Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Endocrine-disrupting chemical exposure in US: disease burden and cost analysis

thelancet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 164 posts

Re: Endocrine-disrupting chemical exposure in US: disease burden and cost analysis

#61

Post by zdragnar »

_qhtn wrote: post #36
Analemma_ wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Buy from a farmers' market, and ask. Most of the sellers will know off the top of their heads exactly how their crops have been grown and what was/wasn't used, and if they don't, that's a seller to avoid. As an added bonus, farmers' markets tend to be cheaper than supermarkets even as the food is better. It mystifies me that they aren't more commonly used and have a reputation as being for rich hipsters (i.e., like W…

> It mystifies me that they aren't more commonly used and have a reputation as being for rich hipsters Are there many farmers markets open for the second shift worker getting off at, say, 10pm?

Depends on where you live. Within very easy driving distance from me (or a rigorous bicycle ride) are farmers markets that, put together, are open from 8:30AM to 6:30PM. If you're working the second shift (lucky you, I only ever got first or third) you'll have no problem being able to get to one of those at least once a week.

Re: Endocrine-disrupting chemical exposure in US: disease burden and cost analysis

#62

Post by zdragnar »

linkmotif wrote: post #42
Analemma_ wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Buy from a farmers' market, and ask. Most of the sellers will know off the top of their heads exactly how their crops have been grown and what was/wasn't used, and if they don't, that's a seller to avoid. As an added bonus, farmers' markets tend to be cheaper than supermarkets even as the food is better. It mystifies me that they aren't more commonly used and have a reputation as being for rich hipsters (i.e., like W…

Never been to a cheaper farmer’s market in my life. I’ve lived in New York, Chicago and Baltimore. Intrigued by this concept. Can’t imagine it actually exists anywhere.

Toll roads, long driving, competition and dealing with parking and paying to set up in a high-demand area are all problems farmers face at large city markets. Go almost anywhere else and you'll indeed be surprised.

Re: Endocrine-disrupting chemical exposure in US: disease burden and cost analysis

#63

Post by nostrademons »

felix_nagaand wrote: post #53
smt88 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The positive correlation between testosterone and violence is not a myth in animals. It has also been observed in humans, though the correlation is weak[1]. 1. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S135917890...

A weak correlation cannot intelligently be used to justify anything except further research...

In this case, it's a weak correlation across a meta-analysis of 45 independent studies. While I'd agree that further research would probably be beneficial, this is a result that already includes some further research.

Re: Endocrine-disrupting chemical exposure in US: disease burden and cost analysis

#64

Post by mirimir »

tlb wrote: post #2

Consider the possibility that some such chemicals are good for society. For example, exposure to pseudoestrogens may reduce violence. Medical literature doesn't really have a category for this -- there is only 'burden and cost' of environmental effects, assuming that any change from evolved human biology is bad. But it seems like evolved human biology is a little too violent for the society we want, and perhaps we'd…

Damn, that's quite the conspiracy theory. So are you arguing that radical SCUM-style feminists have pushed the commercialization of persistent estrogenic chemicals? To basically chemically castrate troublesome men?

Although it's quite the SF trope, I can't imagine how it's plausible. Simple careless greed is the most likely reason.

Re: Endocrine-disrupting chemical exposure in US: disease burden and cost analysis

#65

Post by Fomite »

linkmotif wrote: post #42
Analemma_ wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Buy from a farmers' market, and ask. Most of the sellers will know off the top of their heads exactly how their crops have been grown and what was/wasn't used, and if they don't, that's a seller to avoid. As an added bonus, farmers' markets tend to be cheaper than supermarkets even as the food is better. It mystifies me that they aren't more commonly used and have a reputation as being for rich hipsters (i.e., like W…

Never been to a cheaper farmer’s market in my life. I’ve lived in New York, Chicago and Baltimore. Intrigued by this concept. Can’t imagine it actually exists anywhere.

Those are all fairly large cities. I find, living genuinely pretty close to the farms themselves, that the farmers market around here is pretty affordable. And nicely does accept things like WIC.

Re: Endocrine-disrupting chemical exposure in US: disease burden and cost analysis

#67

Post by elandybarr »

linkmotif wrote: post #42
Analemma_ wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Buy from a farmers' market, and ask. Most of the sellers will know off the top of their heads exactly how their crops have been grown and what was/wasn't used, and if they don't, that's a seller to avoid. As an added bonus, farmers' markets tend to be cheaper than supermarkets even as the food is better. It mystifies me that they aren't more commonly used and have a reputation as being for rich hipsters (i.e., like W…

Never been to a cheaper farmer’s market in my life. I’ve lived in New York, Chicago and Baltimore. Intrigued by this concept. Can’t imagine it actually exists anywhere.

It is certainly the case in the Central Valley in California. I got great wine grapes for $1/pound as well and wonderful organic persimmons for that same price. However, that area has a bunch of actual farmers.

Re: Endocrine-disrupting chemical exposure in US: disease burden and cost analysis

#68

Post by ProAm »

VMG wrote: post #50
ProAm wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can buy it right on the site, its only 31 dollars.

That's incredibly expensive

Maybe email the authors? Its weird to see people asking to steal something straight up on HN. Its a product, has a price, and people dont want to pay it, and $31.50 is cheap.

Re: Endocrine-disrupting chemical exposure in US: disease burden and cost analysis

#69

Post by bunderbunder »

Bjartr wrote: post #66
crawshaw wrote: post #27

How do I buy food in the US that I know hasn't been exposed to such pesticides?

Buy seeds and grow them yourself.

Careful, though - if you live in an area that's been populated for a long time, that may increase your exposure to lead. Maybe get the soil tested first.

Re: Endocrine-disrupting chemical exposure in US: disease burden and cost analysis

#70

Post by lumberjack »

sschueller wrote: post #24
cryoshon wrote: post #14

note: monsanto's roundup chemical is an endocrine disruptor. we put it on most of our food supply. this contributes to the high cost burden. secondary note: you don't want to have endocrine disruptors anywhere. they aren't good for you.

The purchase of Monsanto by Beyer has to be dumbest corporate acquisition ever. After all these years it is now that the lawsuits are coming in as the science and leaks start pilling up providing the fodder. Even dumber is that Beyer is retiring the brand Monsanto which will result in Beyer itself being named in the lawsuits and media. They probably thought they could shake it off like Dow chemical when they aquired…

Monsanto teamed up with Bayer to gain influence within the EU. Monsanto was having trouble bribing EU officials. Bayer already have them in their pockets. Might not be good for PR, but Monsanto was terrified because the EU almost banned Glyphosate last year. Bayer itself does not have a good PR image either.
Post reply on HN