Except that you can spray more expensive less toxic sprays that don't have any where near that level of hazard to humans. That is why so many small farmers are trying out organic sprays.
Sorry to comment so late but - yes, yes there is real hazard to humans when spraying or consuming something sprayed recently with toxic chemicals, I'm not sure how you can refute that but feel free to link to something.
And are you talking about genetically modified humans or plants?
Chicken can have Salmonella... so I don't touch it till I cook it.
These crops are being sprayed with a chemical that can be harmful in large doses, but harmless is low doses... similar to the arsenic in almonds... will you eat almonds?
The story that goes around is that the crops have been engineered to be more tolerant of pesticide, meaning that more can be used, meaning that so much is used that it actually "soaks in" and thus the normal washing and/or cooking process isn't going to get rid of as much as one would think - meaning a larger cumulative dose over time which has an effect on health.
I don't know if any of that is actually legitimate or not, but that's the argument being presented.
That thought process is not supported by scientific evidence.
Even if it were, the amount that could be "soaked up" for a single serving at a single point in time would be far less than likely ingested were one openly exposing their hands and lungs to applying all the pesticide to an entire batch of crops. Again, it's not the substance, it's the dosage.
Nod, that's the argument I've heard being made though. They insist that it's much like certain other substances that build up in the body over time, so that there's a cumulative effect (or that young children, with smaller bodies, are more affected by even small doses.) Like I said, I have no idea about the scientific validity of any of those arguments; I'm just answering the question: "'how is it terrifying' to the people arguing against it?" I'm not one of those folks because I have yet to be convinced that harm has been demonstrated.
FDA examining antibacterial soaps, body washes (http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/16/health/fda-antibacterial/)
Manufacturers of antibacterial hand soap and body wash will be required to prove their products are more effective than plain soap and water in preventing illness and the spread of infection, under a proposed rule announced Monday by the Food and Drug Administration. Those manufacturers also will be required to prove their products are safe for long-term use, the agency said. Further, some data suggest that long-term exposure to certain active ingredients used in antibacterial products -- for example, triclosan (liquid soaps) and triclocarban (bar soaps) -- could pose health risks, such as bacterial resistance or hormonal effects."
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2013-12-17 03:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-12-17 05:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-12-18 03:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-12-18 03:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-12-19 06:56 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-12-19 12:42 pm (UTC)Thankfully, the genetic modifications coming into play are going to make a lot of this moot in the coming years.
no subject
Date: 2013-12-22 03:13 am (UTC)And are you talking about genetically modified humans or plants?
no subject
Date: 2013-12-17 07:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-12-17 09:21 pm (UTC)These crops are being sprayed with a chemical that can be harmful in large doses, but harmless is low doses... similar to the arsenic in almonds... will you eat almonds?
no subject
Date: 2013-12-18 01:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-12-18 02:33 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-12-18 02:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-12-18 01:30 pm (UTC)I don't know if any of that is actually legitimate or not, but that's the argument being presented.
no subject
Date: 2013-12-18 05:58 pm (UTC)Even if it were, the amount that could be "soaked up" for a single serving at a single point in time would be far less than likely ingested were one openly exposing their hands and lungs to applying all the pesticide to an entire batch of crops. Again, it's not the substance, it's the dosage.
no subject
Date: 2013-12-18 07:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-12-18 09:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-12-18 10:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-12-17 04:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-12-18 03:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-12-18 06:23 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-12-18 06:53 am (UTC)