3 ms·

>- Fragrance: Welcome to life. Everything is scented. I hate it, but putting a scary orange "D" next to it should make you roll your eyes in light of the other

>- Fragrance: Welcome to life. Everything is scented. I hate it, but putting a scary orange "D" next to it should make you roll your eyes in light of the other fragrances that saturate thousands of other products that don't get rinsed away, and thus stay in the air around you. No, it's not everything, and it's not everywhere. There are many spaces which are free of fragrance for the most part. It really does INCREASE QUALITY OF LIFE for many people, who are sometimes NOT EVEN AWARE of the effects this synthetic crap has on their physical well-being. And all it takes is JUST A LITTLE BIT OF VIGILANCE on the space administrator's part in not accepting and not allowing it into the space. Just like we are creating safe spaces which are not tolerant of bullying, bigotry, harrasment, etc., many are also creating safe spaces in terms of hazardous chemicals. You are ignoring a lot of progress in this area when you paint things as hopeless or good enough. And EWG is one of the most competent, clear, and level-headed organizations working in this space. They provide scientifically supported, solid, and well-researched information in an easy to understand format. I don't think you are qualified to criticize them given what you wrote above.

nate_meurer 5y ago
I completely agree about the fragrances. I hate them, and I'm happy to hear that it's getting better. > And EWG is one of the most competent, clear, and level-headed organizations working in this space. They provide scientifically supported, solid, and well-researched information in an easy to understand format. Like I said, they do some good work, but they do some really shoddy, clickbaity stuff too, and this detergent link is a good example. You can tell it was written by people with no knowledge of chemistry. > I don't think you are qualified to criticize them given what you wrote above. Instead of an ad-hominim, are you able to defend the EWG's assertions? For example, can you explain why the EWG says a tiny amount of nitric acid used to adjust pH is a hazard of any kind? Can you explain why they think that any nitric acid could possibly survive in the finished alkaline product, or why it would be a problem even if it did? Can you find any studies or evidence of any kind to back them up? How about the zinc? Or any of the others that I mentioned earlier? Honestly this isn't difficult. It's not advanced chemistry. It's chemistry 101. EWG has no excuse for not knowing better.

nate_meurer 5y ago

I completely agree about the fragrances. I hate them, and I'm happy to hear that it's getting better. > And EWG is one of the most competent, clear, and level-headed organizations working in this space. They provide scientifically supported, solid, and well-researched information in an easy to understand format. Like I said, they do some good work, but they do some really shoddy, clickbaity stuff too, and this detergent link is a good example. You can tell it was written by people with no knowledge of chemistry. > I don't think you are qualified to criticize them given what you wrote above. Instead of an ad-hominim, are you able to defend the EWG's assertions? For example, can you explain why the EWG says a tiny amount of nitric acid used to adjust pH is a hazard of any kind? Can you explain why they think that any nitric acid could possibly survive in the finished alkaline product, or why it would be a problem even if it did? Can you find any studies or evidence of any kind to back them up? How about the zinc? Or any of the others that I mentioned earlier? Honestly this isn't difficult. It's not advanced chemistry. It's chemistry 101. EWG has no excuse for not knowing better.