredients.

但也有像薯片這樣的例子，你在挑選薯片時，要看它是由洋芋、油和鹽製成的，還是由 18 種配料製成的。

So there are ways to minimize the ultra processing.

是以，有一些方法可以最大限度地減少超處理。

I consume convenience foods.

我食用方便食品。

I buy packaged foods.

我買包裝食品。

So we are all just doing the best that we can.

是以，我們都在盡力而為。

And I think it's really important that the government do more to protect consumers so that the burden doesn't fall on consumers to have to make those choices themselves.

我認為，政府必須加大對消費者的保護力度，使消費者不必自己做出選擇。