Numbers don't lie

Following up on the Boeing topic regarding asbestos, I’m starting this thread about the stuff we interact with daily and ingest through our diet—those XYZ supplements, or materials like aluminum and those aluminum cans. Just sharing my thoughts here:

1. Does anyone know more about how harmful aluminum actually is? We find it
everywhere, from Coca-Cola cans to deodorant (like Rexona). There's talk about links to Alzheimer's and multiple sclerosis—basically, damage to the nervous system...

2. Here's a link and some info on the dangers of additives like E102, E133, etc. substances

These things show up in more and more food products lately, not to mention cosmetics... It's almost impossible to avoid them entirely.

The goal isn't to panic like dustycanyon6. It's just about trying to choose "clean" food whenever possible—nothing with preservatives, emulsifiers, artificial flavors, or dyes...

It’s tough living under a microscope like this, but I guess you have to be careful about what you're actually putting in your body.

I honestly thought this whole aluminum thing was just another internet scam, but then I did a little digging on PubMed and found out that aluminum really can be neurotoxic. Honestly, I stopped using aluminum-based deodorants a while ago—not just because of this, but for plenty of other reasons too...

Don't get me wrong, it’s not like you’ll just catch MS or Alzheimer's from a tiny bit of aluminum in your food or deodorant; it's just one small piece of a much bigger puzzle. Another huge factor is actually the quality of the soil where you live and how many metals are present in it. I dug that up on PubMed as well...

Here’s a quick summary, but feel free to look into the rest yourselves:

Suay Llopis l, Ballester Diez F.

EVES, Unidad de Epidemiology and Statistics, C/Juan de Garay 21 46017 Valencia.

Review Has been made of The epidemiological Studies published evaluating The rola of aluminum as a risk Factor for developing Alzheimer's Disease. search for published Studies was conducted in The PubMed database by combining the terms " Aluminum and "Alzheimer's disease". Most of the studies looked at exposure through drinking water. Thes Studies suggest that a relationship exists between aluminum and Alzheimer's disease, with relative risks hovering around 2 for groups exposed to aluminum concentrations in drinking water higher than 0.1 mg/l. Other ways people might be exposed—like through food, meds, or work environments—haven't really been studied much yet. These studies have some methodological flaws and the results aren't totally consistent, so we can't say for sure right now if there's a direct link between aluminum exposure and the cause of Alzheimer's disease. Still, The toxic Effect of aluminum on human health cannot be ruled out either, so it's probably best to keep an eye on aluminum exposure and try to limit it whenever possible.

Publication Types:
Review
Review, tutorial PMID

PMID: 12602134 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

shadowgardener12 said:The trick isn't freaking out like dustycanyon6 does. Instead, you should try to stick to "clean" foods—stuff without all those preservatives, emulsifiers, artificial flavors, or dyes...

If you were dealing with my issues, you’d probably be panicking too. 😉 I mean, I wouldn't say I'm panicking, per se, but when I first realized what my symptoms actually meant, it definitely hit me hard. I'm seeing early signs of multiple sclerosis and Alzheimer's, and let's face it, there isn't exactly a magic cure for that stuff.

Beyond avoiding everything you just mentioned, you really have to feed your body the right things to fight back. You need plenty of Omega-3 fatty acids... modern diets totally throw the ratio of Omega-3 to Omega-6 out of whack because we consume way, way too much Omega-6 from oils and processed foods, which can lead to all sorts of health problems. Then there's vitamin C—since it's water-soluble, you don't really have to worry about overdosing, and some studies even show high-dose IV vitamin C can be helpful in fighting cancer. Plus, other vitamins, garlic (which is great for detoxing toxins)... and honestly, cutting back on carbs and starches might help too, since the human body isn't always great at processing them.

dustycanyon6 said:Lots of vitamin C (it's water-soluble, so you can't really overdose; it's even shown to help fight cancer if you take 10 grams intravenously), other vitamins, garlic (which is great for detoxing toxins)... Also, we should probably stay away from carbs and starch since the human body isn't great at digesting them.

You can't really overdose on vitamin C, sure, but taking massive amounts over a long period has been linked to kidney stones. And if it were actually that effective at treating cancer, wouldn't doctors be using it for that? (Unless you think there's some massive conspiracy involving Big Pharma pushing expensive chemotherapy instead...?)

As for that idea that we can't digest carbohydrates properly (and yeah, starch counts as a carb)—that is just total nonsense.

Casey Palmer5 said:You can't really overdose on vitamin C, but taking massive doses over a long period... that’s linked to kidney stones. And look, if it were actually that effective at treating cancer, you'd think they'd be using it for that purpose by now. Or do you honestly believe it's just some grand conspiracy by Big Pharma to keep pushing those expensive chemo treatments?

Vitamin C is dirt cheap—and honestly, I think that’s exactly the point. It feels like they're hiding how much it could actually help with cancer treatment just so Big Pharma can keep those massive profit margins coming in... But it doesn't even stop there. They go as far as paying doctors to publish studies claiming Vitamin C might actually cause cancer instead of fighting it. You really ought to look into it for yourself... Hey... just checking in... Great read. Next time you find yourself wandering through a drugstore, just take a second to look around... honestly, there are so many colorful little boxes for every little thing, it's like stepping into a candy shop...

It’s actually kind of wild when you think about it... the recommended daily amounts of vitamin C are just way too low to really make a dent in our health... barely enough to do anything at all...
Health... things to think about...

The whole idea that we can't properly digest carbs—and yeah, starch counts as one—is just total nonsense... honestly, it's such a joke...

I think I might have overshot my mark a bit with what I said earlier... or maybe my conclusion was just a little too blunt. But look, we all know—or at least we should know—that we aren't actually gaining weight because of fat. Not if you aren't absolutely gorging yourself on it, anyway. It’s the carbs that get us. The thing is, humans only really started eating grains and heavy carbs about 10,000 years ago. In the grand scheme of evolution, that's nothing. It’s way too short a window for our metabolism to actually catch up and adapt... That’s why the Atkins diet works so well; it basically just cuts the carbs out of the equation. Carbs spike your insulin and drive up that "bad cholesterol," which can lead to all sorts of health issues. I'm talking about those chronic conditions that people don't immediately link back to what they eat. It’s pretty wild how much diabetes cases have shot up lately, isn't it? And that includes all the heart and cardiovascular stuff too... Here’s a look at what’s going on with this topic... So, I was reading some stuff the other day about diabetes... you know, those stories where people who were basically tethered to insulin—feeling like they were just waiting for the disease to take them—actually turned things around. They saw huge improvements in their health, or in some cases, the diabetes just... vanished. It was all down to changing up what they eat. I can't remember the exact specifics... just that low-carb was the big thing...

I mean... honestly, everything nowadays seems to be driven by nothing but pure marketing hype. People are just too naive, or maybe just uninformed, and they swallow whatever nonsense pops up in an advertisement. Then you read some fluff in The New York Post or The Washington Post, or see some celebrity doctor on TV, and it just reinforces all those ridiculous ideas... Milk isn't even nearly as healthy as everyone makes it out to be. The stuff you grab at the grocery store is pasteurized and heavily processed, which strips away so many useful nutrients and makes it way harder to digest. And don't even get me started on all those breakfast cereals... they act like it's this amazing source of energy and vitamins, right? It's mostly just junk. Honestly, it’s probably one of the main reasons why Americans struggle so much with being overweight and unhealthy. The more processed a grain is, the less nutritional value it actually holds... So, we're getting into the territory of dangerous substances now. Everything I've said so far is fine, but we're missing the stuff people think isn't "that" bad. Right after you start avoiding preservatives and additives, you really need to look at sugar and, whenever possible, grains... though I'm not sure if I could ever fully commit to a grain-free diet myself. Once you cut those out, you start wondering what's actually left to eat... but sugar? Yeah, you can definitely skip the sugar...

dustycanyon6 said:Vitamin C is incredibly cheap—and honestly, I think that’s exactly the point. By keeping the truth about how useful it can be in cancer treatment under wraps, big pharma companies are able to keep pulling in those massive profits...

That’s just not true. If you head over to PubMed and search for keywords like "ascorbic acid + cancer" or something similar, you'll find a massive pile of research abstracts discussing how vitamin C impacts cancer. There is actually a ton of published research out there highlighting the benefits of vitamin C... If people could truly cure themselves using nothing but vitamin C, they would be doing exactly that, regardless of the entire pharmaceutical industry and all their attempts to "cover up" how useful vitamin C really is...

dustycanyon6 said:Take a look at this... Hey... That's a great read...

Honestly, this site isn't any more scientific than those random wellness blogs or Dr. Google searches. Anyone can spin up a webpage and write whatever nonsense they feel like... I remember this email going around a while back about some doctor working at a major pharmaceutical firm—like Pfizer or something—who was writing to a friend about how aluminum in deodorant causes breast cancer. It turned out that this "famous" doctor didn't even exist, let alone work for that company... just one big hoax...

dustycanyon6 said:Next time you find yourself wandering through the aisles of a pharmacy, just take a second to look around... everything is such a blur of bright, colorful boxes for every little thing imaginable. Honestly, it feels like walking into a giant candy shop...

I don't know if you'll believe me or not, but I honestly try to stay away from pharmacies and avoid taking medication as much as I possibly can...

dustycanyon6 said:I think I might have jumped the gun a bit with my last point—or maybe just my conclusion. We all know (or at least think we do, right?) that it isn't actually fat that makes us gain weight... provided you aren't just overdoing it on the fats themselves. It's really those carbohydrates that get us into trouble...
.

Weight gain really just comes down to eating more calories than you burn, whether those extra calories are coming from carbs or fats. And honestly, fats aren't nearly as innocent as people make them out to be... as far as I know, it’s not carbs that build up on your artery walls, but actually excess fat...

dustycanyon6 said:The Atkins diet really hit the mark because of how effectively it cuts carbs out of your diet...

The Atkins diet is an incredible way to absolutely wreck your own kidneys. Wasn't it Dr. Atkins himself who struggled with heart issues...?

dustycanyon6 said:I mean, honestly—it feels like everything nowadays is just driven by pure sentimentality. People are so naive or just plain uninformed, swallowing whatever nonsense they see in commercials. And then you've got outlets like The New York Post or The Washington Post, or even those "home doctor" shows, just feeding them more misinformation... it really makes you wonder how anyone stays grounded in reality...

Exactly, plus there's all that random stuff people read online...

dustycanyon6 said:Milk isn't actually as healthy as everyone makes it out to be. The kind you grab at the grocery store is pasteurized and "processed," which strips out a lot of the good stuff and makes it harder to digest. I mean, look at all those breakfast cereals—they're great for energy, full of vitamins, totally "healthy," right?

I see your point there, and honestly, I agree. I don't drink milk and I stay away from grain-based livestock feed, including cereal, because both just gross me out. Okay, maybe a splash of milk in my coffee, but that’s about it.
Digestibility is really about a lack of lactase, not about pasteurization or sterilization. Some people just don't produce enough of it, so they have a hard time processing dairy.

dustycanyon6 said:I don't know if I could ever go completely grain-free, though, because then you start wondering what you'll even eat! But yeah, avoiding sugar is definitely doable.

You know, looking back, I barely touch grains these days. Not a single gram today.

I won't give up sugar entirely, though—you've gotta have something to enjoy! Besides, I haven't really noticed it doing me any harm...

Finally found a little more breathing room to get back to you and respond to that post...

Casey Palmer5 said:That’s just not true... honestly, if you go over to PubMed and just plug in "ascorbic acid" plus "cancer" or whatever, you'll find a mountain of research abstracts sitting right there detailing how vitamin C impacts cancer... it's all there...

I honestly can't remember which specific PubMed database I was digging through—there are so many of them—but I didn't find anything like that. In fact, everything I came across said the exact opposite... that vitamin C might actually help prevent or even assist in treating cancer, not to mention all the other benefits. Could you send over some links? And seriously, which PubMed search were you using? I'm genuinely curious. All I've found are studies showing the positive side of vitamin C... that one negative study was run by a "scientist" who pocketed millions from big pharma companies... so, you know how that goes... It's just not happening... Just gotta believe...

There’s a ton of research out there talking up how great vitamin C can be... But honestly, if people could just heal themselves using nothing but vitamin C, they wouldn't be stuck dealing with the entire pharmaceutical industry and all their little "cover-ups" regarding its actual benefits... It's just how things work...

I never actually said that—you’re really taking my words to the extreme here. Look, studies have shown that vitamin C can actually help with cancer treatment... I just find myself wondering why it isn't being used more widely (presumably alongside those "mandatory" prescriptions, if such things even exist)? If we aren't utilizing vitamin C, then treatments might just drag on longer, which means spending more money on even more medication... higher doses, more volume, right? Of course, I'm not saying someone is magically cured just because they start taking vitamin C...

Honestly, this place isn't any more scientific than some random blog you'd find on Google... anyone can start a website and just write whatever nonsense they feel like... turns out having an opinion online doesn't make you an expert...

There’s a massive difference between this and sites like WebMD or those mainstream medical blogs. First off, the site doesn't make its money peddling pharmaceutical ads. Sure, they sell some supplements through the platform, but you don't even see them unless you go looking for the "products" section—and even then, it's just stuff they’ve actually tested themselves. Also, they aren't just pumping out their own fluff pieces. Honestly, most of what you read there is pulled straight from official scientific publications or newspapers they actually trust. Usually, there’s a bit of their own commentary attached to the reprinted articles. When they do publish the "heavy" stuff—not just news clips—they actually name names. They tell you exactly who wrote what. It’s not like reading *The Washington Post* where they just say "experts say" or "scientists discovered"... like, which scientists? Give me a name. Plus, they provide actual references, which is huge. They also share pieces meant to teach people how to spot the truth amidst all the lies and public misinformation out there. Now, you could argue the whole point of those articles is just to keep you hooked on the site... but no. Those posts aren't even really about the site itself. They're written very rationally. Most of us already know this stuff, really... these articles just help it finally click...

I remember seeing this email floating around a while back... some story about a doctor working at a big pharma company like Johnson & Johnson. She was supposedly writing to a friend about how breast cancer is linked to the aluminum in your deodorant. But then, it turns out that whole famous doctor? Total fabrication. She doesn't even exist, let alone work at that firm... just one of those internet tall tales...

People are just naive—what else can I say? It’s exactly what that article I mentioned was getting at. It’s just a shame most people are naive in all the wrong ways... like those who believe some random email is gospel truth. They think, "Oh, it can't be that bad," and then they end up doing themselves a massive disservice regarding their health. We know aluminum is dangerous (by the way, it's even in Rexona!) and that it's linked to Alzheimer's, but breast cancer is a totally different story. Honestly, it’s better if they believe it causes breast cancer rather than believing it's perfectly safe. It's like how people act about mercury in dental amalgams... it's just pure faith. Dentists, doctors, and most regular folks just take it as fact without any actual evidence or logical reasoning. Of course, at first, it seems right because they get one "rational" explanation... the problem is they only hear one side and cling to it. Then, when they finally hear fifty much more convincing and rational arguments, they reject them just because of their preconceived beliefs...

Sites like Mercola give you the other side of the story. True, to an uninformed reader, it might seem like they're exaggerating because it makes it feel like nothing is actually safe. But that’s where the smart surfer comes in... you have to judge for yourself how significant a risk is. These days, practically nothing is 100% healthy. Like, vegetables are "healthy"—they are, sure—but people forget they’re often sprayed with pesticides... so then they aren't exactly "healthy" anymore. It’s really up to each person to decide if they want to risk various illnesses by skipping veggies or if they'd rather risk the pesticides...

I wouldn't know, I don't go into pharmacies and I avoid medication as much as possible.

Good for you. Up until a few months ago, I was hitting the pharmacy every single month for my Claritin and Flonase. I don't use them anymore because I realized they weren't actually helping me. Now, I only stop by the drugstore for my vitamin C tablets, garlic pearls, calcium, and Omega-3 fatty acids.

Weight gain is simply the result of consuming excess calories, which can come from both carbs and fats. Besides, fats aren't as harmless as people think; from what I know, it isn't carbs that build up on artery walls, but excess fat.
The Atkins diet is a fantastic way to wreck your own kidneys. Didn't Dr. Atkins himself have heart problems?

I never said fats were harmless—I don't eat anything particularly fatty. Based on what you said, it sounds like I'm claiming you should ditch carbs and eat tons of fat—but I'm not saying that. I'm saying: ditch both. I cut out sugar, but not necessarily carbs. I'm not saying carbs will kill you—I touched on that a few paragraphs ago—it's just up to everyone to decide what they eat. The important thing is having the right information. Most people just don't have it. As for Dr. Atkins... I don't know anything about him, and neither do you. What about all the other people who didn't follow the Atkins diet but still ended up with heart problems?

I see we agree there. I don't drink milk and I don't touch processed foods like cornflakes because both are gross to me. Okay, I put a little milk in my coffee, but that's it.
Digestibility has to do with a lack of lactase, not with pasteurization or sterilization. Some people just don't have enough of it, so they have a hard time digesting milk.

And pasteurization destroys lactase along with several other things (http://www.mercola.com/article/Diet/milk/no_milk.htm).

You know, thinking back on it... I barely even touch grains anymore. Not a single gram today.

I'm not giving up sugar entirely, though. You have to enjoy something in life, right? And honestly, I haven't really noticed it doing me any harm...

The thing is, we can't just look at a substance—especially something that only hurts you over the long haul—and decide it's fine because we feel okay right now. Just because it isn't hitting you hard today (which, for me, isn't really an issue since I don't do caffeine, so there’s nothing to offset the sugar crash anyway) doesn't mean you won't face health issues twenty or thirty years down the line that wouldn't have been there if you hadn't been consuming it... Or at least, if you'd kept it to a minimum. Look at mercury amalgams in dental work: for most people, by the time the mercury actually leaches out of those fillings, they're already getting older... and then they just blame everything on "old age." Another example... my grandmother ate pretty heavy, fatty foods her whole life (like most grandmas used to) and didn't think twice about it... until she had a heart attack in her fifties.

From everything I've picked up online and through my own experience, I'm becoming more convinced that most of us would be in much better shape if we just avoided certain foods and stuck to what's actually good for us. If we cut out toxins—mercury, aluminum, aspartame, other synthetic sweeteners, formaldehyde (man, that stuff is everywhere! From shampoo to furniture to electronics...), fluoride (some idiots put it in the water supply just to prevent cavities in kids!)... if we exercised, did things that actually nourish our bodies, and kept stress to an absolute minimum... It all seems to tie back to the epidemic of allergies, and diseases like Alzheimer's and multiple sclerosis, obesity, heart disease...

dustycanyon6 said:I have no idea which PubMed you were looking at (there are several versions), but I couldn't find anything like that. In fact, I found the exact opposite: claims that vitamin C can actually help prevent and assist in cancer treatment, along with tons of other benefits. Send me some links (and seriously, which PubMed were you searching?)—I am genuinely curious. Every study I've come across regarding vitamin C has been positive, and that one negative study was run by a "scientist" who pocketed millions from Big Pharma... so, honestly, you cannot trust him.

There is only one PubMed. If you just type "PubMed search" into Google, you'll find the site easily. I don't get how you can say you've found studies supporting the positive effects of vitamin C, yet moments ago you were arguing that it's being suppressed. Like I just told you, I also found research supporting the benefits of vitamin C, and nobody is suppressing or hiding the truth about it. What part of this isn't clicking?

dustycanyon6 said:Pasteurization destroys lactase and several other substances (http://www.mercola.com/article/Diet/milk/no_milk.htm).

Lactase is an enzyme produced in our bodies. Lactose is milk sugar, and I'm not entirely sure it gets destroyed by pasteurization...

dustycanyon6 said:From everything I've learned online and through my own experience, I'm becoming more convinced that most of us would be healthy if we just avoided certain foods (and ate what's actually good for us), stayed away from toxins (mercury, aluminum, aspartame and other synthetic sweeteners, formaldehyde—good grief, it's in everything from shampoo to furniture and electronics, fluoride—some idiots put it in the water supply just to reduce cavities in kids!), exercised, did things that nourish the body, and kept stress to an absolute minimum. It all lines up perfectly with the epidemic of various allergies, diseases like Alzheimer's and multiple sclerosis, obesity, heart disease...

So now we're worried about formaldehyde? You'll be living under a glass dome soon enough... You try to avoid everything alive, and yet you still have symptoms. Isn't that a little strange?

Casey Palmer5:
The Atkins diet is an incredible way to absolutely wreck your kidneys.

👍

All these cookie-cutter diets are total nonsense because everyone’s body reacts differently.
You really need to find a healthy lifestyle that works specifically for YOU.

Casey Palmer5 said:Look, there's only one PubMed... it's not like there are a bunch of them. Just type "PubMed" into Google and you'll find those pages in no time. I don't get why you're acting confused. One minute you're claiming you found studies proving how much vitamin C actually helps, and then a second ago you were typing about how all that info is being suppressed... it doesn't add up. Like I just told you, I went looking too, and I found plenty of research showing the benefits of vitamin C. Nobody is hiding the truth about it or covering anything up. I honestly don't know what part of this isn't clicking for you...

I honestly don't know! My bad! I guess I'm still a little... well... "confused"... I thought you were trying to prove there’s actually more research out there regarding the negative effects of vitamin C... Total mistake on my part...

I wonder how many doctors actually use the internet to dig into actual studies... In the US, I bet a good chunk of them do, but definitely not here. And looking back at those old medical texts, I doubt they put much emphasis on the benefits of vitamin C—if they even mentioned it at all, since they probably didn't even know much about it back then... Hmm... It’d be interesting to ask current med students if they’re even learning about vitamin C in their classes... Or if anyone ever brings up its positive impact on cancer treatment...

So, lactase is basically that enzyme our bodies rely on... then you've got lactose, which is just the sugar found in milk. I'm honestly not entirely sure if the pasteurization process actually destroys it or not... turns out it's a bit more complicated than that...

I didn't catch it right away that you wrote lactose instead of lactase... lactose is... It doesn't destroy it... Pasteurization... man, that really is the core of the issue. If we could just get rid of it, pretty much everyone would finally be able to enjoy a glass of milk without any trouble...

With this (I was just scrolling through some info from the NIH website about digestive diseases... it’s pretty heavy stuff if you really dig into it. It makes you realize how much goes on under the hood just to keep us running. Everything from how we process food to how our gut bacteria play nice with our immune system... it's all connected. Honestly, sometimes I think we take our digestion for granted until something goes sideways. Anyway, worth a look if you're curious about how the whole system works... or if you've just been feeling a bit off lately.I've been digging through some stuff online lately... just browsing... trying to make sense of things... So, every once in a while, you get kids who are born totally unable to produce lactase. It’s pretty rare... but for most of us, it's just something that happens as we grow up. Basically, after about the age of 2 years, the body begins to produce less lactase. You might feel fine for a long time, though... some people don't even notice a thing until they're much older. Just one of those things, I guess...

I'm honestly not sure what to make of this whole thing regarding the claim that pasteurization wipes out lactase... maybe he just went a bit overboard with the rhetoric, or maybe he actually knows something the rest of us haven't figured out yet... Mercola says: They go ahead and pasteurize their milk, which basically wipes out all those good enzymes... you know, like lactase for processing lactose, galactase for galactose, or even phosphatase for helping your body take in calcium... It's a shame, really...I haven't really seen this info popping up anywhere else... most places barely even mention lactase. And when they do, it’s always just some basic textbook definition like, "lactase is the enzyme you need to digest lactose." But wait, isn't lactase actually present in milk itself? It feels a little weird to think that pasteurization would wipe out all those other enzymes but somehow just skip over the lactase... turns out the body begins to produce less lactase after about the age of 2 years... anyway...
Look, the truth is just that pasteurized milk is pretty terrible for you... at least once you're past being a little kid and your body stops making enough lactase to handle it. I've even seen those lactose-free options online where they basically just use enzymes to kill off the lactose after the fact. Honestly, if you're one of those people who loves to panic about everything, you should probably check out this page... I was reading through some stuff online earlier... just one of those rabbit holes you fall down at 2 AM. It’s about milk and how our bodies handle it as we get older. Turns out, there's this thing where after about the age of 2 years, the body begins to produce less lactase... which basically means things start getting a little complicated for a lot of us. It makes you wonder about all the different things we consume every day without thinking twice. You know, the stuff we just assume is fine because it's sitting right there in the fridge. It really makes you stop and think about the connection between what we eat and how we feel long-term... anyway, just a random thought that popped into my head while I was scrolling. They’ve cranked the alarm levels way up on the whole milk thing compared to everyone else... It all looks super convincing when you read it, too. The only catch is the way they wrote it—it makes you walk away thinking milk is ten times more dangerous than it actually is. Though, who knows, maybe it really is...

So now we're talking formaldehyde? You'll be living under a glass dome soon enough... You try to dodge everything in sight, yet you're still dealing with symptoms. Isn't that a little weird?

And you're doing it again, taking my words and pushing them into extremes. Formaldehyde isn't even the main issue right now—I'm still waiting on my mercury results. 😉 I mean, what's wrong with looking out for myself as much as possible? I still eat sweets once in a while (not often), occasionally grab some ice cream (I know there's milk in it, but hey... I'm technically allergic to dairy), I still have bread every day, the occasional cookie, I still live in a house where the formaldehyde concentration is >0, I still brush my teeth with fluoride toothpaste, I still shower in chlorinated water (well, at least I don't drink it) and so on.

We all know what formaldehyde is and the trouble it can cause. For me, it's tricky because I have allergic rhinitis, so it’s hard to tell if my issues at any given moment are from formaldehyde or just pollen. About a year and a half ago, I picked up a new monitor—a 17" LCD in a black plastic casing. Ever since I got it, for two or three months (maybe longer), my eyes were swollen and red, and I could barely look near it. Back then, I had to spend long hours on the computer, so I moved that LCD to the hallway and worked on a good old-fashioned CRT monitor instead. One time, a buddy of mine who also struggles with allergies came over and his eyes started watering almost immediately. For a long time after I bought that monitor, whenever he visited, he’d complain that "something was wrong with the air" because his nose would start running right away. Now, was it the formaldehyde or maybe an apricot tree blooming outside my window? I'm not 100% sure... probably both. Eventually, the monitor seemed to "off-gas," but I still get eye strain or a slight headache when I work at my desk for too long (especially since I have an open PC case, and I just installed a new graphics card last week). I should mention, though, that most of my symptoms aren't related to that and couldn't have been caused by formaldehyde anyway (most of them started way before that).

Like I said before: information is what matters. What each of us decides to do with that info is up to us. For instance, I am never again going to wash my hair with a shampoo that contains formaldehyde (Head&Shoulders is one of those), nor will I use sprays containing aluminum or similar junk. To make matters worse, the idiots (I don't know what else to call them—honestly, calling them pigs is an insult to pigs) don't even list formaldehyde on the label. Instead, they write Polyquaternium-10. If formaldehyde is such a harmless thing, why not just put it on the label instead of using these cryptic names?! Even with soda, they'll tell you which toxin is inside (like aspartame or cyclamates), but they won't explicitly state "this soda contains artificial sweeteners." If we have alternatives, why bother using toxins? Just so manufacturers can rake in more profit? At the end of the day, you're the only one responsible for your own health.

So, how many of you actually pay attention to—or try to dodge—those E321 additives? Is it even possible to find anything in your local grocery store that doesn't have stuff like E338 in it?

For instance, you can actually find packaged prosciutto without preservatives if you look hard enough...

shadowgardener12 said:not really, but how many of you actually pay attention to or try to avoid those E321... ingredients? I mean, is there even anything in your local grocery store that doesn't have stuff like E338 in it?

I do look at the ingredient lists, I suppose, but I have to admit I don't exactly know by heart which e-dodak additives are okay and which aren't, and I guess I just can't be bothered to go grocery shopping with a giant printed list from the internet in my hand.

What worries me most when I'm buying food is labeling deception, you know, where they don't write down every single thing inside a product. For instance, some of our domestic companies (specifically, Grand Canyon) will put only selected ingredients on an American product, but then when they export to the United States, they include a much, much more detailed list to comply with American regulations, which are way stricter. Who knows how many additives, pesticides, and GM products we're actually eating without even realizing it?! 😕

I'm especially wary of those "natural" products sold by ladies at the farmer's market. They always claim that "nothing was sprayed," but that's a huge question mark, and you can't really verify it.

Personally, I know this Goldie lady who acts like a total hipster with her own little farm, selling her "organically produced" goods out of some garage in Zvonimirovo (maybe I remembered that wrong), but most of what she sells is actually just stuff she buys from farmers around Des Moines, specifically at the market there! 😲 So, she's basically buying fruit and vegetables from people she doesn't even know, with no idea if they used chemicals or not, and then she sells it to Americans at astronomical prices under the guise of "organic food." 😲 👎

shadowgardener12 said:Actually, I was wondering how many of you really pay attention to or try to avoid those E321 ingredients, and if you even find anything in your local grocery store that doesn't contain things like E338?

For instance, it might actually be possible to find packaged prosciutto without any preservatives at all!

It seems like most processed foods are packed with heavy-duty Emulsifiers, especially when you look at certain candies, cookies, or sweets... and one of the worst offenders, potentially linked to cancer, is ice cream, followed closely by vanilla pudding, whipped toppings, and various creams....
I try my best to avoid almost all of those products in about 99% of my diet, though I do occasionally indulge in something sweet containing an emulsifier, just enough that I hope my body can process it... or perhaps I am just telling myself that to feel better...

Also, have you ever heard the theory that white sugar is treated with a mixture containing crushed animal bones just to achieve that bright crystalline whiteness? Apparently, this is cited as a major contributor to diabetes... though I don't have any actual scientific evidence to back that up, but still...

You know, shadowgardener12, I’ve spent way too much time obsessing over my own anatomy lately... just thinking about how my guts are laid out, wondering if my spleen is going to end up crushing my kidneys if things lose their grip, or all those gross biological processes happening inside me just to keep me breathing... honestly, there are nights I can't even sleep because I'm so repulsed by this whole mess of cells.

At some point, I just had to accept it and stop overthinking it—it’s not like I can go in there and rewire myself.

All these food additives, emulsifiers, preservatives, and all that other nonsense exist because Earth just can't keep up with feeding everyone—humans and animals alike—with actual quality food... I have no clue what the ideal population count for Earth should be, but I’m damn sure nobody thinks they're the extra baggage... And we're all paying the price for it...

E330 is hands down the most dangerous additive out there—we're talking straight-up carcinogens. It’s just as nasty as citric acid.
Check this link if you want to see a list of the really sketchy additives: http://metajna.com/bhagavat/pozor.htm

- READ THIS! IT'S VITAL!

William Morris2 said:E330 is one of the most dangerous additives out there because it's linked to cancer. It's basically the same thing as citric acid.
here's a link listing some of these nasty additives: http://metajna.com/bhagavat/pozor.htm

- IMPORTANT!

That is total nonsense. Citric acid isn't dangerous at all...

We need to be precise here. I’ll admit I don't have the answer, so I'm asking: Is E330 actually citric acid, or is it just a substitute for it? I'm leaning toward the latter being the right call...

Is it actually citric acid, $C_6H_8O_7$, also known as E330, or am I tripping?

What do you guys think about how dangerous something can be if it’s already inside all your cells and is basically essential for your metabolic processes to function...