Secret Chief
nirvana is samsara
Aside from Jews, that would be about 7 billion people.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Micro plastics in Protein
- Thread starter The Hammer
- Start date
Heyo
Veteran Member
The problem is that you don't get the one without the other. Most GMO's only modification is that it survives Roundup. No other benefits.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Corn. Or maize if you prefer, often also has a built in pesticide. One that is safe for mammals but deadly for insects.
"Corn is the most commonly grown crop in the United States, and most of it is GMO. Most GMO corn is created to resist insect pests or tolerate herbicides. Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) corn is a GMO corn that produces proteins that are toxic to certain insect pests but not to humans, pets, livestock, or other animals. These are the same types of proteins that organic farmers use to control insect pests, and they do not harm beneficial insects, such as ladybugs. GMO Bt corn reduces the need for spraying insecticides while still preventing insect damage. While a lot of GMO corn goes into processed foods and drinks, most of it is used to feed livestock, like cows, and poultry, like chickens."
GMO Crops, Animal Food, and Beyond
Many GMO crops are used to make ingredients that Americans eat such as cornstarch, corn syrup, corn oil, soybean oil, canola oil, or granulated sugar.
Micro-plastics have been found in almost every location tested, including the air we breath, so it's hardly just the food we eat.
Plastic, plastic everywhere – airborne microplastics are settling into the most remote corners of the globe
Researchers are uncovering how microplastic particles are carried in wind, rain and snow to remote regions of our planet.
theconversation.com
Koldo
Outstanding Member
Why do you feel so important as to make a worldwide health concern centered around you specifically?
Guitar's Cry
Disciple of Pan
I think there is plenty of money and time invested into the problems you bring up.
But that doesn't mean we can't study the impact of something that, with more bioaccumulation, could be of a greater significance. It reminds me of climate change: fears of being inconvenienced or having technology regulated lead to kicking cans down the road that eventually accumulate beyond our ability to deal with them.
Aye, we're all doomed.
But it's always been thus, & always will be.
As for micro-plastics, we don't yet know
effects. They're just one more of modern
maladies, like car fumes, electro-magnetic
waves, & lawyers.
So you're quite the food fusser, eh.
I eat what's put in front of me, &
praise the Mrs for her latest triumph.
The space lasers zap the plastics
before livestock ingest them.
We can be concerned about all of these things at once. It's not like we can only do one thing at a time.
What is particularly troubling about microplastics compared to all of those other things you list is that microplastics persist for an extremely long time. We're talking thousands of years. All of your other examples are easily within the realm of human control. One cannot just remove all the microplastics in the environment. Once it is there, that's it... done. There's no fixing it. And while the science of the impact of this microplastic pollution is as if yet unclear, we know enough to know that it's bad. The question is more of how bad.
Dude, nobody goes into academic research in environmental science for profit. That's not where the money is. It's in corporate sector, which are the people who would be funding the studies about how smoking doesn't cause cancer, that carbon dioxide emissions aren't a problem, and that microplastics are no big deal so they can keep polluting and harming for their business interest.
Some people treat their body like a Temple while others treat their's like a tent.
Again, the number of people killed by this is zero.
That makes no sense. I am not advocating for more study of this.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I never liked cheap shoddy massively overpriced plastic products anyways.
It’s Not Just Seafood: New Study Finds Microplastics in Nearly 90% of Proteins Sampled, Including Plant-Based Meat Alternatives - Ocean Conservancy
Researchers at Ocean Conservancy and University of Toronto estimate that American adults could be consuming up to 3.8 million microplastics per year from protein aloneoceanconservancy.org
"Portland, Ore. – A new study led by researchers at Ocean Conservancy and the University of Toronto and published today in the journal Environmental Pollution found microplastic particles in 88% of protein food samples tested. The samples were drawn from 16 different protein types* destined for U.S. consumers, including seafood, pork, beef, chicken, tofu, and three different plant-based meat alternatives."
Turns out it doesn't matter what you are eating and drinking these days, you are going to be killing yourself slowly by ingesting invisible micro plastics.
Highest concentrations were found in processed meat sources, but still relatively high even in plain chicken breast.
If anything at all, its proving the Fermi Paradox as valid, as probably the rest of the advanced galaxy has already poisoned themselves to death through microplastics.
There are many millions, if not billions, of people that don't eat at least some of the selected supposedly common foods. For example Muslims don't eat pork and estimates put the number of them in the billions.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Not yet but it's what you would classify as a silent killer once it hits that level where it actually starts to kill.
Microplastics cause damage to human cells, study shows
Harm included cell death and occurred at levels of plastic eaten by people via their food
I would suggest it is not about money but about gaining public support for their cause:
From the article referenced by OP:
"As ocean scientists, my co-authors and I are deeply concerned about the growing plastics crisis in the world’s ocean,” said Dr. George Leonard, Ocean Conservancy’s Chief Scientist and a co-author of the study.
" Our work is a call to action to reduce plastic pollution in its many forms to ensure a safe and healthy food supply for all consumers."
It will likely be like air pollution. Directly tracking how many humans air pollution kills is difficult - it's a confounding factor for other health conditions (i.e., asthma) that pushes body systems over the edge into flatlining when present over a certain threshold. But we regulate air pollution because the science is sound enough to warrant it. The same will eventually happen with plastic pollution. The problem is we aren't conservative with pushing out new technologies like we should be. You'd think that after the first several dozen times this became an issue humans would smarten up. But profit motive kills sound conservatism when it comes to technology use, unfortunately.
Have it your way. I suggest that the "support" you admit exists is fungible into cash.