171–180 of 341 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>>Turns out masks are not made of asbestos. Neither are cigarettes, but getting enough cigarette smoke in your lung does causes cancer.
It also turns out masks are not made of burning cigarettes. How many more of these do we have to do?
The actual study is here https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030438942... The study presents three scenarios assuming different assumptions about the mass of plastic particles. In the worst case scenario, where I think the assumptions are bad, they estimate 5g of plastic per week. In the other two scenarios which used more complex but more realistic modelling they estimate 0.15 and 0.3g of plastic cons…
I can't take anyone seriously who publishes a pie-chart like this: https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S03043894203199...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's pretty clear the epidemic of obesity and metabolic disease is largely caused by sugar https://youtu.be/dBnniua6-oM
It’s not at all clear that the current epidemic is caused by sugar. Lustig is a great speaker, and I’ll admit that when I first watched that I was quite convinced. His position, however, is still not representative of a consensus within the field, and for good reason. While sugar consumption is likely detrimental to one’s overall health. Simply cutting out sugar is not necessarily going to lead to better weight manag…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The form matters. The plastic in masks is not inhalable, and in all likelihood wearing a mask reduces inhaled plastics like it reduces inhaling of any other solid.
Micro plastics mostly come from synthetic fibers, like the fabric in masks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Eating a credit card full of plastic per year sounds totally natural. Nothing to worry about!
I'm sure we eat that much silica powder.. what makes a granule of plastic worse? I'm not discounting the potential problem of microplastics, but I'm not seeing a clear description of what it actually does to a person. Embed and raise cancer risk?
I was surprised about the honey. Geezz.
Anyways, i've got about 35 fruit trees, and 90 berry bushes in the backyard and I plan to eat primarily from that as soon as they generate enough food..
This article conflates particles of any size, and often does not even mention sizes, e.g., '28 particles' in a serving of beer? That is imprecise (doesn't mention size) and wrong: probably way to little, as nano particles are used in filtering (clarifying) beer. The articles also doesn't really tell me how to avoid all that plastic. If 40 percent of human diet contains plastic, then there's hope, so which 60 percent…
Personally, I think that in answer to the question of “how to avoid all that plastic?”, the article is leaning more towards “take action to stop the plastic from being produced and added to food in the first place”. While it makes the problem larger from an individual perspective, the alternative of simply trying to avoid it in our own foods would mean that our available foods shrink over time as plastics continue to…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s not at all clear that the current epidemic is caused by sugar. Lustig is a great speaker, and I’ll admit that when I first watched that I was quite convinced. His position, however, is still not representative of a consensus within the field, and for good reason. While sugar consumption is likely detrimental to one’s overall health. Simply cutting out sugar is not necessarily going to lead to better weight manag…
Consensus is not a necessary condition for truth. An idea can have no one believing it and be correct, and another idea can have everyone believing it and be wrong.
That said, it does beg the question: why, 12 years after that video was published, has the field not come to an agreement, if it is “pretty clearly” the truth?
One could come up with various explanations, including lobbying by big sugar, but it falls flat when you consider that the sugar industry is only a small fraction of the industrialized food industry, there’s plenty of lobbying and influence to go around.
At the end of the day, there are only a few things that are clear: junk food is bad, Americans eat too many calories, and could stand to eat more fruits and vegetables.
The actual study is here https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030438942... The study presents three scenarios assuming different assumptions about the mass of plastic particles. In the worst case scenario, where I think the assumptions are bad, they estimate 5g of plastic per week. In the other two scenarios which used more complex but more realistic modelling they estimate 0.15 and 0.3g of plastic cons…
I saw a neat video which I cant find where a guy buys Himalayan salt, puts it under a microscope, and pulls out plastic. It's disturbing how plastic is in the salt and almost impossible to remove.
How, exactly, would plastic be appearing in rock salt that was laid down millions of years ago?