Fire Retardants Found in Peanut Butter, Other Fatty Foods, yet no specific disclosure

[Kluge]

So if I eat peanut butter with spicy food, my ass won't burn anymore?

You should take the lighters away from the hookers you try to stiff, so to speak.

 

[Lishy]

Maybe this is a scam, since we cannot know which food it is?

 

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

Why not post that article in the OP if that was your argument? If you bought into the fearmongering style of Huffington Post, it's okay, many people do--but just know that the OP's initial argument is not scientifically sound. Don't have time now to read the second article you posted, but I'll second Genghis on his mention of PPB/PPT, and relevance to this as well.

I made my point clear in the OP. They are asserting that the chemical is dangerous (not simply that is has another use) and then go on to refuse to say where they found it. If they believe it is dangerous, I find it unethical for them not to disclose where they found it.

 

[tttppp]

This further supports my point that the majority of food you buy at the mainstream supermarkets is garbage. There is no reason for unnecessary chemicals to be in your food.

 

[Kluge]

I made my point clear in the OP. They are asserting that the chemical is dangerous (not simply that is has another use) and then go on to refuse to say where they found it. If they believe it is dangerous, I find it unethical for them not to disclose where they found it.

Agreed. However, they are using a common fear tactic, and not sound logic in order to drive the point home and score more hits.

The HP article, overall, shouldn't be taken seriously until they stop using such tactics and give full information about findings (such as quantity found, at minimum). No skin off my teeth anyways, I don't eat peanut butter, and probably won't anytime in the near future. Bad balance of fatty acids (that won't change whether organic or not), and they use tons of pesticides on standard-farmed peanuts.

Just stop eating them, or only eat them in very small amounts. After the kid goes to sleep, I might take more of a look into it, just out of curiosity--unless I find something that interests me more.

 

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

Why not post that article in the OP if that was your argument? If you bought into the fearmongering style of Huffington Post, it's okay, many people do--but just know that the OP's initial argument is not scientifically sound. Don't have time now to read the second article you posted, but I'll second Genghis on his mention of PPB/PPT, and relevance to this as well.

Also, I was posting more info for you since you were busy dismissing it without looking - and YOU clearly missed my point in the OP. I even clearly stated it twice. As far as ghengis's point, I agree. What would constitute a dangerous level is not within my sphere of knowledge.

 

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

Agreed. However, they are using a common fear tactic, and not sound logic in order to drive the point home and score more hits.

The HP article, overall, shouldn't be taken seriously until they stop using such tactics and give full information about findings (such as quantity found, at minimum).

There were also other articles, but the huffington post article actually contained way more information than the other 4-5 I saw. Believe it or not, the others were probably heavier on scare tactics and lighter on information.

 

[Kluge]

There were also other articles, but the huffington post article actually contained way more information than the other 4-5 I saw. Believe it or not, the others were probably heavier on scare tactics and lighter on information.

That hardly inspires confidence in the "findings."

Listen, I know you think I'm a bitch for pointing out the obvious, but those fear tactics are in your OP--and you shouldn't have included them if it isn't your point, only what is pertinent and quantifiable. Having a chemical that's in a fire retardant (in your title), is not. Stop getting mad, I'm not hating, I don't think you're stupid--I just wish that people wouldn't post sensationalistic stuff like that. I've done it before on here, and I'll do it again.

If it makes you feel better, I did get -repped and called a "troll," which is fine by me, as I don't mind -rep. I didn't miss your points, I ignored them because you used the same fear tactics as HP used. Big difference.

 

[Vessol]

So you're saying that if I'm in a fire and there's no escape, I can slap on some Jiffy and escape? Thanks government, you think of everything.

 

[wrestlingwes_8]

I used to be a senior chemist with an R&D lab; I fully support this post.

Yes, we should be aware of what is in our food. But as detection limits are pushed (ppb is now the standard ppm used to be; ppt as in trillion is coming), you're going to find certains compounds in anything you test.

Again, being informed is good; obeing overly reactionary to something that is made to sound scary, on a subject with little native understanding is not so good.

I think it's the discerning mind of the people here that is so appealing. We shouldn't take anything at face value, even if it fits well in our views of the world. Selection bias is a bitch!

I don't care how small the amounts are, they will still have some kind of effect on the human body. Humans had not been exposed to all these crazy, synthetic chemicals until the start of the 1940s. Since then, scientific research about the possible effects on the human body has been suppressed in the interest of larger profits for CEOs and shareholders. You can't logically sit there and pretend we know everything there is to know about these chemicals. I mean c'mon, we've known about water for our entire existence and we still don't completely understand it. Whenever you add a foreign object to a functioning system, you will see disorder ensue. Why? Because the system was not designed to operate in that fashion. The same applies to the human body; if the chemical cannot be found in the natural world where humans would have came into contact with it, it probably will cause some unforeseen consequences. I'm going to side with Mother Nature on this one, she has way more experience and a much better track record than 'modern science'.

Until man duplicates a blade of grass, nature can laugh at his so-called scientific knowledge.... ~Thomas Edison

 

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

That hardly inspires confidence in the "findings."

Listen, I know you think I'm a bitch for pointing out the obvious, but those fear tactics are in your OP--and you shouldn't have included them if it isn't your point, only what is pertinent and quantifiable. Having a chemical that's in a fire retardant (in your title), is not. Stop getting mad, I'm not hating, I don't think you're stupid--I just wish that people wouldn't post sensationalistic stuff like that. I've done it before on here, and I'll do it again.

If it makes you feel better, I did get -repped and called a "troll," which is fine by me, as I don't mind -rep. I didn't miss your points, I ignored them because you used the same fear tactics as HP used. Big difference.

I'm not mad, and don't think you're trolling. You aren't getting -repped or called a troll by me. Sure, I could have used a chemical name instead, but imo, saying what the chemical is used for could give people better clues as to how it is showing up in the food supply. As mentioned, I'm also bothered they didn't test organic options too since that might have given future research a head start on that issue.

 

[Lishy]

In all seriousness, do we know whether that article is even true or not? They're just telling us theories with no evidence.

 

[teacherone]

So? Don't buy peanut butter.

Thanks free market.

 

[Kluge]

I'm not mad, and don't think you're trolling. You aren't getting -repped or called a troll by me. Sure, I could have used a chemical name instead, but imo, saying what the chemical is used for could give people better clues as to how it is showing up in the food supply. As mentioned, I'm also bothered they didn't test organic options too since that might have given future research a head start on that issue.

When I was in college, working on some research that got boring, I decided to test bottled waters vs. the city-sourced drinking fountain water--just for the heck of it and I had the AA fired up. Bottled water consistently had more heavy metal content than the city water, at the time. Of course, these bottled waters constantly advertised themselves as "pure" and wonderful in every way, but it's generally bullshit. Off-topic from this convo, but semi-relevant in being skeptical about claims, whether they're from a source you like or not.

It's a stupid "experiment" if they didn't test organic alongside, and do a workup on a peanut...sounds like they didn't have any controls whatsoever. But that's speculation on my part--I can only take two-minute breaks from the kid before she gets involved in her next round of hijinks, so I can't read anything in-depth right now.

 

[Lishy]

I'm a big peanutbutter lover... Eating it right now. I want to know whether this is actually reliable or not, because I could also claim my ass is the cure for cancer and not provide evidence for it.

It's not that I'm a government shill hating on dissenters or anything, but this is pretty disgraceful for the scientific community!

 

[Kluge]

I'm a big peanutbutter lover... Eating it right now. I want to know whether this is actually reliable or not, because I could also claim my ass is the cure for cancer and not provide evidence for it.

It's not that I'm a government shill hating on dissenters or anything, but this is pretty disgraceful for the scientific community!

Why not Google it and see what you can come up with? Just wipe the peanut butter off your fingers first, and you're good to go.

 

[Lishy]

Why not Google it and see what you can come up with? Just wipe the peanut butter off your fingers first, and you're good to go.

I did on duckduckgo, and it's the same unbacked claims.

Please give me evidence.

 

[Kluge]

I did on duckduckgo, and it's the same unbacked claims.

Please give me evidence.

How shall I give you said evidence? Pull it out of my or someone else's ass? Call Jiffy and Peter Pan and give 'em hell.

 

[Lishy]

How shall I give you said evidence? Pull it out of my or someone else's ass? Call Jiffy and Peter Pan and give 'em hell.

Which website isn't just making claims, but provides evidence? You told me to google it, so I did. Which website?

 

[Kluge]

Which website isn't just making claims, but provides evidence? You told me to google it, so I did. Which website?

How about you go read this entire thread?