This is a great forum topic:clap_1:
Organic mama, you bring up some interesting and important concepts about pesticides and other chemicals making their way into the ecosystem and doing harm. However, not all substances are capable of grabbing a solid hold in the foodchain and lingering. We recognize this risk with DDT, DDD and other inorganics like elemental mercury and lead. Luckily, we live in one of the cleanest and environmentally astute countries on the planet and we are pretty good at avoiding the introduction of such toxins into the ecosystem. I am no chemist, but do understand most of the concepts of concentration, degradation, half lives, etc, and really do not think the stuff being sprayed in SOWAL or anywhere else pose a threat to entering the ecosystem and accumulating like DDT (as is illustrated in the article). I can understand frustration with not wanting to breathe the stuff, but let me make a few observations on why I think we can all relax a little regarding getting poisoned. First, I have logged many, many hours in hospitals and emergency rooms...I have never, ever seen a case of organophosphate poisoning or any other acute toxic reaction to poisons and other chemicals commonly applied to the environment. Furthermore, I would
LOVE to compare the bell curve of human life expectancy over the last 70 years (a big shift to the right) compared to the bell curve of application of pesticides and herbicides (also a big shift to the right) during the same time. It would stand to figure that if there was really some sort of cause and effect that came from environmental exposure to commercial chemicals, you would see a shift in the life expectancy curve to the left ( or at least a more modest rightward shift) concurrent with the righward shift of mass use of chemical applications to the environment.
Furthermore, 'organic' farming is not without risks of its own...natural fertilizers (and you know what they use) have the potential to harbor coliform bacteria that can make consumers sick from consumption and also taint rivers and wells with fecal runoff....gross and dangerous!
Finally, a quick comment regarding the evils of allopathic cures versus 'natural remedies';I can't think of
ANY industry as poorly regulated as the natural remedy market. Essentially, as long as they put a statement on the label that they do not promise to 'diagnose or cure' any condition as well as 'these satements have not been evaluated by the FDA' , they can bottle and sell just about anything. Go on and look in your medicine cabinet, all the bottles are labeled as such. I will contend until the day I die that there is nothing 'safe' about some herbal remedy whose source, purity, manufacture, content, efficacy and understanding of long term implications of use are not regulated by anyone other than the manufacturer. Yet, the 'herbs' are 'natural', ergo safer. That makes zero sense to me.
Skunky, what about the illnesses that we have no idea how they started? This could be a whole other thread in regards to this, but there are a ton of illnesses that medical schools DO NOT study at this point and therefore there isn't any "cure" from modern medicine. PLUS, the real tests that find the answers to many people's health issues are NOT paid for by insurance companies, which means that individuals have to CHOOSE to pay out of pocket or simply accept the limited scope of normal allopathic medicine. Most people cannot afford these tests and simply throw up their hands in frustration and have to deal with whatever their insurance companies will pay for & nothing else.
Please know that I am not against allopathic medicine. I believe there are really good and viable things that allopathic medicine does... especially when it comes to emergency situations, when a life needs to be saved immediately. Which is something that you obviously have experience with in the emergency room. I do feel that allopathic medicine really falls short in disease prevention and in long-term care. A childhood friend of mine was an ER doctor in NYC for a long time and we have had long, fun conversations about this.
Question, if allopathic medicine is so safe, then why is something as harmful as corticosteriods and the like handed out like candy when the situation is deemed unknown and at a point where MDs usually throw up there hands at figuring out situations? Why is it used in situations where it actually drives the cause deeper into the body to where it surfaces as another issue altogether and the patient has to take a grocery list of medicines just to combat the side effects of the steroid? I, personally, have studied the hell out of corticosteriods (and all its "cousins") because of my husband's "unknown" (as deemed in allopathic medicine) illness.
Sadly, alternative medicine is written off most of the time, while allopathic medicine is regarded as safe when it's not such a cut & dry statement. I do not agree with any herb being stripped down to active constituents because then you take away many of the natural "safety nets" and, in essence, it becomes not much more than a pharmaceutical (aka neutraceutical). I also feel that people should educate themselves on whatever they are considering taking, whether it's allopathic or holistic. That goes back to my statement about making choices: One can either make an informed or uninformed decision. Either way, it's a decision. You can either go with the flow and choose whatever everyone is doing or you can educate yourself and do things in a safe & educated manner, no matter what the subject or issue is.
I am quoting an article from a mainstream magazine called "Toddler" that we picked up last week in our pediatrician's office. The article is about what foods one should buy if they are considering lowering pesticide exposure for themselves and their children:
"Although eating organic foods does indeed promote environmental health, perhaps the best argument for going organic is your child's age and size. Toddlers taken in two to four times more food per pound of body weight than the average adult; thus, they have the potential to ingest more pesticides per pound of body weight as well. 'When a 20-pound toddler eats an apple, he gets six times the relative pesticide dose of a 120-pound adult,' explains Alan Greene, M.D., a pediatrician and assistant clinical professor, Division of General Pediatrics, Lucile, Packard Children's Hospital at Stanford University School of Medicine.
Research has shown that eating organic foods can limit that exposure. In one study, children in Seattle, age 2-4 years, were monitored as they ate different types of diets. While eating the organic foods, the children's urine samples showed nondetectable levels of pesticides commonly used in U.S. agricultural production. Once the children ate conventional food (i.e., non-organic) again, the concentration of pesticides increased substantially in their urine.
Yet to be answered by the scientific community, however, is how serious a health risk ingesting pesticides or antibiotic and hormone-laden meat and dairy products really is. In the absence of solid evidence, experts recommend that you err on the side of caution, especially since we don't know how pesticides affect developing brains and bodies. 'If you have a choice between ingesting toxins or not, it makes sense to choose not to, maintains Somers.'"
Okay, so the point is, we really don't know. You can't say something is safe because you don't have an answer. AND why the hell is the scientific community going to do the tests when the ones that would probably fund the tests would not want the real results exposed? For instance, Monsanto (AKA Roundup, a simple, common product) doesn't want you to know what their chemicals do. Nor do they have the best interests of any consumer, especially in developing countries, at heart. They are too busy developing plants that won't produce seeds so that farmers have to keep buying more seed each year.
And, yes, this is a very interesting thread.