Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

eloel- t1_iu4irh7 wrote

Because plastic is very, very popular and seeps into lots of things. Even outside of plastic, with anything that doesn't have proper regulations companies tend to ignore its effects on health because caring about it costs money.

3

thedl894 OP t1_iu4m2tj wrote

I figured the FDA always stopped harmful items coming to the market but it seems as if they turn a blind eye quite often

1

gollumaniac t1_iu4nmnv wrote

Sometimes we only find out much later that something we thought was OK is actually harmful. Also a key element is quantity. Something in the ppm range may not cause harm, while the same thing in the percent range could. Plus the FDA doesn't regulate everything.

3

thedl894 OP t1_iu4oiuz wrote

That’s true, only a couple generations ago babies were sleeping in lead paint cribs

1

eloel- t1_iu4mxqa wrote

Harmful is cheaper. Sometimes it just is a choice between "do we let this harmful thing feed everyone on the cheap, or do we let them starve"

1

thedl894 OP t1_iu4ofao wrote

That’s fair. I never once ate ramen noodles and thought they were good for my organs

1

ShalmaneserIII t1_iu4sdsk wrote

If you wanted an all-natural lifestyle, you'd have to live in a cave and kill your dinner with a club. Even then, the smoke from the cooking fire might get you.

0

eloel- t1_iu4ukbi wrote

Why are the options "unhealthy" and "all natural"? What makes "all natural" inherently healthy, or man-made inherently unhealthy? As far as I can tell, half the things in nature would fuck up a human if we ate them, so I don't think the divide is where you think it is.

2

ShalmaneserIII t1_iu4uzc8 wrote

Nobody bothers to count that. How long would it take before we noticed that carrots were as dangerous as cigarettes if they were?

0