4 ms·

Why is it impossible for something to get into the food chain for a large number of people? You've got loads of spraying, processing and packaging going on in t

by vosper 4y ago

Why is it impossible for something to get into the food chain for a large number of people? You've got loads of spraying, processing and packaging going on in the industrial food chain. Even if you have myriad producers, ruling out an issue due to centralization of processing, they might all be wrapping their product in the same materials.

nh23423fefe 4y ago
It's conspiracy theory that simple point in time causes have widespread diffuse effects. Imagining there is "something in the water" is paranoia
- omniglottal 4y ago
  There, in fact, is something in the water. One substance is a known neurotoxin used to treat tooth decay, but statistically seen to decrease IQ. You can call it paranoia, but that makes you more out of touch with reality while you quash viable, accurate discourse. Japan's culture already predisposes its citizens to more estrogenics than the US consumer sees... but go on, let's have another few decades of indoctrinated ignorance because you cannot be honest and accurate about reality. Don't attribute to paranoia your own distinct lack of thought about extant phenomenea. If an effect exists, causes exist which far outweigh your inability to measure them distinctly.
  - the_only_law 4y ago
    I like how instead of expanding on your idea, you use weasel-wording and spend more time attacking GP. That makes you more trustworthy.
- vosper 4y ago
  Sure, but there's a difference between "impossible" and "not supported by current evidence". As another poster points out, there is an example with flouride (though I am no anti-flouridist). Other examples might be widespread use of BPA and PFAS. Air-pollution might be another example of something that could effect much of a population (though it's not in the food chain). I'm not a conspiracy theorist, and until we have strong scientific evidence I won't claim that there are population-wide effects. But saying it's "impossible" is wrong.

by vosper 4y ago

nh23423fefe 4y ago

It's conspiracy theory that simple point in time causes have widespread diffuse effects. Imagining there is "something in the water" is paranoia

omniglottal 4y ago
There, in fact, is something in the water. One substance is a known neurotoxin used to treat tooth decay, but statistically seen to decrease IQ. You can call it paranoia, but that makes you more out of touch with reality while you quash viable, accurate discourse. Japan's culture already predisposes its citizens to more estrogenics than the US consumer sees... but go on, let's have another few decades of indoctrinated ignorance because you cannot be honest and accurate about reality. Don't attribute to paranoia your own distinct lack of thought about extant phenomenea. If an effect exists, causes exist which far outweigh your inability to measure them distinctly.
- the_only_law 4y ago
  I like how instead of expanding on your idea, you use weasel-wording and spend more time attacking GP. That makes you more trustworthy.
vosper 4y ago
Sure, but there's a difference between "impossible" and "not supported by current evidence". As another poster points out, there is an example with flouride (though I am no anti-flouridist). Other examples might be widespread use of BPA and PFAS. Air-pollution might be another example of something that could effect much of a population (though it's not in the food chain). I'm not a conspiracy theorist, and until we have strong scientific evidence I won't claim that there are population-wide effects. But saying it's "impossible" is wrong.