Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
What are your unpopular opinions about health / fitness?
Replies
-
ForecasterJason wrote: »
Science has not shown that eating a plethora of foods laced with those additives for years upon years is safe, however. I'm not saying that eating foods like that occasionally or as a very small minority of the diet are a big issue.stevencloser wrote: »It's pointless. It will inevitably be argued otherwise. After all, they've been approved for use in food. But I don't believe that necessarily means they are safe. I still have my concerns.
If you must know, some of the additives I try to avoid BHA or BHT, artificial sweeteners, food dyes like blue # 1 & 2, red # 3 - just to name a few -sodium nitrate, sulfur dioxide, sodium benzoate, potassium bromate, high fructose corn syrup, MSG, and of course trans fats. Pesticides, artificial hormones, antibiotics… And the list goes on.
If science saying they're safe is not enough for you to believe they're safe, how do you eat ANYTHING? After all, apples contain cyanide.
Also, apples are naturally found in nature. You cannot say the same thing amount most of those other things listed like MSG, trans fats, and food dyes.
Re: the bolded. Science has studied all substances approved for food and has failed to find that they DO cause any problems. The closest things have been studies on rats or other small mammals, and the doses have been much much higher than even regular/frequent eating of many foods with them would provide to us. You'd have to work to get that kind of dosage.
The thing is, you can't prove the null hypothesis (that there is no effect). You just can't. That's the nature of the beast working with the scientific method. You can only try to prove the alternate - that there is - and then show that there is not substantial proof. Which, again, leads to the question of how do you eat ANYTHING (or take any medications, or use any fibers for covering your skin, or ...)
Oh, and I'm pretty sure that MSG does occur in nature. Celery, if I'm recalling correctly.
7 -
Do you have complete confidence that every chemical in your food Is safe for regular, repeated consumption? More power to ya. They said DDT was safe at one point. They said cigarettes were good for your health. They said BPA was safe. No one is saying if it's natural it's automatically safe, as in Hemlock. But you seem to be saying that chemicals are to be unquestionably trusted?
"They" may have said that cigarettes were good for your health, but science never did. Every study on smoking showed that it is detrimental. There were none that showed cigarettes were good.7 -
Define "science". If you mean company paid studies that not surprisingly support their initial goal, I question their veracity.4
-
Define "science". If you mean company paid studies that not surprisingly support their initial goal, I question their veracity.
Yet fear mongering blog sites the kind that suggest that the same chemicals are in antifreeze and our foods are totally reliable.
Peer reviewed scientific journals are what you should be looking for. Not sites that have clickbait headlines and utilize logical fallacies to make their points.
11 -
Studies by truly independent parties are hard to find, except on older ingredients. Self-study does not qualify in my opinion. Yet, it does for the FDA.
I don't read food "blogs".4 -
Do you have complete confidence that every chemical in your food Is safe for regular, repeated consumption? More power to ya. They said DDT was safe at one point. They said cigarettes were good for your health. They said BPA was safe. No one is saying if it's natural it's automatically safe, as in Hemlock. But you seem to be saying that chemicals are to be unquestionably trusted?
DDT was safe... and is safe, and would have eliminated Malaria worldwide if not for ill informed hippies.
To be perfectly clear, I'm talking about Joni Mitchell notorious for Big Yellow Taxi and her ilk who today are promoting world hunger by opposing GMOs.
Ultimately, those who suffer for the ignorant self righteousness of First world hippies are those living on the edge of survival in the so called third world.11 -
Monosodium glutamate is a naturally occurring substance- it's a salt of the (non-essential) amino acid glutamic acid. It's found in, well, food that tastes nice, to be blunt about it.
These foods include potatoes, peas, yeast extract, hydrolyzed vegetable protein, soy extracts, tomatoes and tomato juice, mushrooms, grapes, grape juice and other fruit juices, Parmesan cheese and Rocquefort cheese.*
*List of sources collated from
1) http://www.livestrong.com/article/317694-a-list-of-foods-with-msg/ and
2) https://www.fda.gov/food/ingredientspackaginglabeling/foodadditivesingredients/ucm328728.htm
4 -
Studies by truly independent parties are hard to find, except on older ingredients. Self-study does not qualify in my opinion. Yet, it does for the FDA.
I don't read food "blogs".
What winogelato says. You don't trust studies but you trust wherever the hell you got the "it's in antifreeze!" argument from. You never had any credibility on this.8 -
Do you have complete confidence that every chemical in your food Is safe for regular, repeated consumption? More power to ya. They said DDT was safe at one point. They said cigarettes were good for your health. They said BPA was safe. No one is saying if it's natural it's automatically safe, as in Hemlock. But you seem to be saying that chemicals are to be unquestionably trusted?
This comment suggests to me that you either don't know what a chemical is or that you are using it in an atypical, difficult to understand manner.
Do I have complete confidence that everything in my food is safe at ANY level of exposure? No, many things (including the cyanide in apples, the Vit A in liver) would be problematic at sufficient amounts (same with water).
There's also mercury in fish, and I eat a lot of fish (less of the kinds likely to have lots of mercury, but still). There are disputes about sat fat, and I eat some sat fat. Some raise issues about the effects of smoking fish or curing pork, of course (the bacon I get is from a farm and cured in a traditional manner), or about the benefits vs. harms of sodium. You could drive yourself crazy.
None of this is about the food industry, particularly, or natural vs. not. You don't seem to recognize this.
I don't eat much in the way of pre-packaged foods with lots of ingredients, so it seems a pointless thing for me to worry about, but many of the things in those seem to me to be more obviously harmless than what's naturally in plenty of foods (or added through processes that we've been doing for hundreds of years or more).5 -
@stevencloser: I think you just lost all credibility in a serious debate,
As someone who has read all the posts in this thread, I disagree with this statement. @stevencloser has not lost any credibility here, and has built up a lot of credibility on these forums.
16 -
When I say chemicals - I specifically mentioned earlier I was discussing manmade additives. I'm not talking about naturally occurring msg or sodium nitrate. The fact of the matter is that most of the products with these man made additives in them are from highly processed foods that also tend to be unhealthy in other ways - high sugar, low fiber, low nutrient density etc. So I choose less processed foods for my idea of healthy eating. Period. I like plants. I like proteins (animal and plant-based), I like whole grains (also from plants). I don't like Captain Crunch, Wonder Bread, sodas (diet or otherwise) and the like. I prefer organic for health and environmental reasons. I eat cake at birthday parties without freaking out. I'm not living in fear or obsessed. I just choose less prepackaged foods and opt for whole foods to get my calories and nutrients. No, I don't trust that every food additive is safe, and that may be an unpopular belief, which is why I chose this thread to post. My way of eating is not superior to any of yours. I just think getting my calories and nutrients from foods without these things is healthier for me and my family. And I think people should consider that maybe, just maybe, some of the things added to their food might not be in their best interest. But the choice is ours to make. Do what's right for you.9
-
When I say chemicals - I specifically mentioned earlier I was discussing manmade additives. I'm not talking about naturally occurring msg or sodium nitrate. The fact of the matter is that most of the products with these man made additives in them are from highly processed foods that also tend to be unhealthy in other ways - high sugar, low fiber, low nutrient density etc. So I choose less processed foods for my idea of healthy eating. Period. I like plants. I like proteins (animal and plant-based), I like whole grains (also from plants). I don't like Captain Crunch, Wonder Bread, sodas (diet or otherwise) and the like. I prefer organic for health and environmental reasons. I eat cake at birthday parties without freaking out. I'm not living in fear or obsessed. I just choose less prepackaged foods and opt for whole foods to get my calories and nutrients. No, I don't trust that every food additive is safe, and that may be an unpopular belief, which is why I chose this thread to post. My way of eating is not superior to any of yours. I just think getting my calories and nutrients from foods without these things is healthier for me and my family. And I think people should consider that maybe, just maybe, some of the things added to their food might not be in their best interest. But the choice is ours to make. Do what's right for you.
If I show you the chemical structure of monosodium glutamate you would be able to tell the difference between the one that is naturally occurring and the one that is added to foods?
14 -
@Tacklewasher
To me, attacking a person on a personal level or insulting them has no place in serious debate. Debate the issue with your facts and opinions, disagree all you want. But personal insults are low blows and take away from your argument, not add to it.3 -
.Do you have complete confidence that every chemical in your food Is safe for regular, repeated consumption? More power to ya. They said DDT was safe at one point. They said cigarettes were good for your health. They said BPA was safe. No one is saying if it's natural it's automatically safe, as in Hemlock. But you seem to be saying that chemicals are to be unquestionably trusted?When I say chemicals - I specifically mentioned earlier I was discussing manmade additives. I'm not talking about naturally occurring msg or sodium nitrate. The fact of the matter is that most of the products with these man made additives in them are from highly processed foods that also tend to be unhealthy in other ways - high sugar, low fiber, low nutrient density etc. So I choose less processed foods for my idea of healthy eating. Period. I like plants. I like proteins (animal and plant-based), I like whole grains (also from plants). I don't like Captain Crunch, Wonder Bread, sodas (diet or otherwise) and the like. I prefer organic for health and environmental reasons. I eat cake at birthday parties without freaking out. I'm not living in fear or obsessed. I just choose less prepackaged foods and opt for whole foods to get my calories and nutrients. No, I don't trust that every food additive is safe, and that may be an unpopular belief, which is why I chose this thread to post. My way of eating is not superior to any of yours. I just think getting my calories and nutrients from foods without these things is healthier for me and my family. And I think people should consider that maybe, just maybe, some of the things added to their food might not be in their best interest. But the choice is ours to make. Do what's right for you.
So you've gone from expressing a dogmatic opinion to holding a preference based on your own individual tastes
You equated "chemicals in food" with cigarettes. And as yet you've refused to define or list which chemicals you object to.1 -
My very unpopular view is that people need to focus on being better humans, neighbors, friends, co-workers, community members and that fitness/weightloss/health are really very insignificant life goals and should absorb the least amount of mental energy possible. I hate that they are endowed with moral significance and that it's perfectly acceptable to post and praise on all social media "triumphs" and successes--and yet we give no credit and have no interest in people sharing their struggles and successes in becoming more empathetic, better listeners, kinder or more generous. Health is a means to life, but what are we living for is what we should be concentrating on.18
-
stanmann571 wrote: ».Do you have complete confidence that every chemical in your food Is safe for regular, repeated consumption? More power to ya. They said DDT was safe at one point. They said cigarettes were good for your health. They said BPA was safe. No one is saying if it's natural it's automatically safe, as in Hemlock. But you seem to be saying that chemicals are to be unquestionably trusted?When I say chemicals - I specifically mentioned earlier I was discussing manmade additives. I'm not talking about naturally occurring msg or sodium nitrate. The fact of the matter is that most of the products with these man made additives in them are from highly processed foods that also tend to be unhealthy in other ways - high sugar, low fiber, low nutrient density etc. So I choose less processed foods for my idea of healthy eating. Period. I like plants. I like proteins (animal and plant-based), I like whole grains (also from plants). I don't like Captain Crunch, Wonder Bread, sodas (diet or otherwise) and the like. I prefer organic for health and environmental reasons. I eat cake at birthday parties without freaking out. I'm not living in fear or obsessed. I just choose less prepackaged foods and opt for whole foods to get my calories and nutrients. No, I don't trust that every food additive is safe, and that may be an unpopular belief, which is why I chose this thread to post. My way of eating is not superior to any of yours. I just think getting my calories and nutrients from foods without these things is healthier for me and my family. And I think people should consider that maybe, just maybe, some of the things added to their food might not be in their best interest. But the choice is ours to make. Do what's right for you.
So you've gone from expressing a dogmatic opinion to holding a preference based on your own individual tastes
You equated "chemicals in food" with cigarettes. And as yet you've refused to define or list which chemicals you object to.
Actually, I did make a list and post it. I did not equate chemicals in food to cigarettes, that's not what I meant. I said they were once considered safe and now we know better. Just as we may learn that some things in our food may later be found to be unsafe.
But again, arguing these details was never the point of my original post. I said that too, with an apology at one point for coming off as my way was superior. It's not. I've repeated that numerous times. I got caught up in defending my personal belief and choices and went down a road I never intended, arguing the safety of specific ingredients and such. My original post was a couple of sentences and a few people took it way too literal and I rebutted, digging deeper into my personal point of view. My original post was intended to say that I think what we put in our bodies nutritionally matters, not just calories in/calories out. I may have been unclear and several people jumped on individual word choices and I took the bait.
I'm not going to anymore.4 -
otterchica wrote: »My very unpopular view is that people need to focus on being better humans, neighbors, friends, co-workers, community members and that fitness/weightloss/health are really very insignificant life goals and should absorb the least amount of mental energy possible. I hate that they are endowed with moral significance and that it's perfectly acceptable to post and praise on all social media "triumphs" and successes--and yet we give no credit and have no interest in people sharing their struggles and successes in becoming more empathetic, better listeners, kinder or more generous. Health is a means to life, but what are we living for is what we should be concentrating on.
I would agree that having the best booty on Instagram is a shalow goal.
However, IMO, we owe it to our families and society in general to be as healthy as possible so as not to cause a burden on them.4 -
stanmann571 wrote: ».Do you have complete confidence that every chemical in your food Is safe for regular, repeated consumption? More power to ya. They said DDT was safe at one point. They said cigarettes were good for your health. They said BPA was safe. No one is saying if it's natural it's automatically safe, as in Hemlock. But you seem to be saying that chemicals are to be unquestionably trusted?When I say chemicals - I specifically mentioned earlier I was discussing manmade additives. I'm not talking about naturally occurring msg or sodium nitrate. The fact of the matter is that most of the products with these man made additives in them are from highly processed foods that also tend to be unhealthy in other ways - high sugar, low fiber, low nutrient density etc. So I choose less processed foods for my idea of healthy eating. Period. I like plants. I like proteins (animal and plant-based), I like whole grains (also from plants). I don't like Captain Crunch, Wonder Bread, sodas (diet or otherwise) and the like. I prefer organic for health and environmental reasons. I eat cake at birthday parties without freaking out. I'm not living in fear or obsessed. I just choose less prepackaged foods and opt for whole foods to get my calories and nutrients. No, I don't trust that every food additive is safe, and that may be an unpopular belief, which is why I chose this thread to post. My way of eating is not superior to any of yours. I just think getting my calories and nutrients from foods without these things is healthier for me and my family. And I think people should consider that maybe, just maybe, some of the things added to their food might not be in their best interest. But the choice is ours to make. Do what's right for you.
So you've gone from expressing a dogmatic opinion to holding a preference based on your own individual tastes
You equated "chemicals in food" with cigarettes. And as yet you've refused to define or list which chemicals you object to.
Actually, I did make a list and post it. I did not equate chemicals in food to cigarettes, that's not what I meant. I said they were once considered safe and now we know better. Just as we may learn that some things in our food may later be found to be unsafe.
But again, arguing these details was never the point of my original post. I said that too, with an apology at one point for coming off as my way was superior. It's not. I've repeated that numerous times. I got caught up in defending my personal belief and choices and went down a road I never intended, arguing the safety of specific ingredients and such. My original post was a couple of sentences and a few people took it way too literal and I rebutted, digging deeper into my personal point of view. My original post was intended to say that I think what we put in our bodies nutritionally matters, not just calories in/calories out. I may have been unclear and several people jumped on individual word choices and I took the bait.
I'm not going to anymore.
NO, you haven't posted a list.
And your words speak quite clearly... you did equate "chemicals" to cigarettes.
And a tepid apology when faced with overwhelming facts isn't particularly convincing.5 -
When I say chemicals - I specifically mentioned earlier I was discussing manmade additives.
But then you don't actually mean chemical, and are using the word incorrectly, leading to the confusion.
Many of the things added to foods (for example, sodium chloride, sugar) ARE naturally occuring.most of the products with these man made additives in them are from highly processed foods that also tend to be unhealthy in other ways - high sugar, low fiber, low nutrient density etc.
I personally think it makes more sense to focus on the particular food being not that nutrient-dense or good for you, if it is something you would otherwise want to eat. And if you don't want to eat it, why worry about it?
This seems like you are actually wanting to eat some of these things, so are coming up with reasons to try and scare yourself away from the beyond just the nutritional issues and them not fitting too well in your diet.
I think eating lots of cookies doesn't fit well in my diet, so I don't. I don't fool myself that if I made the cookie myself it's completely different and not still high cal/low nutrient. (I AM more likely to eat a cookie I made myself, or which was otherwise home or bakery made, because I am likely to think it tastes better -- most of the things you seem concerned about are things I usually don't eat because they don't appeal to me.)
Hmm -- worth adding that the reason I am taking issue with your posts is because it is a frame of mind I can relate to some, and which I think is irrelevant if you don't want to eat those foods, but for some it can unfairly demonize foods that actually make eating healthfully much easier. You can make nutrient dense and non nutrient dense foods at home and, similarly, you can buy nutrient dense and non nutrient dense packaged foods. When I was in my 20s I worked a ton and had an opportunity to get food at good restaurants (largely made of ingredients you'd likely approve of, but high cal), but I also would cook myself, or sort of cook, since I wasn't very experienced. I'd use things like packaged rice and beans with some spice mixture and add vegetables (I was a vegetarian for part of this period). The meals were healthy, IMO, actually more so than the high cal restaurant things, and something I was more likely to do than try to cook a whole meal from scratch in those days (that came later). But I'm sure they had some "chemicals" in them. I don't think that makes rice and beans and spices and added olive oil and vegetables some kind of scary "must be avoided as bad for you" meal, and it would not have been helpful for me to think the only option was cooking from scratch or just giving up and being unhealthy.
Other things I ate in those days included lots of packaged salads (bag of lettuce and some additions and a dressing) and some pasta with a storebought sauce I'd doctor up some.3 -
And:It's pointless. It will inevitably be argued otherwise. After all, they've been approved for use in food. But I don't believe that necessarily means they are safe. I still have my concerns.
If you must know, some of the additives I try to avoid BHA or BHT, artificial sweeteners, food dyes like blue # 1 & 2, red # 3 - just to name a few -sodium nitrate, sulfur dioxide, sodium benzoate, potassium bromate, high fructose corn syrup, MSG, and of course trans fats. Pesticides, artificial hormones, antibiotics… And the list goes on.
"History is chock full of formerly believed to be safe products. It took people standing up and saying something about it before it stopped." My preface to bringing up cigarettes..
And:
I'm sorry you find my numerous apologies tepid. They came from my heart. That's all I can offer.
I'm officially leaving this derailed discussion.5 -
Do you have complete confidence that every chemical in your food Is safe for regular, repeated consumption? More power to ya. They said DDT was safe at one point. They said cigarettes were good for your health. They said BPA was safe. No one is saying if it's natural it's automatically safe, as in Hemlock. But you seem to be saying that chemicals are to be unquestionably trusted?
Every product has an inherent risk/reward.
DDT is singly responsible for saving countless lives due to malaria reduction. Was it worth the risk? Scientific evidence says yes. Media hyperbole says no.
No hall of science ever stated that cigarettes were good for you health. This is hyperbolic and patently false.
BPA is safe in the regulated dosage and form and a critical binding agent used in several medical products. Don't confuse scientific output with media hyperbole.9 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
Science has not shown that eating a plethora of foods laced with those additives for years upon years is safe, however. I'm not saying that eating foods like that occasionally or as a very small minority of the diet are a big issue.stevencloser wrote: »It's pointless. It will inevitably be argued otherwise. After all, they've been approved for use in food. But I don't believe that necessarily means they are safe. I still have my concerns.
If you must know, some of the additives I try to avoid BHA or BHT, artificial sweeteners, food dyes like blue # 1 & 2, red # 3 - just to name a few -sodium nitrate, sulfur dioxide, sodium benzoate, potassium bromate, high fructose corn syrup, MSG, and of course trans fats. Pesticides, artificial hormones, antibiotics… And the list goes on.
If science saying they're safe is not enough for you to believe they're safe, how do you eat ANYTHING? After all, apples contain cyanide.
Also, apples are naturally found in nature. You cannot say the same thing amount most of those other things listed like MSG, trans fats, and food dyes.
MSG is in tomatoes.2 -
janejellyroll wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
Science has not shown that eating a plethora of foods laced with those additives for years upon years is safe, however. I'm not saying that eating foods like that occasionally or as a very small minority of the diet are a big issue.stevencloser wrote: »It's pointless. It will inevitably be argued otherwise. After all, they've been approved for use in food. But I don't believe that necessarily means they are safe. I still have my concerns.
If you must know, some of the additives I try to avoid BHA or BHT, artificial sweeteners, food dyes like blue # 1 & 2, red # 3 - just to name a few -sodium nitrate, sulfur dioxide, sodium benzoate, potassium bromate, high fructose corn syrup, MSG, and of course trans fats. Pesticides, artificial hormones, antibiotics… And the list goes on.
If science saying they're safe is not enough for you to believe they're safe, how do you eat ANYTHING? After all, apples contain cyanide.
Also, apples are naturally found in nature. You cannot say the same thing amount most of those other things listed like MSG, trans fats, and food dyes.
MSG is in tomatoes.
Lamb and beef naturally contain small amounts of trans fats and several food dyes are extracts from vegetables (beetroot and carrots for example) and insects (cochineal).3 -
Do you have complete confidence that every chemical in your food Is safe for regular, repeated consumption? More power to ya. They said DDT was safe at one point. They said cigarettes were good for your health. They said BPA was safe. No one is saying if it's natural it's automatically safe, as in Hemlock. But you seem to be saying that chemicals are to be unquestionably trusted?
Every product has an inherent risk/reward.
DDT is singly responsible for saving countless lives due to malaria reduction. Was it worth the risk? Scientific evidence says yes. Media hyperbole says no.
No hall of science ever stated that cigarettes were good for you health. This is hyperbolic and patently false.
BPA is safe in the regulated dosage and form and a critical binding agent used in several medical products. Don't confuse scientific output with media hyperbole.
Doctors, who are the face of medical science to the general public, were certainly stating this in the not too distant past...
8 -
Do you have complete confidence that every chemical in your food Is safe for regular, repeated consumption? More power to ya. They said DDT was safe at one point. They said cigarettes were good for your health. They said BPA was safe. No one is saying if it's natural it's automatically safe, as in Hemlock. But you seem to be saying that chemicals are to be unquestionably trusted?
Every product has an inherent risk/reward.
DDT is singly responsible for saving countless lives due to malaria reduction. Was it worth the risk? Scientific evidence says yes. Media hyperbole says no.
No hall of science ever stated that cigarettes were good for you health. This is hyperbolic and patently false.
BPA is safe in the regulated dosage and form and a critical binding agent used in several medical products. Don't confuse scientific output with media hyperbole.
This and the anti-GMO pro famine hyperbole are two of my unpopular opinions that actually get me a little angry and hot under the collar.
We might not be able to turn famine ridden sub-Saharan Africa and southwest asia into Garden spots with trees and rivers. But we could at least make them a little less hellish to live in.4 -
I don't get the low carb keto high fat high carb super food stuff. its like if you fry quinoa in olive oil then suddenly fried food becomes healthy. just eat a balanced diet a little bit of everything n you will be fine.
I also don't like that sugar is marked evil its really the amount that counts. life is too short to live without chocolate and cake. but obviously you should not eat half of your calories from those2 -
janejellyroll wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
Science has not shown that eating a plethora of foods laced with those additives for years upon years is safe, however. I'm not saying that eating foods like that occasionally or as a very small minority of the diet are a big issue.stevencloser wrote: »It's pointless. It will inevitably be argued otherwise. After all, they've been approved for use in food. But I don't believe that necessarily means they are safe. I still have my concerns.
If you must know, some of the additives I try to avoid BHA or BHT, artificial sweeteners, food dyes like blue # 1 & 2, red # 3 - just to name a few -sodium nitrate, sulfur dioxide, sodium benzoate, potassium bromate, high fructose corn syrup, MSG, and of course trans fats. Pesticides, artificial hormones, antibiotics… And the list goes on.
If science saying they're safe is not enough for you to believe they're safe, how do you eat ANYTHING? After all, apples contain cyanide.
Also, apples are naturally found in nature. You cannot say the same thing amount most of those other things listed like MSG, trans fats, and food dyes.
MSG is in tomatoes.
...and yet companies like the one below are paying off fraud lawsuits for concealing the presence of MSG in their foods. How silly!
https://www.bigclassaction.com/settlement/noodle-soup-maker-settles-msg-consumer-fraud-lawsuit.php0 -
Bry_Lander wrote: »Do you have complete confidence that every chemical in your food Is safe for regular, repeated consumption? More power to ya. They said DDT was safe at one point. They said cigarettes were good for your health. They said BPA was safe. No one is saying if it's natural it's automatically safe, as in Hemlock. But you seem to be saying that chemicals are to be unquestionably trusted?
Every product has an inherent risk/reward.
DDT is singly responsible for saving countless lives due to malaria reduction. Was it worth the risk? Scientific evidence says yes. Media hyperbole says no.
No hall of science ever stated that cigarettes were good for you health. This is hyperbolic and patently false.
BPA is safe in the regulated dosage and form and a critical binding agent used in several medical products. Don't confuse scientific output with media hyperbole.
Doctors, who are the face of medical science to the general public, were certainly stating this in the not too distant past...
"Less irritating" = still irritating, just less than other brands. There is also a Surgeons General warning on that advertisement.
I know Doctors even today that smoke. Just because they participate in a behavior doesn't mean that there is no risk associated with it.
edit: found a higher res image.
3 -
jseams1234 wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »Do you have complete confidence that every chemical in your food Is safe for regular, repeated consumption? More power to ya. They said DDT was safe at one point. They said cigarettes were good for your health. They said BPA was safe. No one is saying if it's natural it's automatically safe, as in Hemlock. But you seem to be saying that chemicals are to be unquestionably trusted?
Every product has an inherent risk/reward.
DDT is singly responsible for saving countless lives due to malaria reduction. Was it worth the risk? Scientific evidence says yes. Media hyperbole says no.
No hall of science ever stated that cigarettes were good for you health. This is hyperbolic and patently false.
BPA is safe in the regulated dosage and form and a critical binding agent used in several medical products. Don't confuse scientific output with media hyperbole.
Doctors, who are the face of medical science to the general public, were certainly stating this in the not too distant past...
"Less irritating" = still irritating, just less than other brands. There is also a Surgeons General warning on that advertisement.
I know Doctors even today that smoke. Just because they participate in a behavior doesn't mean that there is no risk associated with it.
I thought I saw a warning, but I couldn't find a better resolution image to confirm it.
1 -
Bry_Lander wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
Science has not shown that eating a plethora of foods laced with those additives for years upon years is safe, however. I'm not saying that eating foods like that occasionally or as a very small minority of the diet are a big issue.stevencloser wrote: »It's pointless. It will inevitably be argued otherwise. After all, they've been approved for use in food. But I don't believe that necessarily means they are safe. I still have my concerns.
If you must know, some of the additives I try to avoid BHA or BHT, artificial sweeteners, food dyes like blue # 1 & 2, red # 3 - just to name a few -sodium nitrate, sulfur dioxide, sodium benzoate, potassium bromate, high fructose corn syrup, MSG, and of course trans fats. Pesticides, artificial hormones, antibiotics… And the list goes on.
If science saying they're safe is not enough for you to believe they're safe, how do you eat ANYTHING? After all, apples contain cyanide.
Also, apples are naturally found in nature. You cannot say the same thing amount most of those other things listed like MSG, trans fats, and food dyes.
MSG is in tomatoes.
...and yet companies like the one below are paying off fraud lawsuits for concealing the presence of MSG in their foods. How silly!
https://www.bigclassaction.com/settlement/noodle-soup-maker-settles-msg-consumer-fraud-lawsuit.php
It's often cheaper to settle than to fight.
Although not always.
See the Ford Pinto case study.
Had they not gone through the trouble of determining that it would be cheaper to pay off the lawsuits than fight/fix the issue they would have done quite well.2
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions