Toxins... Oh Noes!

Orphia
Posts: 7,097 Member
Every day we get threads on detoxes aiming to rid the body of these mysterious toxins.
What exactly ARE toxins, and should we be worried about them?
You need to read this, or failing that, the main points I've summarised below.
http://fitnessreloaded.com/most-common-food-toxins/
The dose makes the poison. Small doses of "toxic" substances can be quite harmless. We are prone to worrying needlessly.
Detoxing does nothing to reduce these toxins.
What are the 4 most common toxins?
But what about the children??? “People are exposed to a lot of different compounds but we know that eating a really good diet during pregnancy is absolutely critical and has enormous beneficial effects, that taking prenatal vitamins is very beneficial and probably the key thing in terms of a child’s development is stimulation of the child. Read to your child. Play with your child. Talk to your child. All those things are just incredibly important and probably have much more effect, positive effect than these chemicals are having negative effects."
After spending more than 15 hours researching for this article – The author came down to three conclusions:
Put your energy into worrying about real issues that matter. The Nepal earthquake. The violence in Nigeria. Genital mutilation. Sexism.
Stop wasting everyone's time and your own money on detoxes and phobias that do nothing to help anyone.
What exactly ARE toxins, and should we be worried about them?
You need to read this, or failing that, the main points I've summarised below.
http://fitnessreloaded.com/most-common-food-toxins/
The dose makes the poison. Small doses of "toxic" substances can be quite harmless. We are prone to worrying needlessly.
Detoxing does nothing to reduce these toxins.
What are the 4 most common toxins?
- Lead - highly monitored; “dietary intake of lead by a 2-year-old child has dropped more than 90 percent since 1979";
- Methylmercury - mostly found in a few forms of seafood; The FDA is currently revising their 2004 guidelines for pregnant women in order to encourage them to eat more fish!
- Pthalates in plastic - there is no evidence of any harm done to anyone
- Pesticides - 95% of pesticide residues are less toxic than caffeine!
But what about the children??? “People are exposed to a lot of different compounds but we know that eating a really good diet during pregnancy is absolutely critical and has enormous beneficial effects, that taking prenatal vitamins is very beneficial and probably the key thing in terms of a child’s development is stimulation of the child. Read to your child. Play with your child. Talk to your child. All those things are just incredibly important and probably have much more effect, positive effect than these chemicals are having negative effects."
After spending more than 15 hours researching for this article – The author came down to three conclusions:
I’m much safer than I thought I was.
Still, I should keep washing my fruits and vegetables for pesticide residue. This is common sense.
I should keep an eye on but not necessarily worry about food toxins. Instead I can put my mental resources somewhere else. Let me expand on this.
I feel that even though our food is getting safer, our toxicophobia is getting worse.
Toxicophobia: An insane or greatly exaggerated dread of poisons.
Put your energy into worrying about real issues that matter. The Nepal earthquake. The violence in Nigeria. Genital mutilation. Sexism.
Stop wasting everyone's time and your own money on detoxes and phobias that do nothing to help anyone.
0
Replies
-
Funnily, one of the most dangerous, deadly and recognisable toxins in food is in a bunch of foods no one ever says not to eat - apples, almonds lima beams, spinach and soy to name some. Cyanide is a very well known toxin...0
-
But the sugar!0
-
The only thing that's toxic is the mindset. Enough already. Great post!0
-
-
0
-
nice post OP …
hopefully, this will be taken the correct way.
0 -
no u need 2 detoxify if u eat any toxins or chemikillzzz!!!!!1one!11!0
-
IsaackGMOON wrote: »no u need 2 detoxify if u eat any toxins or chemikillzzz!!!!!1one!11!
wasn't dr dre's detox album about detoxing???? bahahahahahahaha0 -
IsaackGMOON wrote: »no u need 2 detoxify if u eat any toxins or chemikillzzz!!!!!1one!11!
wasn't dr dre's detox album about detoxing???? bahahahahahahaha
It was indeed :laugh:0 -
Great post!0 -
I have a child with ASD. As much as toxins and woo-science subjects may come up on these boards it's nothing compared to most autism message boards. Somedays I'm afraid of giving myself a concusion from all the *headdesks*.0
-
Nice. Unfortunately, they won't listen0
-
Pthalates in plastic - there is no evidence of any harm done to anyone
It's spelled "phthalates". Few human studies have been done, so it's too early to tell. The CDC (Centers for Disease Control) says:
"Human health effects from exposure to low levels of phthalates are unknown. More research is needed to assess the human health effects of exposure to phthalates."
cdc.gov/biomonitoring/phthalates_factsheet.html[*] Pesticides - 95% of pesticide residues are less toxic than caffeine!
So if my math is correct, that means 5% of pesticide residue is more dangerous than caffeine. Well how dangerous are they? If they're very dangerous, which foods have them? Let's not sweep the issue under the rug.
Speaking of pesticides, one thing almost never studied is the interaction effect of multiple pesticides. Even though chemicals can be safe when tested individually, some can chemically combine to create new compounds that aren't safe. Nobody talks about this.
By the way, i agree about opposing genital mutilation.. especially circumcision. What an awful first impression of the world for a baby.0 -
If you eat well it shouldn't be a problem. Cancer and obesity rates are out of control, but we don't live like our grandparents did. That is what we should focus on. Local and organic food.0
-
Please list second hand smoke
Every agency had tried to prove it is a health risk and failed
0 -
i predict this will go weird fast as well.0
-
professionalHobbyist wrote: »Please list second hand smoke
Every agency had tried to prove it is a health risk and failed
I don't know if it's an actual health risk or not, but it's gross!!0 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
professionalHobbyist wrote: »Please list second hand smoke
Every agency had tried to prove it is a health risk and failed
It is if you have asthma.0 -
schandler1011 wrote: »If you eat well it shouldn't be a problem. Cancer and obesity rates are out of control, but we don't live like our grandparents did. That is what we should focus on. Local and organic food.
Not sure if serious.0 -
There are actually a HUGE number of naturally-occurring toxins. They're pretty much harmless at the doses we eat them at, and some are even considered beneficial! DO thoroughly peel any potatoes with green under the skin, though. That can totally make you sick.
There are other rarer ones like the products created by various bacteria that can contaminate food and stuff like botulism.
Pthalates is one that I WOULD be concerned about shortened ano-genital distance in boys is a sign of seriously messed up hormones. I would very much like to see them controlled much more rigorously than they are now.
Fortunately, the pesticides that are associated with problems with children are banned in the US and have been for at least 20 years. And rates of lead contamination are far, far lower.
The most common toxic exposure that affects people at seriously worrying levels is probably radon, though. That's mostly in the form of a gas and in well water.0 -
professionalHobbyist wrote: »Please list second hand smoke
Every agency had tried to prove it is a health risk and failed
Untrue. Second-hand smoke has been associated with a huge amount of health problems. It gave my grandfather emphysema, so I'd really prefer you not spreading Big Tobacco lies, mkay?0 -
schandler1011 wrote: »If you eat well it shouldn't be a problem. Cancer and obesity rates are out of control, but we don't live like our grandparents did. That is what we should focus on. Local and organic food.
Our grandparents lived much shorter lives. And they did die from cancer--more often than we do, in fact.
Our grandparents weren't eating "local" food, either. NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE has "eaten local" in the Western world except in periods of economic crisis and depression since Egypt became the bread basket of the Mediterranean 2300 years ago.
What do you think people were trading in all their ships? Unicorn farts? It was fiber for textiles, textiles themselves, and FOOD. Lots and lots and lots of FOOD traded hundreds and thousands of miles over several thousand years.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
-
UltimateRBF wrote: »professionalHobbyist wrote: »Please list second hand smoke
Every agency had tried to prove it is a health risk and failed
I had to re read this a couple times. Um, second hand smoke is pretty well known to be harmful.
I actually wrote a paper on this in college and it was interesting but the studies done said that for it to be an impact you had to have the equivalent situation as being enclosed on an airplane with every other person smoking for it to make an impact...you know what let me try to find that again. There were a few other interesting ones as well. But its still freaking disgusting.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
schandler1011 wrote: »If you eat well it shouldn't be a problem. Cancer and obesity rates are out of control, but we don't live like our grandparents did. That is what we should focus on. Local and organic food.
I refuse to give up bananas, which don't grow in Indiana.0 -
UltimateRBF wrote: »professionalHobbyist wrote: »Please list second hand smoke
Every agency had tried to prove it is a health risk and failed
I had to re read this a couple times. Um, second hand smoke is pretty well known to be harmful.
Smoking itself is well-known to be harmful, but nobody can prove that it caused any single death. You cannot say, "This man got lung cancer because he smoked." There's never any way to know for sure. Not yet, anyway. In the 70s and 80s, there was tons of arguing about it. This scientist or doctor says "There is no proof that it caused the cancer that killed anyone!" (True dat), another one says, "So what? We still know it's bad for you! Don't be a ding-dong!"
They finally put labels on the cigarettes saying it increases risk. There was another big lawsuit in the early 90s. I forget but what it was about, but the lawyers on the side of the cigarette people won that one.
There's good reason not to smoke! It absolutely increases your risk of cancer. You'd be a fool to take the, "It's only a correlation, not a causation, so I'll smoke!" approach. But there is not, technically proof that it causes cancer.
They say it now, "it causes cancer," but they can't prove this or that person died because of the smoking.
Second-hand smoke is even harder to make a link with.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 395.2K Introduce Yourself
- 44.1K Getting Started
- 260.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.2K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 444 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.2K Motivation and Support
- 8.2K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 1.3K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.9K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions