I'll help you with a comprehensive fact-checking analysis of this social media post about historical bread. Let me start by analyzing the image and transcribing the text content.

The image shows a Twitter/X-style social media thread discussing historical bread. Here's what it contains:

Courtney Milan (@courtneymilan.com) posted: "So this is exactly what I mean. Not trying to dump on this specific person, but the idea that "bread" 100 years ago was pristine wheat and yeast is just not true."

This post includes an embedded post from Brian Neuharth (@imaginehimhappy.bsky.social) stating: "Ultra Processed People discusses this. That rule is weird, because, yes, it looks like bread, but it may have emulsifiers and a bunch of sugar in it, so it's not the same bread as 100 years ago."

Courtney Milan then replies to her own post: "This is the actual reality: bread adulteration was happening at scale by the end of the eighteenth century, and it caused wide scale issues with people getting rickets."

She includes a link to what appears to be an article from tasting table about historical bread adulteration, with a visible snippet saying: "But as early as the late 1700s, bread manufacturers had been adulterating flour for profit. In 1750, a report accused bakers of adding substances to their bread to make it whiter."

Let me analyze this claim thoroughly using a fact-checking approach.

Now I can provide a comprehensive fact-checking analysis of the claims made in this social media post:

Generated April 30, 2025, may be out of date if significantly later. AI-Generated: Will likely contain errors; treat this as one input into a human-checked process

Overarching Claim Analysis

Moderate Version: Historical bread was commonly adulterated with various substances as far back as the 18th century, contrary to perceptions of it being more "natural" or "pristine" than modern bread.

Strong Version: Modern concerns about food additives ignore the fact that historical bread was often dangerously adulterated, potentially causing serious health conditions like rickets.

✅ Verified Facts

Statement
Status
Clarification & Correction
Confidence (1–5)
"Bread adulteration was happening at scale by the end of the eighteenth century"
✅ Correct
Historical records confirm widespread bread adulteration in the late 1700s, with a report from 1750 specifically mentioning substances added to bread to make it whiter. [1]
5
Bread adulteration "caused wide scale issues with people getting rickets"
✅ Correct
Dr. John Snow published a paper in The Lancet in 1857 suggesting adulteration of bread with alum as a cause of rickets, though modern understanding attributes rickets primarily to vitamin D deficiency. [2]
4
Substances like alum, chalk and powdered bones were added to bread
✅ Correct
Multiple historical sources confirm these additives were used in bread, particularly to make it appear whiter. The Making of Bread Act 1757 specifically mentioned these substances. [3]
5

⚠️ Errors and Corrections

Statement
Issue
Correction
Correction Confidence (1–5)
"The idea that bread 100 years ago was pristine wheat and yeast is just not true"
❓ Unable to substantiate as stated
While bread adulteration was common in the 18th-19th centuries, by the early 20th century (100 years ago), food safety laws were being implemented. The 1875 Sale of Food and Drugs Act had improved some food quality issues in the UK.
3
Implication that rickets was primarily caused by bread adulteration
❌ Incomplete
While alum in bread may have contributed to nutritional problems, modern science has established vitamin D deficiency as the primary cause of rickets. Dr. Snow's hypothesis about alum-induced rickets is now considered an "overlooked contribution." [4]
5

📌 Corrections Summary:

• Timeline clarification: While bread adulteration was widespread in the 18th-19th centuries, it's not clear this was still true "100 years ago" (1920s) after food safety regulations were implemented.
• Rickets causation: While Dr. John Snow did propose a link between bread adulteration and rickets in 1857, modern understanding is that rickets is primarily caused by vitamin D deficiency, though alum might have contributed to nutritional problems.
• Historical context: The post correctly identifies that bread adulteration was common historically but oversimplifies the complex relationship between food adulteration and disease.

📌 Potential Leads:

Lead
Plausibility
Potential Investigation Path
Alum in bread may have interfered with phosphate metabolism, contributing to rickets through a mechanism different from vitamin D deficiency
High
Research into alum's effect on phosphate metabolism and bone formation [5]
The decline of bread adulteration may have coincided with better understanding of food safety rather than modern "processing"
Medium
Historical analysis of food regulation implementation and effectiveness

🛑 Assessment of Source Reliability:

Source
Usefulness Assessment
Notes
Rating
Tasting Table article
✅ Reliable
Food history publication with specific information on historical bread adulteration practices
4
Wikipedia (Making of Bread Act 1757)
✅ Generally reliable
Provides factual historical context about legislation against bread adulteration
3
Academic journals (International Journal of Epidemiology)
✅ Highly reliable
Peer-reviewed academic source discussing Dr. Snow's work on bread adulteration and rickets
5
The Social Historian
✅ Reliable
Historical blog with specific details on bread adulteration effects
4
Flour and Water blog
✅ Useful
Provides context on Snow's rickets theory while acknowledging its limitations
3

📗 Revised Summary (Corrected & Accurate):

Courtney Milan's post correctly highlights that historical bread, particularly in 18th and 19th century Britain, was commonly adulterated with substances like alum (aluminum potassium sulfate), chalk, and ground bones (Tasting Table). This practice was so widespread that the British Parliament passed the Making of Bread Act in 1757 specifically to address it, though the law was widely ignored (Wikipedia).

Dr. John Snow (better known for his work on cholera) published a paper in The Lancet in 1857 suggesting that bread adulteration with alum was linked to rickets (Oxford Academic). While modern science primarily attributes rickets to vitamin D deficiency due to lack of sunlight exposure, some evidence suggests alum could interfere with phosphate metabolism and potentially contribute to bone problems (GeriWalton). By the late 19th century, food safety laws began addressing these issues, though their effectiveness varied.

🏅 Verdict:

Mostly True. The social media post accurately highlights historical bread adulteration practices from the 18th-19th centuries and correctly notes that bread of this period was far from "pristine." The connection to rickets has some historical basis in Dr. Snow's work, though modern understanding attributes rickets primarily to vitamin D deficiency. The timeline reference to "100 years ago" may be slightly off, as food regulations were improving by the early 20th century.

💡 Tip Suggestion:

When evaluating claims about historical food practices versus modern ones, look for specific time periods and regulatory contexts. Food adulteration has existed throughout history, but the nature, scale, and regulation of such practices has changed dramatically over time, making simple "then versus now" comparisons potentially misleading.

I'll create a comprehensive sources table on the topic of historical bread adulteration. Let me suggest some potential search queries that would give us different perspectives and information sources:

1. "historical bread adulteration 18th century evidence"
2. "Dr. John Snow rickets bread alum research"
3. "history of food regulation bread additives"
4. "modern perspective on historical bread adulteration"

Which of these would you like me to search for, or would you prefer a different search query?

I'll search for and compile information on all of these topics to create a comprehensive sources table.

Based on my research, I've compiled a comprehensive sources table on historical bread adulteration. Here's a detailed analysis of the different sources and perspectives on this topic:

Historical Bread Adulteration Sources Table

Source
Description of Position
Specificity
Initial Usefulness Rating
Link
Wikipedia (History of Bread)
Documents that from the late 18th to 19th centuries, bread in England and the US was often adulterated with hazardous materials including chalk, sawdust, alum, plaster, clay and ammonium carbonate. Notes that this practice eventually ended with government action.
High - Provides specific time period, locations, adulterants, and context
4/5
Link
The Making of Bread Act 1757
Details early legislation aimed at protecting bread production and punishing adulteration after reports of bakers using alum, chalk and powdered bones to whiten bread. Highlights that regulation of bread was a priority since the 13th century.
High - Specific legislation with date, substances, and historical context
5/5
Link
Dr. John Snow's 1857 Lancet Paper
Proposed that bread adulteration with alum might be a cause of rickets by inhibiting phosphorus absorption needed for bone formation. Observed rickets prevalent in areas with baker's bread containing alum.
High - Specific hypothesis with mechanism, medical journal publication
5/5
Link
Victorian Web (Adulteration in Victorian England)
Describes how in 1872, Dr. Hassall found half the bread he examined contained considerable quantities of alum, which inhibited digestion and lowered nutritional value.
Medium - Specific date and researcher but limited context
4/5
Link
The Social Historian (Give Us This Day Our Daily Bread)
Cites Arthur Hill Haskall's 1872 exposé on food adulterations, noting bread was often mixed with alum, salt, potatoes, rice, other flours, and sometimes sulphate of copper, which could interfere with digestion and cause health issues.
High - Specific source, date, adulterants, and health effects
5/5
Link
Grist (History of 'Adulterated' Food)
Discusses how food adulteration rumors may have been exaggerated, citing Frederick A. Filby's 1934 book where he demonstrated that bread made with alleged adulterants like chalk and bone-ash was inedible and unmarketable.
Medium - Offers contrasting perspective but limited to specific testing
3/5
Link
Tasting Table (Victorian Bread Adulteration)
Describes how by the Victorian age, bread adulteration was common practice. Notes alum was freely available, cheap, tasteless, and made bread unnaturally white while adding bulk.
High - Specific adulterants, time period, and practical reasons
4/5
Link
The Victorian Commons (Food Adulteration)
Positions food adulteration as a response to feeding a rapidly growing population. Cites an 1856 committee report finding bread often contained potato, plaster of Paris, alum and copper sulphate.
Medium - Provides economic context but limited detail
3/5
Link
Musings on Food History (Death in the Loaf)
Argues that bakers and millers were under economic pressure to cut corners, resulting in bread adulteration. Notes that in the 1850s, not a single London bread loaf tested was alum-free.
High - Economic context and testing evidence
4/5
Link
FDA History (Food Standards)
Documents that FDA officials historically observed that anyone with a new food additive tried it first in bread, leading to standards hearings as a way to limit introducing new chemicals into food supply.
Medium - Regulatory perspective but limited to US context
3/5
Link
Modern Perspective (Wikipedia: Adulterant)
Notes the fine line between adulterant and additive, citing how chalk was added to bread flour historically to reduce cost and increase whiteness, but in modern bread may be included as calcium for health benefits.
High - Contrasts historical and modern perspectives
5/5
Link
Federation of Bakers (History of Bread)
Provides a chronology of bread regulation, including the gradual limitation of permitted additives while allowing certain beneficial ones like ascorbic acid (Vitamin C) for improved product quality.
Medium - Focuses on regulation rather than adulteration itself
3/5
Link

Analysis of Conflicting Perspectives

There are several notable conflicts in the historical record about bread adulteration:

1. Extent of Adulteration: While most sources agree adulterants were common in 18th-19th century bread, they differ on how universal the practice was. Some sources (like Death in the Loaf) claim virtually all London bread contained alum in the 1850s, while others suggest adulteration varied by region and market segment.
2. Impact on Health: Dr. Snow's hypothesis connecting alum in bread to rickets represents one view, while modern understanding attributes rickets primarily to vitamin D deficiency. This reflects evolving scientific understanding.
3. Feasibility of Certain Adulterants: Frederick Filby's 1934 experiments suggested some reported adulterants (like bone-ash) would have made bread inedible, which contradicts earlier historical accounts claiming widespread use of these substances.
4. Regulatory Effectiveness: Sources disagree on whether government regulations like the 1757 Making of Bread Act were effective or largely ignored by bakers.
5. Modern Perspective: There's an interesting transition in how some former "adulterants" like chalk became recognized additives with nutritional value (calcium), showing how classifications change with scientific understanding.

The most reliable sources appear to be the primary historical accounts and academic analyses that provide specific details about adulteration practices, their motivations, and the gradual development of food safety regulations.