This is why people don't have any faith in government. John Oliver on food safety if you want to get angrier
Honestly, it is good the system is breaking in this way.
Politicians are realizing that politics is not just easy money anymore. It's a job that every person's life is now suffering from.
Unions are increasing, climate activism is increasing, people are realizing the defense department may be a corrupt money pit rather then for defense.
Things are slowly changing, and the CEOs of the republican party are getting out before the roof collapses on them.
Politicians are realizing that politics is not just easy money anymore.
I don't believe this is accurate. (Gestures to the news, the latest elections, the current batch of gov)
I had to skip that one. I just didn't want to know. But I'm never eating chocolate again because of him.
I completely understand. Watching his show made me feel so powerless, frustrated, and angry that I took a pretty long break. That particular episode was the first one I had watched in a long time. I didn't see the chocolate episode so I don't know what you're talking about actually.
Do not watch the chocolate episode if you want to keep eating chocolate. Because I guarantee you that you will never want to eat it again.
It's really, really bad, so I don't blame you if you don't want to know.
I'm at work so I can't watch it now but I'll post it here too remind me to watch it later
Removed by mod
Hate to break it to you, but that is also the case, though it's pretty inconsistent across brands and even batches. Just search for "chocolate cadmium lead".
What's the TLDR?
Hidden for people who don't want to know.
A large percentage of the world's chocolate is harvested using child slave labor and even chocolate brands that try to be cruelty-free cannot guarantee that children were not harvesting and processing it. He showed a bunch of footage. It's just awful.
Ugh, another EWG backed 'study' that media decided to report on. They produce sensationalist garbage that matches their ideology and not the science or data.
For example, if you look at their dirty dozen they list strawberries and all the news about it was showing fresh strawberries. Digging into the data they hadn't even tested any fresh strawberries, only frozen strawberries, and many of those from international sources. Their conclusions didn't match data
How did I guess this was the Environmental Working Group? This is a pseudoscience pushing fearmongering group who frequently mislead on a variety of topics in order to claim everything is killing you.
Yes, some contaminants are a concern, but I would want an actual trustworthy source discussing them, not the EWG.
They're the ones that were also a big pusher of the "vaccines cause autism" BS.
A lot of it is very likely genetics based on family history, but every time my daughter has a mental or physical health issue, I wonder if it's because she was exposed to this sort of thing as a baby. But then, I was born when the air was filled with lead from gasoline and there were probably even more and worse pesticides in my baby food, so maybe it's not as bad as it used to be?
It's a curve that is very difficult to get ahead of, because humans need to make a mistake before we identify something as being a mistake.
Even worse, we usually have to make those mistakes several times. And even then we have large swathes of people that forget we made them, and advocate for making the same mistakes over again. And then we make perverse incentives to lie to people about the fact that they're actually mistakes. Humans are wild.
The world has never been a safe place, but we keep trying. You do the best you can with the information you have and hope for the best.
And I think I've done my best. I've made mistakes, but every parent does. If she was eating toxic stuff as a baby, that was through no fault of my trying to keep her safe. I could't guarantee her baby food would have been free of poison. All I could do is hope they didn't do it. She was also born in Los Angeles and lived there for the first two years of her life. Maybe the air quality harmed her in developmental ways, but we didn't have the resources to move. You do what you can, but I hate that we poison our kids without even knowing it.
All you can do is give them a better life than the one that came before them. It sure beats sending children to work in the mines, or 50% of them dying as infants, etc. One day we'll get there :)
Or even worse, what they did in the middle ages, sell them into slavery if you couldn't afford another mouth to feed. Yes, we definitely are treating children better than any people I can think of in recorded history.
Kind of a negative Nancy headline. I would have said "Most baby food does not contain pesticides!" Reporting is all so senationalisitc and doom and gloom these days.
It's the EWG making the claim. They're a well known pseudoscience and fearmongering group. They also pushed the "vaccines cause autism" claim in the past.
If this claim were true (I see comments saying it's probably biased), 40% is an extremely high number. Baby's could eat like 10 to 20 (ballpark example figure, I know it varies) jars of baby food every week, it would suck if 4 to 8 of them had toxins. It's not like it's a whole fruit you can wash off. I agree with your point about unnecessary gloom in the news, but I don't think there's really much of a bright side to 60% uncontaminated baby food. If they took figures like 5% and sensationalized it I'd agree with you more. 60% is barely "most."
Nice
