I totally agree with the comments about not reinventing the wheel. By all means we need to survey the literature and make sure we're asking a question that remains open.
It's interesting to see the old rivalries and prejudices among different fields of science emerge in such a far flung forum. You have to keep in mind the kind of resources available to scientists doing public research in lower profile fields, including food science. I think the rigour is high, though to a physicist it might seem extremely empirical, or to a medical researcher, irrelevant. What matters is the integrity of the process.
In my own field, you can definitely get published by just manipulating a variable and turning the crank, but you'll still be seen as an irrelevant failure, because nobody will read your papers. I'd imagine the same drive for relevance and novelty exists in every area of science.