General chatter Because life isn't just about dieting. Play games, jokes, or share what's new in your life!

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-29-2006, 01:06 PM   #1  
Want them Muscles!
Thread Starter
 
fitgal2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 583

S/C/G: 135/129/120

Default Why?????

So I read this artical in this magazine we get here in Canada for free at Nutrition House. Well there was this article about all the chemicals that are put into make-up, shampoo, etc that have known links to causing cancer.

WHY WHY WHY are we putting up with this???? WHY do we let our governments decided what a "safe" level is. I am sure that in SMALL SMALL amounts this stuff won't harm us but we was our hair EVERYDAY, eat fruit and veggies (thus eatting pesticides, which cause cancer) daily, we put make up on some of us more than other. the frequent use of these product will build up toxins in our bodies...so again I ask what is a truely SAFE level??? there really is not one. Basically the artical said that certain products have been shown to cause cancer in their test animals UMMMMM if it can give animals cancer why are they allowing these chemicals to be used!!!

Another scary thing I looked into after reading this artical is on this link... all the chemicals used in products you find in the grocery store! NOt only do some of the chemicals cause cancer but they are also neurotoxins, cause the formation of resistant bacteria cause liver damage...the list goes on...and it in things that I would have never thought like NAIL POLISH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

www.lifekind.com/catalog/chemical_glossary.php

pretty scary!!!

WHY WHY WHY are we putting up with this?????????????

And THAT is what I have to say about THAT!

Last edited by fitgal2; 04-29-2006 at 01:13 PM.
fitgal2 is offline  
Old 04-29-2006, 02:10 PM   #2  
Senior Member
 
kaplods's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Wausau, WI
Posts: 13,383

S/C/G: SW:394/310/180

Height: 5'6"

Default

Some of this has to be put into perspective. I'm not saying that we shouldn't know what's in our food and cosmetics, and that the safest possible options should be used whenever possible, but sometimes we are given only a tiny part of the whole picture.

Grilled foods are link with cancer. Marinades can help reduce the risk to some degree, but any food with char marks will have some of the molecules that are linked with these cancers. Am I going to give up grilled zucchini, NOPE.

Some chemicals preservatives are linked with a significant increase in cancer rates (though the actual risk may is still be far smaller than being hit by a bus). However, some of these chemicals may also be preventing food born illnesses, such as toxic molds, ecoli, salmonella, and botulism. When people canned their own foods, one family might be wiped out if a mistake was made, but today, thousands could die from with ONE contaminated batch.

I am on medications that put me at risk for some life threatening conditions (reading the potential side effects scare the crap out of me), but they prevent other more immediate concerns. I'm willing to take certain risks to avoid others.

I'm not saying that there is NO reason for concern, just that we all need to be more aware of the whole picture and the alternatives before panicking. I know chain smokers who avoid Nutrasweet, "because it's poison." Believe me, the cigarettes are going to kill you faster.

Again, don't misunderstand, I'm not saying that everthing we put into our mouthes or on our bodies doesn't have an impact, just that snippets of informations sometimes confuse the matter more than they clarify.
kaplods is offline  
Old 04-29-2006, 02:30 PM   #3  
Senior Member
 
lucky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,343

Default

I agree, perspective is key when making decisions about what to eat and what products to use. There is no question that the "cleaner" a product or food is the better - but that doesn't mean everything else is necessarily THAT bad. Like anything else, we have to use our personal judgment to determine what our own limits are. Personally, I like to by organic products when I can but I also appreciate that use of pesticides helps keep entire crops from being wiped out by infestation thus keeping fresh foods available and cost effective. In my opinion, the risk of cancer due to chemical ingestion is far outweighed by the risk of what could happen economically if farmers were no longer able to control their crop growth chemically. The bottom line is that there is always a CHOICE in the products we purchase.

Anybody remember the movie "The Incredible Shrinking Woman" starring Lily Tomlin? It is about a women who actually shrinks due to all of the chemicals in make-up, food, soap, hair spray, etc. It always pops into my head when the topic of chemical safety comes up. LOL.
lucky is offline  
Old 04-30-2006, 03:53 PM   #4  
Want them Muscles!
Thread Starter
 
fitgal2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 583

S/C/G: 135/129/120

Default

Totally perspective is key!

I am just saying that there has to be alternatives to wha they put into products these days. Imean, there has been proven methods to keep corps alive and thriving WITHOUT the use of pesticides other wise there owuld be no such thing as oganic...

I dunno its just dishartening to think that as individuals we try hard to take care of ourselves, eat right and exercise then we find out that the stuff we put into/on it isn't that good for use either!
What do you do?
fitgal2 is offline  
Old 04-30-2006, 07:42 PM   #5  
I restore Teeth.
 
veggielover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: GOTHAM CITY
Posts: 1,194

Default

CHemicals are a part of life. Inorganic or organic it doesn't matter. If you didn't wash your hair with shampoo, eat organic food, yadayadah.... taking all precautions to avoid these "dangerous" chemicals, YOU'D STILL DIE. I've accepted the fact that I was never meant to be immortal and these things won't scare me. I've made better choices for myself (exercise, proper diet) and to me that suffices. In any case, if they could PROVE that not ingesting or even touching any of these chemicals would make you live til 120, I'd still prefer to die at 80.

And I stress this: if you were the most healthiest person in the world, you could still develop cancer, disease etc. The fact is that these are linked to AGE. SO if you can stop time, then you found the key. I wouldn't blame chemicals; I myself am made of chemicals. Nothing is 100% good for you. Water and oxygen are essential and good for you, but believe me, if I gave you a right amount, you could die. (In the case of oxygen, any hydrocarbon will combust if enough heat is provided) THat which nourishes you can kill you as well. So small amounts will always minimize the effect. If I read that article I'd probably continue on with my life and forget that I ever read it.
veggielover is offline  
Old 05-01-2006, 05:32 AM   #6  
Senior Member
 
kaplods's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Wausau, WI
Posts: 13,383

S/C/G: SW:394/310/180

Height: 5'6"

Default

In college, I took several courses on statistics, and how research studies and statistics can be seriously misleading, especially by the time it reaches the general public by way of public media (magazines, books, tv...) The articles are usually written by regular people, and even when the writer claims to be an "expert" there is no guarantee that they really know what they are talking about (or that they are not deliberately or accidentally misleading their audience).

As a result, in most things, I am a skeptic. Whenever I hear information that scares me, I check it out. I consider whether the source might have a reason to be biased, I might check a hoax or urban legend websites, I read articles from the "other side" of the debate, I try to verify the credentials of the source...

The problem is we get so much information overload, we can't do all the research ourselves, and if we take all the articles and snippets of information at face value, we can be afraid to eat, drink, use, or wear anything.

You can't eliminate risks. Eliminating one risk, often increases another.

There are many 100% natural products that are associated with health risks including cancer. Soy, for example has been found to be associated with increases in some health problems and decreases in others. Eggs also come to mind.

You might remember several years ago, in the news, they reported several studies that showed that organic products were far more likely to cause serious food-born illnesses and death from those illnesses (mostly botulism, ecoli, and salmonella) than non-organic products. Organic eggs, vegetable and fruits and unpasteurized juices and honeys are the biggest risks.

Organic products are also more expensive, not only because people are willing to pay more, but because organic farming methods are less reliable and more expensive. More of the crops are lost, and the farms are smaller. I'm sure there are some organic methods that can be adapted for larger farms, but I don't know that we could produce enough food organically to feed everyone. Though I also think that organic and environmental options need to be explored more.

Another thing to consider is that an association with a risk, such as cancer, doesn't always mean there is a cause/effect link. For example, a study about a decade ago, linked decaf coffee with increased health risks - people who drink more decaf, were more likely to have certain health problems. Most doctors, and even the original researchers did not assume decaf caused health problems (as it is known that older people with health problems are more likely to chose decaf than younger, healthier people), but after the research was published, articles started appearing, especially in "health-oriented" magazines that concluded that decaf caused health problems.

One study years ago linked wearing a bra with increased risk breast cancer, and death rates from breast cancer. The study even suggested that the constriction of the bra might be responsible for the cancer. The researchers were practically laughed out of their profession when it was pointed out that in our culture only the smallest breasted women routinely go bra-less, and that larger breasts are associated with increased cancer risk (in part because of hormones, and also increased surface area - more breast means more opportunity for cancer to develop and go unnoticed). Even so, I wouldn't say that large breasts "Cause cancer," only that if you have large breasts you might have a slightly higher risk of cancer and that if you have a lump you may not notice it as sooner than your flat-chested friends.

I think it's ironic to worry about additives and such, when heart disease is a bigger killer than all cancers combined. And the largest cancer risks are not associated with additives, but with poor diet, lack of exercise, and obesity. Talking about banning additives with any increase in cancer risk, would be like banning all high-fat food and making it illegal to eat poorly or not get enough exercise.


I don't mean this long post as rant or lecture, it just drives me crazy to see information presented in a way that makes eating a typical grocery store carrot seem as risky as playing in traffic blindfolded. Life is full of risks, (and as veggielover pointed out, a terminal condition).

If you're concerned, then become informed. Look for information (from both sides of the argument), weigh the risks, and make your choices.
kaplods is offline  
Old 05-01-2006, 10:34 AM   #7  
Want them Muscles!
Thread Starter
 
fitgal2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 583

S/C/G: 135/129/120

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by veggielover
CHemicals are a part of life. Inorganic or organic it doesn't matter. If you didn't wash your hair with shampoo, eat organic food, yadayadah.... taking all precautions to avoid these "dangerous" chemicals, YOU'D STILL DIE. I've accepted the fact that I was never meant to be immortal and these things won't scare me. I've made better choices for myself (exercise, proper diet) and to me that suffices. In any case, if they could PROVE that not ingesting or even touching any of these chemicals would make you live til 120, I'd still prefer to die at 80.

And I stress this: if you were the most healthiest person in the world, you could still develop cancer, disease etc. The fact is that these are linked to AGE. SO if you can stop time, then you found the key. I wouldn't blame chemicals; I myself am made of chemicals. Nothing is 100% good for you. Water and oxygen are essential and good for you, but believe me, if I gave you a right amount, you could die. (In the case of oxygen, any hydrocarbon will combust if enough heat is provided) THat which nourishes you can kill you as well. So small amounts will always minimize the effect. If I read that article I'd probably continue on with my life and forget that I ever read it.
I hear what you are sayaing, and Trust me I know all too well that I am Immortal, I was the healthiest person (well I thought i was) then I did developed cancer TWICE. This is my whole point. If there are known chemicals that have a direct link to cancer/disease then why are they being used? there are proven altrunatives. thats all I am saying...
I guess I am just trying to reduce the external "chances" of ever developing it again...but who really knows if that is even possible
fitgal2 is offline  
Old 05-01-2006, 11:29 AM   #8  
Blonde Bimbo
 
almostheaven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 2,984

S/C/G: 250+/144/135

Height: 5' 4"

Default

I always remember the Surgeon General's Warning...smoking may cause cancer. Well my aunt never smoked a day in her life, never allowed it around her. She went through 3 bouts of cancer before the last one took her life. She was not overweight, but thin as a rail. She was flat chested, so it wasn't the bra.

No one really knows what causes cancer. If they did, they could stop/heal it. They're still guessing. All they can do is show one group had a higher risk. And that group happened to eat all the store veggies and not the ones from the local co-op. So? They also happen to the be the group with larger chests, or the ones who drank caffein. Who knows. These "studies" simply don't delve deep enough. They look for one cause and one cause only and test for that one cause, ignoring any other links such groups might have. And again so what. Because one group has a higher percentage of an illness does not even mean it was anything they did/didn't do that caused it. They could have just been born with it in their genes for all we know.
almostheaven is offline  
Old 05-01-2006, 12:34 PM   #9  
Senior Member
 
kaplods's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Wausau, WI
Posts: 13,383

S/C/G: SW:394/310/180

Height: 5'6"

Default

" If there are known chemicals that have a direct link to cancer/disease then why are they being used? "

But, that is the problem. I don't think that the links have been proven (despite what some articles you read imply - who is checking their facts?), or the benefit is still seen to far outweight the risk.

Besides which, we can't ban everything that might make us sick. We can't even ban everything that might make some people sick - or even things we know will kill them (peanuts, shellfish, and strawberries come to mind).

We read that one glass of wine has health benefits, but excessive (and no one knows how much that is) alcohol consumption is "directly linked" to birth defects, and cancers. Prohibition didn't work in the 20th century, and it won't work in the 21st. If some of these chemicals slightly increase cancer risks, but gigantically reduce the risks of deadly food-poisonings, or prevents millions of people from starving to death, would it help anyone to ban them?

We blame drug companies for making drugs with known risks, when at least some patients, may be anxious to take the risks, to improve their health or improve their quality of life. I have met people who are at their wits end because their arthritis medication was taken off the market because of heart-attack risk. Their pain was so bad, they were willing to take the risks in order to have quality of life, but now they don't have that choice. Their doctors are afraid to give them narcotics because they might become "addicted," and besides the narcotics make them drowsy and loopy when their old medicine didn't. As I heard one woman say, "I probably won't have a heart attack, but I'm seriously thinking about killing myself."

Scary
kaplods is offline  
Closed Thread


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:21 AM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.