3 ms·
A lack of evidence that a substance is harmful does not corroborate the claim that it is safe. Personally, I'd rather not buy any products containing these rela
by runeks 12y ago
A lack of evidence that a substance is harmful does not corroborate the claim that it is safe. Personally, I'd rather not buy any products containing these relatively unknown substances, and completely avoid the risk of them being harmful.
I think people are generally hesitant when it comes to filling their bodies with unknown chemicals.
Animals avoid this by instinct (rats only eat small amounts of something they've never tasted before, in order to test its reaction in the body), humans mostly use science to try to gauge which chemicals are detrimental to the body.
Of course, as with all activities involving the human mind, sometimes it can get out of hand (eg. parents not vaccinating their child because they believe it causes autism). But, all in all, I think the fundamental resistance to filling our bodies with unknown substances is quite healthy.
- ZoFreX 12y agoYour reasoning seems sound to me. That said, can we really rule out the possibility that stainless or glass or silicone will have problems found in them? We may have been using (some of) them for hundreds of years, but we haven't been scrutinizing them scientifically for that long.
- runeks 12y ago> That said, can we really rule out the possibility that stainless or glass or silicone will have problems found in them? No. We can't completely rule out anything, if you ask me. But, glass and stainless steel have been used in sensitive environments (eg. chemical synthesis) for around a century, so we'd most likely have discovered if harmful substances leak from these materials. It would show up when a substance has been synthesized, and some sort of chromatography/mass spectrometry is performed on the resulting substance.