|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
isisaredead
Joined: 18 May 2010
|
 Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2011 4:01 am Post subject: |
 |
|
seriously, twenty seconds under some water. you're good to go.
if the chemicals were that much of a problem, we'd all be dead, or dying. and what company wants the consumers of their products to die? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
akcrono
Joined: 11 Mar 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2011 6:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| isisaredead wrote: |
seriously, twenty seconds under some water. you're good to go.
if the chemicals were that much of a problem, we'd all be dead, or dying. and what company wants the consumers of their products to die? |
Not trying to start fights here, but companies aren't so concerned with the health of their customers. See cigarettes.
I agree though; just wash them and you'll be fine. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AtmaWeapon
Joined: 30 Jun 2011
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2011 9:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| akcrono wrote: |
Lets not forget that organic food is dangerous as well:
http://www.hudson.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=publication_details&id=1196
DDT, while it can destroy bird populations in an environment, is basically non-toxic to humans. There are actually groups advocating for its limited use in Africa (sprayed on huts, not fumigation) where malaria epidemics are rampant.
The deciding factor to me was that life expectancy increased as we started using these chemicals. If they are as dangerous as some people make them out to be, there would be a lot more deaths. Instead, we get higher yields that are safer to consume.
Now, I'm not a huge fan of chemicals, and I agree that DDT (and any other pesticide that harms the environment) should be banned commercially. However, I feel that there is a lot of undue fear over the chemicals in the food. I'd rather eat a tomato from a grocery store here than one mailed to me by my parents. What did people do before all of these modern food production techniques?
"The answer is simple. They died young." |
Seriously? You couldn't tell this was a propaganda piece just after reading the first few paragraphs?
Wikipedia: The Hudson Institute is supported by donations from companies and individuals. Corporate contributors listed in a publication from 2001 included Eli Lilly and Company, Monsanto Company, DuPont, Dow-Elanco, Sandoz, Ciba-Geigy, ConAgra, Cargill, and Procter & Gamble.
Try getting your "facts" from reputable sources, not industry shills next time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2011 2:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| akcrono wrote: |
| atwood wrote: |
| akcrono wrote: |
| atwood wrote: |
| akcrono wrote: |
Lets not forget that organic food is dangerous as well:
http://www.hudson.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=publication_details&id=1196
DDT, while it can destroy bird populations in an environment, is basically non-toxic to humans. There are actually groups advocating for its limited use in Africa (sprayed on huts, not fumigation) where malaria epidemics are rampant.
The deciding factor to me was that life expectancy increased as we started using these chemicals. If they are as dangerous as some people make them out to be, there would be a lot more deaths. Instead, we get higher yields that are safer to consume.
Now, I'm not a huge fan of chemicals, and I agree that DDT (and any other pesticide that harms the environment) should be banned commercially. However, I feel that there is a lot of undue fear over the chemicals in the food. I'd rather eat a tomato from a grocery store here than one mailed to me by my parents. What did people do before all of these modern food production techniques?
"The answer is simple. They died young." |
I think your conclusion can be classified under "gross simplification." |
And yours under "lack of evidence". |
You're guilty on both counts. Case closed. |
Strange. I provided evidence. You have yet to offer anything except unsupported quips. |
A lack of evidence, not a total absence of evidence.
As already stated, the Hudson Institute is a shill for industry and they've got you hook, line and sinker. Your "evidence" is lacking. My evidence, and there was evidence in my first post, was straight from the horse's mouth.
Big business spends billions of dollars to convince people their products are "safe"and what we need is less regulation, lawyers, etc. Don't be their dupe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
akcrono
Joined: 11 Mar 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2011 8:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Information on the safety of DDT on humans (as well as the need for pesticides). The lives saved by DDT alone is staggering.
http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/Fall02/Mosquitoes.html
According to the article, DDT alone has saved over 500,000,000 lives just from malaria.
Organic food also requires shipping, reducing the positive effects of organic produce on the environment.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15158675/
Not to mention that inefficient farming requires more land area (area that used to be wild).
Life expectancy has also gone up drastically since we started using chemicals:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus07.pdf#027
10 years between 1950-2000. I don't attribute that to chemicals, but it shows that they're not killing us. Here's some more positive news about global life expectancy. Notice how the industrialized nations (the ones using chemicals) increase rather quickly:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo
Lastly, while they may certainly be funded by companies, I challenge you to find a logical flaw with the overall point The Hudson Institute is trying to make: organic food can end up being more costly for the environment and more dangerous to the consumer, while lower yields likely require deforestation or starvation. I've also read reports that companies LIKE producing organic food because of the markup they command (although not from an established source).
I feel I need to reiterate that chemical use needs to be done responsibly and rationally. Frequent testing and R&D can help further reduce the impact we have on the environment and ourselves. But the fear over pesticides seems overblown. There are chemicals in many of the foods we eat. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2011 9:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| akcrono wrote: |
Information on the safety of DDT on humans (as well as the need for pesticides). The lives saved by DDT alone is staggering.
http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/Fall02/Mosquitoes.html
According to the article, DDT alone has saved over 500,000,000 lives just from malaria.
Organic food also requires shipping, reducing the positive effects of organic produce on the environment.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15158675/
Not to mention that inefficient farming requires more land area (area that used to be wild).
Life expectancy has also gone up drastically since we started using chemicals:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus07.pdf#027
10 years between 1950-2000. I don't attribute that to chemicals, but it shows that they're not killing us. Here's some more positive news about global life expectancy. Notice how the industrialized nations (the ones using chemicals) increase rather quickly:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo
Lastly, while they may certainly be funded by companies, I challenge you to find a logical flaw with the overall point The Hudson Institute is trying to make: organic food can end up being more costly for the environment and more dangerous to the consumer, while lower yields likely require deforestation or starvation. I've also read reports that companies LIKE producing organic food because of the markup they command (although not from an established source).
I feel I need to reiterate that chemical use needs to be done responsibly and rationally. Frequent testing and R&D can help further reduce the impact we have on the environment and ourselves. But the fear over pesticides seems overblown. There are chemicals in many of the foods we eat. |
Where on this thread was anyone recommending organic food?
As for the Hudson's Institute's point, ANYTHING can end up being more costly for the environment, etc. Those companies putting big markups on organic foods are the same companies that are overspraying, putting high fructose corn syrup in everything, etc.
As for your life expectancy argument, that's "gross oversimplification." There are so many factors that influence life expectancy that to give all the credit to DDT (Have you had your DDT today if you believe so strongly in it?) is nonsensical.
That there are chemicals in "many of the foods" is cause for worry not relief. And can't you find an unbiased source? That website is a hoot, but scientific it isn't. What happened to its predecessor? Why did they have to change the name? Why are they headquartered in Washington, D.C.? Physical science is a branch of physical economy? The Coming Ice Age? Lyndon LaRouche?
Keep the laughs coming. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
akcrono
Joined: 11 Mar 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2011 10:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atwood wrote: |
Where on this thread was anyone recommending organic food? |
Where in this thread did I bring up recommendations?
AtmaWeapon was looking for organic food (and considering getting some shipped from home)
taobenli was worried about pesticides
You suggested though your anecdote that Korean vegetables were not safe.
I simply presented the other side to this viewpoint.
| atwood wrote: |
As for the Hudson's Institute's point, ANYTHING can end up being more costly for the environment, etc. Those companies putting big markups on organic foods are the same companies that are overspraying, putting high fructose corn syrup in everything, etc.
|
Which clearly invalidates my argument 
| atwood wrote: |
| As for your life expectancy argument, that's "gross oversimplification." There are so many factors that influence life expectancy that to give all the credit to DDT (Have you had your DDT today if you believe so strongly in it?) is nonsensical. |
| akcrono wrote: |
| I don't attribute that to chemicals, but it shows that they're not killing us. |
Also, saving 500,000,000 lives probably DOES directly effect it, at least in Africa.
| atwood wrote: |
| That there are chemicals in "many of the foods" is cause for worry not relief. And can't you find an unbiased source? That website is a hoot, but scientific it isn't. What happened to its predecessor? Why did they have to change the name? Why are they headquartered in Washington, D.C.? Physical science is a branch of physical economy? The Coming Ice Age? Lyndon LaRouche? |
I listed:
A leading entomologist with decades of research and experience.
A major news network.
The CDC.
A respected statistician.
You have failed to support your point in any way, to the extent where I don't even know what your point is.
| Quote: |
| Keep the laughs coming. |
You're doing fine on your own lol. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2011 11:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| akcrono wrote: |
| atwood wrote: |
Where on this thread was anyone recommending organic food? |
Where in this thread did I bring up recommendations?
AtmaWeapon was looking for organic food (and considering getting some shipped from home)
taobenli was worried about pesticides
You suggested though your anecdote that Korean vegetables were not safe.
I simply presented the other side to this viewpoint.
| atwood wrote: |
As for the Hudson's Institute's point, ANYTHING can end up being more costly for the environment, etc. Those companies putting big markups on organic foods are the same companies that are overspraying, putting high fructose corn syrup in everything, etc.
|
Which clearly invalidates my argument
| atwood wrote: |
| As for your life expectancy argument, that's "gross oversimplification." There are so many factors that influence life expectancy that to give all the credit to DDT (Have you had your DDT today if you believe so strongly in it?) is nonsensical. |
| akcrono wrote: |
| I don't attribute that to chemicals, but it shows that they're not killing us. |
Also, saving 500,000,000 lives probably DOES directly effect it, at least in Africa.
| atwood wrote: |
| That there are chemicals in "many of the foods" is cause for worry not relief. And can't you find an unbiased source? That website is a hoot, but scientific it isn't. What happened to its predecessor? Why did they have to change the name? Why are they headquartered in Washington, D.C.? Physical science is a branch of physical economy? The Coming Ice Age? Lyndon LaRouche? |
I listed:
A leading entomologist with decades of research and experience.
A major news network.
The CDC.
A respected statistician.
You have failed to support your point in any way, to the extent where I don't even know what your point is.
| Quote: |
| Keep the laughs coming. |
You're doing fine on your own lol. |
No, higher life expectancy doesn't show that they're not killing us. Who knows how much higher it would be without all the chemicals we ingest? You've proved nothing.
You didn't list anything. You linked to two websites with axes to grind, both very strong supporters of big business, both with an agenda. They, like you, try to hide behind "giving the other side of the story" yet haven't even looked at both sides.
My point, which I didn't bother to elucidate because others already did, is that you can either peel, wash thoroughly or special order fruit in Korea if you want to protect your health. You'll notice Koreans peel all their fruit before eating it.
Have you ever been on a farm in Korea? Have you seen how fruits and vegetables are usually raised here? Or you can you just link to reactionary, pro-big business websites? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
akcrono
Joined: 11 Mar 2010
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2011 12:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| No, higher life expectancy doesn't show that they're not killing us. Who knows how much higher it would be without all the chemicals we ingest? You've proved nothing. |
Please find some link where a large number of people have been killed by responsible use of pesticides (the position I'm arguing). Then take all those links and add them together. Pretty sure that number will be much lower than the 500 million JUST DDT has saved JUST from malaria JUST in 2 decades.
The life expectancies do show that these chemicals are not a scourge that WILL kill you. We've been eating a lot more chemicals than we did 100 years ago. We're also living longer. We had short life expectancies a long time ago because disease was so rampant. Chemicals help us control that. If you want to argue with any of that, please back it up with something.
| Quote: |
| You didn't list anything. You linked to two websites with axes to grind, both very strong supporters of big business, both with an agenda. They, like you, try to hide behind "giving the other side of the story" yet haven't even looked at both sides. |
Again, if a statistician, an expert, a major news agency and the US government are not reliable enough sources for you, then I have no idea how you graduated college (did you?). Please provide me an example of a "reliable" source to you.
"Giving the other side of the story" in no way even suggests that I look at both sides. In fact, it specifically says giving one side (because anything I would have said about the other side has already been said by others here).
| Quote: |
| My point, which I didn't bother to elucidate because others already did, is that you can either peel, wash thoroughly or special order fruit in Korea if you want to protect your health. You'll notice Koreans peel all their fruit before eating it. |
Why are you even arguing with me if our points aren't mutually exclusive?
| Quote: |
| Have you ever been on a farm in Korea? Have you seen how fruits and vegetables are usually raised here? Or you can you just link to reactionary, pro-big business websites? |
Pro business websites? Where? Does that make their points and information automatically wrong? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2011 6:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| akcrono wrote: |
| Quote: |
| No, higher life expectancy doesn't show that they're not killing us. Who knows how much higher it would be without all the chemicals we ingest? You've proved nothing. |
Please find some link where a large number of people have been killed by responsible use of pesticides (the position I'm arguing). Then take all those links and add them together. Pretty sure that number will be much lower than the 500 million JUST DDT has saved JUST from malaria JUST in 2 decades.
The life expectancies do show that these chemicals are not a scourge that WILL kill you. We've been eating a lot more chemicals than we did 100 years ago. We're also living longer. We had short life expectancies a long time ago because disease was so rampant. Chemicals help us control that. If you want to argue with any of that, please back it up with something.
| Quote: |
| You didn't list anything. You linked to two websites with axes to grind, both very strong supporters of big business, both with an agenda. They, like you, try to hide behind "giving the other side of the story" yet haven't even looked at both sides. |
Again, if a statistician, an expert, a major news agency and the US government are not reliable enough sources for you, then I have no idea how you graduated college (did you?). Please provide me an example of a "reliable" source to you.
"Giving the other side of the story" in no way even suggests that I look at both sides. In fact, it specifically says giving one side (because anything I would have said about the other side has already been said by others here).
| Quote: |
| My point, which I didn't bother to elucidate because others already did, is that you can either peel, wash thoroughly or special order fruit in Korea if you want to protect your health. You'll notice Koreans peel all their fruit before eating it. |
Why are you even arguing with me if our points aren't mutually exclusive?
| Quote: |
| Have you ever been on a farm in Korea? Have you seen how fruits and vegetables are usually raised here? Or you can you just link to reactionary, pro-big business websites? |
Pro business websites? Where? Does that make their points and information automatically wrong? |
Disease does not originate in fresh fruits and vegetables. What has extended life spans is things such as vaccines, milk pasteurization, blood transfusions, higher standards of living which provide greater access to medical care, OSHA regulations which have lowered on the job deaths, antibiotics, etc.
Yes those websites are wrong:
| Quote: |
| As presented by the �100 facts about DDT� list, all the qualifiers, warnings, and listed harms of DDT are left off. The numbers cited in the quoted section are in error, and considering that the NAS (which is what you are quoting without having even read the report) was calling for research into the harms of DDT, research to replace DDT with chemicals that were short-lived, more carefully targeted by species, and fully researched to avoid the collateral harms DDT caused, it seems dishonest to present that edited quote as an endorsement of DDT. It is no endorsement at all. |
This is typical of the misinformation the supporters of the websites you have linked to spread. You've been duped.
Why am I arguing with you? Because you're wrong.
And before you go crowing about your university education, first learn how to think for yourself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ajosshi
Joined: 17 Jan 2011
Location: ajosshi.com
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2011 12:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| taobenli wrote: |
| ajosshi- where do you get your organic produce in Jeonju? Do they ship or do you go out directly? I live in Jeonju but don't have a car, and I've been wanting to get nicer produce partly because I'm not satisfied with the produce I can get in marts, and partly because I am worried about pesticides. |
Taobenli, The place is in the northern part of Jeonju. They are not set up for retail, so they don't deliver to individual buyers. The owner said that it would be okay to invite you the next time out. He even offered to grow a few veggies that expats miss. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
