221–230 of 309 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Fruit of the Earth - Gel - Aloe Vera Gel - 2.78 2.94* (ppm Benzene) Aloe Vera Gel? Sounds like straight up terrible quality standards to get benzene in an Aloe Vera gel. Stuff like like this makes me hesitant to use any product
The less chemicals you use, the better. Use simple soaps and deoderants, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the parent comment's link: > A Reuters examination of many of those documents, as well as deposition and trial testimony, shows that from at least 1971 to the early 2000s, the company’s raw talc and finished powders sometimes tested positive for small amounts of asbestos, and that company executives, mine managers, scientists, doctors and lawyers fretted over the problem and how to address it while failing to di…
> sometimes tested positive for small amounts of asbestos And the question I have asked is where is the evidence that such small quantities are a risk? The UK links I have posted suggest otherwise. This is why I am asking. I'm puzzled... are the US courts are saying "OMG Asbestos" rather than looking at safe levels? What if the same courts said "OMG 5G" ! This is why I am asking a genuine question.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cyanide occurs naturally in apple cores. It is the dose that makes the poison. The UK links I have cited say the low levels are not an issue. I've genuinely asked what evidence the US courts are using and I appear to have come up against group think. I did not expect this on HN. I'd genuinely appreciate it if somebody can provide evidence citing the risk is other than negligible.
Asbestos -> Cancer. Safe amount = 0.
Alcohol -> Cancer.
Safe amount = 0.
Alcohol content of fresh bread > 0
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This might be true at the very low end of the market, but most sunscreen brands that people care about enough to have loyalty are uniquely sourced products.
They aren't using benzene intentionally as an ingredient. So even if they aren't just reselling a generic product this is likely an impurity in one of the ingredients. It doesn't really matter if its a white label or if its custom manufactured for the big brand. In the end it could still vary next month if the source materials are not sufficiently controlled. Although it could be the same if the process results in co…
https://www.valisure.com/wp-content/uploads/Valisure-Citizen...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> sometimes tested positive for small amounts of asbestos And the question I have asked is where is the evidence that such small quantities are a risk? The UK links I have posted suggest otherwise. This is why I am asking. I'm puzzled... are the US courts are saying "OMG Asbestos" rather than looking at safe levels? What if the same courts said "OMG 5G" ! This is why I am asking a genuine question.
Because there is no safe level of exposure to asbestos. From the above Reuters article "The World Health Organization and other authorities recognize no safe level of exposure to asbestos. While most people exposed never develop cancer, for some, even small amounts of asbestos are enough to trigger the disease years later." https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/johnsona...
I actually was at a landfill expansion project where a backhoe digging down through the trash hit some bags labeled asbestos. I’m glad it was raining. Also worked in a building with asbestos in the floor tiles. Fine when not disturbed, but anytime they had to remove them it was a production.
My family recently went through the search for a decent sunscreen and settled on this link for useful info about which sunscreens have nasty chemicals: https://www.ewg.org/sunscreen/ Our search was not exhaustive (and I can't really vouch for the link that was used) so if you have a better link, please don't keep it a secret.
I'm gonna make a radical suggestion. Maybe just try ditching sunscreen altogether. Yes, it's probably true that exposure to the sun increases the risk of skin cancer. But in the US skin cancer accounts for fewer than 1% of all deaths. In contrast the quintile of people with the highest exposure to the sun have half the all-cause mortality as the quintile with the lowest sun exposure.[1] In particular sunbathers enjoy…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Johnson and Johnson - which just payed out on a case relating to cancer from baby-powders I asked this question in another post and did not get a reply. The US links sited state no evidence for talc causing cancer. A search of the NHS website also suggests no clear evidence [1]. Cancer Research (a respected UK charity) give a layman's summary (albeit focusing on ovarian cancer), stating no clear evidence and pointi…
I see people started downvoting this, if you do, please explain why.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We went through a similar search recently. Part of the challenge is that the US rules are well behind Europe and Asia in terms of whats OK or not ingredient wise. With the new push toward reef friendly ingredients, it also complicates things. Physical barriers like Zinc generally offer reasonable UVB (this is the SPF rating) protection, but poor UVA (not sure there is a rating in US, but you'll see PA++++... on impor…
Just curious, what EU brand/brands did you end up going with? I couldn't find anything specific to that on the EWG website.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because there is no safe level of exposure to asbestos. From the above Reuters article "The World Health Organization and other authorities recognize no safe level of exposure to asbestos. While most people exposed never develop cancer, for some, even small amounts of asbestos are enough to trigger the disease years later." https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/johnsona...
> Because there is no safe level of exposure to asbestos. I think we are getting to the bottom of this :-) The UK Health and Safety Executive state... "The control limit for asbestos is 0.1 asbestos fibres per cubic centimetre of air (0.1 f/cm3). The control limit is not a 'safe' level and exposure from work activities involving asbestos must be reduced to as far below the control limit as possible."[1] Maybe this is…
The UK took its time but they did fully ban Asbestos in 1999.