I do not know of any beers that list the ingredients on the label, except for Rolling Rock. In my fridge, I happened to have several bottles/cans of beer, and I checked them out. Rolling Rock lists its ingredients right on the label: water, malt, rice, corn, hops, brewer’s yeast. No preservatives, no additives. Perhaps this is why Rolling Rock is famous for tasting different every time, and also for occasionally getting a little skunky. Its carb/calorie content is also closer to light beers than regular beers. I also, like the originator of this question, homebrew on occasion, so I appreciate the lack of ingredients I can’t pronounce. No, I don’t work for Rolling Rock, I’m just in college, and thus enjoy beer. A lot. Think I’ll have one now.
I just happened to have a cold Miller High Life in my hand when I sat down at my computer, and it’s label states that it “contains no additives or preservatives”, maybe that’s why I can’t stand “light” beer, there’s just not enough beer in it. 
My definition of light beer is if you can see through it, it’s light. 
The skunky taste is more likely due to the green bottle and how it’s being handled post-shipping. Beer that is exposed to too much light can become “skunky” as light reacts with certain compounds from hops; this is why brown bottles are generally recommended for bottling, as they block out more light than green or clear.
One assumes we’re talking about the classic Cecil column Does Budweiser beer contain … chicken hearts?(1983) .
A link is appreciated. We can all sing along now.
If you enjoy beer, why in G-d’s name do you have a Rolling Rock in your fridge? 
When I was in college RR was the beer for people who didn’t really like the taste of beer, but liked being drunk.
I just read that article, and…
:eek: I had probably six MGDs and Miller High Lifes coursing through my veins one recent night. Ye Gods! My body weeps…
I don’t even drink beer that much (that night was the first time, actually–before that I’d had some wine and some vodka a couple times each, but that was about it). I almost want to hurl thinking about the things I did to my body that night. If only the party throwers had bought Bud instead.
I thought that was the role of Genessee Brewing Co. products…
The seaweed mentioned in the article is probably “irish moss” (carrageenan), a clarifing agent, not a foam stabilizer. The article fails to determine where “chicken hearts” came from. A lot of people eat chicken hearts with beer, maybe that’s it.
Other beer additives:
Isinglass, a natural collagen from fish swim bladders for clarity.
Polyclar (plastic powder) or Silica Gel - To prevent “chill haze”
Gelatin (hooves and beaks) - also for clarity
I encourage everyone, especially those in college to stop drinking anything made by the big american brewers. Try the microbrews from craft breweries (or just about anything from Belgium - the beer disneyland)
Good catch on the Irish moss, monterey86. If I recall correctly, carageenan/Irish moss is used in a lot of food-type products, including in some fast food companies’ milk shakes.
Certain beer “additives” are used even by microbrewers and homebrewers. For instance, a batch of beer I made recently included some Irish moss tossed in to help clarify the beer slightly. In 5 gallons, I think I used a half-teaspoon. Gypsum and other minerals are sometimes added (again, in small quantities) to adjust the pH and/or mineral content of the water - this can be essential if you’re trying to mimic a certain style of beer (pilsners use very soft water, IIRC, while certain English brews use very hard water, and so on) or even just to make your home’s tapwater able to be used in brewing.
In regard to Budweiser, Rolling Rock, etc.: I was taught that if it has rice as an ingredient, it’s not “real” beer, (at least by German beer purity laws). I stand by that in light of the aforementioned examples.
That particular law doesn’t mention yeast. IIRC, at the time they were unaware of yeast and its function in fermentation; “wild” yeasts did the job. I would suspect that even most microbreweries add specific yeast cultures to their beer, though I seem to remember that many Belgian breweries still use the “natural” method of getting yeast into the brew.
Ferret Herder is right about the Begian Breweries, the beer fermented this way is Lambic, the most complex and difficult to brew beer in the world. It depends on wild yeast and especially particular bacteria floating around the north of Brussels (doesn’t work anywhere else). It is usually aged several years.
The German Reinheitsgebot (purity law) is useful in preventing unwanted additives, but severely limits creativity.
MMMM Lambic beers. I always understood that the reason the Belgians started using the yummy fruit to flavour the lambics was because wild yeast is unpredictable so that the resulting flavour of the beer can vary (and even be unpleasant). Adding the fruit to the beer was to mask any potential unpleasant tastes from the wild yeast.
The Atlantic had an article about Belgian beers some years back, for anyone who’s interested.
I just checked my fridge - I don’t have any beer but I do have some amber Woodchuck. They list their ingredients, and the only chemical-sounding stuff in there are sulfites and sorbate, whatever those are. Why are you drinking Rolling Rock, anyway? Nobody really likes that stuff unless they wanna get drunk, and it’s even sort of the local beer where I’m from.
I don’t have one in my hand (if your curious I have a Alexander Keith’s in my hand) but I believe Stella Artois labels it’s ingredients. Also, I believe many European beers do list their ingredients; though I could be very wrong.