Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

All-natural products


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
59 replies to this topic

#21 of 60 OFFLINE   Joseph DeMartino

Joseph DeMartino

    Lead Actor



  • 8,303 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 1969
  • Real Name:Joseph DeMartino
  • LocationFlorida

Posted September 02 2005 - 04:45 AM

Quote:
I didn't know toothpaste had sugar in it.

It doesn't.

Quote:
That seems counterproductive.


It would be if it had sugar in it, which is why it doesn't. Posted Image Artificial sweeteners are used in sweet toothpastes.

Regards,

Joe

#22 of 60 OFFLINE   Philip Hamm

Philip Hamm

    Lead Actor



  • 6,885 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 23 1999

Posted September 02 2005 - 04:56 AM

Quote:
Along with the "man-made chemical" scam. (Hint: Except for some transuranic elements created briefly in laboratories, there are no "man made chemicals".)
Um.. No.

Perhaps you're confusing man-made chemicals with man-made elements?

Elements are the building blocks for chemicals, they are not interchangable.

For instance two atoms of the element Hydrogen (H) and one atom of the element Oxygen (O) make up the chemical Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) commonly referred to as water.

H2O is a chemical, Oxogen and Hydrogen are elements. It is correct that there are no man-made elements other than some transuracic ones which are created mostly in nuclear reactions.

The term man-made chemicals refers to chemical compounds, which are many elements chained together. There are many of these, they are not unusual, they're all around us. Your fingers are probably touching the plastic of your mouse right now. Many of these combinations of elements absolutely do not exist in the natural world and are entirely "man-made". Some are beneficial, particularly phamaceuticals. Some are unbelievably toxic, particularly dioxins. Some are neutral, like most plastics. All are most definitely man-made.
Philip Hamm
Moderator Emeritus

#23 of 60 OFFLINE   Jason Seaver

Jason Seaver

    Lead Actor



  • 9,306 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 1969

Posted September 02 2005 - 04:56 AM

Quote:
I'm at least going to try some of the Burt's stuff to see how I like it. I'll take a look at the ingredients when I get them.
Now, see, I'd reverse the order on that. But that's just me.
Jay's Movie Blog - A movie-viewing diary.
Transplanted Life: Sci-fi soap opera about a man placed in a new body, updated two or three times a week.
Trading Post Inn - Another gender-bending soap, with different collaborators writing different points of view.

"What? Since when was this an energy...

#24 of 60 OFFLINE   Cameron Yee

Cameron Yee

    Executive Producer



  • 10,593 posts
  • Join Date: May 09 2002
  • Real Name:Cameron Yee
  • LocationSince 2006

Posted September 02 2005 - 05:09 AM

Quote:
I didn't know toothpaste had sugar in it. That seems counterproductive.
There was a SNL commercial with a British toothpaste that was made of sugar. It was hilarious. Any yes, toothpastes use artifical sweeteners.
One thing leads to another at cameronyee.com

#25 of 60 OFFLINE   Rob Gardiner

Rob Gardiner

    Screenwriter



  • 2,950 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 15 2002

Posted September 02 2005 - 05:11 AM

Sarah,

Do you realize that in addition to fluoridating water, there are studies underway to fluoridate:
  • Salt
  • Flour
  • Fruit juices
  • Soup
  • Sugar
  • Milk
  • Ice cream
Ice cream, Sarah. Children's ice cream. Posted Image

But seriously,

Mort, Garrett, and the others who brought up this issue in the thread are correct: there are no restrictions on the use of the word "natural" to describe any product. They could put radioactive waste in a can and there would be nothing stopping them from labelling it "100% Natural Radioactive Waste".

I would recommend doing some research. Read the ingredient labels, and search Google and/or Wikipedia to find out what is really in the natural products you're buying, or the "unnatural" products you're avoiding. What I like about using Wikipedia for this type of information is that they strive to present a Neutral Point of View (NPOV). They are usually pretty good about identifying issues for which there exists genuine controversy, or for which there is no consensus.

#26 of 60 OFFLINE   Scott Dautel

Scott Dautel

    Second Unit



  • 471 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 06 1998

Posted September 02 2005 - 05:58 AM

read this please ....

It's just so silly. Their product line is "all natural" ... only except they use fluoride (Na monofluorophosphate, derived from all natural "fluorspar, an ore") ... because IF YOU WANT TO PREVENT CAVITIES, YOU HAVE TO USE FLUORIDE. Otherwise, brush your teeth with a stick.

Also, scroll to the bottom and study the ingredient list on this one, which uses SLS & CAPB surfactants. All natural, I guess, just like the stainless steel chemical reactor they came out of. Posted Image

#27 of 60 OFFLINE   Jeff Gatie

Jeff Gatie

    Lead Actor



  • 6,530 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 19 2002

Posted September 02 2005 - 06:01 AM

Quote:
It's just so silly. Their product line is "all natural" ... only except they use fluoride

Launch the planes, Mandrake! They've already got the hippies and now they're coming for us!!:Posted Image

#28 of 60 OFFLINE   Drew Bethel

Drew Bethel

    Screenwriter



  • 1,210 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 22 1999

Posted September 02 2005 - 07:38 AM

Yes, "natural" is an unregulated term. A safe bet (at a minimum) is looking for "fragrance free" or products that specify that they use only 100% certified organic essential plant oils, which do not use phthalates.

For instance, Johnson's Baby Shampoo uses quaternium -15, a preservative that contains formaldehyde, a probable human carcinogen, according to the EPA. And "fragrance," as noted above, is a catch-all term disguising the presence of problematic phthalates.
"The man who views the world at 50 the same as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life." Muhammed Ali, (Cassius Clay)

#29 of 60 OFFLINE   Scott Dautel

Scott Dautel

    Second Unit



  • 471 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 06 1998

Posted September 02 2005 - 08:03 AM

mis-information here on Quaternium-15

#30 of 60 OFFLINE   Joseph DeMartino

Joseph DeMartino

    Lead Actor



  • 8,303 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 1969
  • Real Name:Joseph DeMartino
  • LocationFlorida

Posted September 02 2005 - 08:53 AM

Quote:
...a preservative that contains formaldehyde, a probable human carcinogen, according to the EPA.


So we have one product that "contains" an unspecified amount of another product, that is considered a "probable" (meaning, "we don't know") human carcinogen (nothing about what kind of dose or exposure is required for it to "probably" cause cancer in humans) by the EPA (a government agency with a long history of peddling politicized pseudoscience and faking results to produce predeterined outcomes.) And people make decisions based on this kind of "information". No wonder there's so much hysteria in this country.

Regards,

Joe

#31 of 60 OFFLINE   Kwang Suh

Kwang Suh

    Supporting Actor



  • 849 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 04 1999

Posted September 02 2005 - 09:01 AM

Quote:
a preservative that contains formaldehyde, a probable human carcinogen
You do know that the human body makes it's own formaldehyde, right?

If you don't want formaldehyde in your system, you'd better stop eating. Rotting food in your gut forms it.

#32 of 60 OFFLINE   BrianW

BrianW

    Screenwriter



  • 2,553 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 30 1999

Posted September 02 2005 - 09:29 AM

In the spirit of Philip's informed post regarding elements, naturally occurring chemicals, and man-made chemicals, I think a distinction should also be made between natural and synthetic chemicals. Although most plastics don't occur in nature and must be man-made, some naturally-occurring chemicals, like sodium chloride (salt), and even hydrogen monoxide (water) can be just as easily (if not more easily) man-made as any non-naturally-occurring chemical. Man-made chemicals identical to naturally-occurring chemicals are generally referred to as synthetic.

Some people are of a mind to think that naturally occurring chemicals are superior to synthetic chemicals. That's why there's a market for Sea Salt ("from the frigid waters of the North Atlantic") and vitamins derived from plant and herbal extracts.

However, I'm of a mind to think that synthetic chemicals are identical in every way to the naturally-occurring chemicals they replicate. A water molecule from a hydrogen fuel cell, for instance, cannot be distinguished from a water molecule from the ocean, and vitamins produced using chemical reactions cannot be distinguished from vitamins produced from plant extracts.

But that's just me. (Who said that first? Posted Image)
-Brian
Come, Rubidia. Let's blow this epoch.

#33 of 60 OFFLINE   Kwang Suh

Kwang Suh

    Supporting Actor



  • 849 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 04 1999

Posted September 02 2005 - 10:19 AM

I use sea salt because it doesn't contain iodine - I find the taste of iodine objectionable.

#34 of 60 OFFLINE   Joseph DeMartino

Joseph DeMartino

    Lead Actor



  • 8,303 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 1969
  • Real Name:Joseph DeMartino
  • LocationFlorida

Posted September 02 2005 - 10:55 AM

Quote:
I use sea salt because it doesn't contain iodine - I find the taste of iodine objectionable.


You do realize that you can buy ordinary table salt without iodine, right? Or use kosher salt, which also doen't contain iodine. It isn't like the choices are iodized or sea salt. Posted Image

I've never heard of anyone who could taste the difference between iodized and non-iodized salt of any kind, but if you do and have a preference then of course you should you do what you like.

But I hope you are getting iodine from some other source, as small amounts of the mineral are important to human health, especially thyroid health

Regards,

Joe

#35 of 60 OFFLINE   Drew Bethel

Drew Bethel

    Screenwriter



  • 1,210 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 22 1999

Posted September 02 2005 - 11:05 AM

Quote:
the EPA (a government agency with a long history of peddling politicized pseudoscience and faking results to produce predeterined outcomes.


Do you have any proof of this? Please provide.
"The man who views the world at 50 the same as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life." Muhammed Ali, (Cassius Clay)

#36 of 60 OFFLINE   Brian Perry

Brian Perry

    Screenwriter



  • 2,815 posts
  • Join Date: May 06 1999

Posted September 02 2005 - 11:07 AM

Drew, what's wrong with fluoride?

#37 of 60 OFFLINE   RobertR

RobertR

    Lead Actor



  • 9,519 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 19 1998

Posted September 02 2005 - 11:11 AM

Quote:
Do you have any proof of this? Please provide.

Here's one:

http://reason.com/sullum/072298.shtml

#38 of 60 OFFLINE   Rob Gardiner

Rob Gardiner

    Screenwriter



  • 2,950 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 15 2002

Posted September 02 2005 - 11:12 AM

This link http://en.wikipedia..../EPA#Corruption provides some background to the issue that Joseph mentioned, but the nature of the information behind that link probably precludes further discussion of the issue, if this thread is to stay within forum rules.

NOTE: the link I provided is from a source that strives to present a neutral point of view, while the link that Robert R provides (in the post above this one) is from a partisan (Libertarian) publication.

#39 of 60 OFFLINE   RobertR

RobertR

    Lead Actor



  • 9,519 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 19 1998

Posted September 02 2005 - 11:41 AM

Both links show that EPA allows science to be influenced by political considerations.

#40 of 60 OFFLINE   Drew Bethel

Drew Bethel

    Screenwriter



  • 1,210 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 22 1999

Posted September 02 2005 - 04:37 PM

Um, you refute the credibility of the EPA with some obsucre website called Reason-online?

Look Joe, it's well documented that formaldehyde is an occupational hazard, don't you think it's prudent to err on the side of caution for prolong exposure to common nonoccupatonal sources? Are you also going to argue with The International Agency for Research on Cancer when their epidemiological study [http://www-cie.iarc.....62/formal.html] concluded: "There is limited evidence in humans for the carcinogenicity of formaldehyde. There is sufficient evidence in experimental animals for the carcinogenicity of formaldehyde."

Are you going to argue with peer-reviewed studies published in PubMed?:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.....&dopt=Abstract
http://www.ncbi.nlm.....&dopt=Abstract


Quote:
At exposure levels less than one order of magnitude greater than those often found in human occupational and nonoccupational environments, it induces squamous cell carcinomas in the nasal cavity of rats. Recent reviews suggest that formaldehyde exposure should be treated as though it poses a carcinogenic risk to humans and should be reduced to the lowest feasible level.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.....&dopt=Abstract

Are yo going to argue with the National Cancer Institute, who endorses the finding of the EPA?

http://cis.nci.nih.gov/fact/3_8.htm

Yeah, the EPA...what do they know!
"The man who views the world at 50 the same as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life." Muhammed Ali, (Cassius Clay)


Back to After Hours Lounge



Forum Nav Content I Follow