Guest guest Posted March 29, 2004 Report Share Posted March 29, 2004 > I think it rivals the frightening concentrations of hydrogen hydroxide-- but > frankly, I'm more worried about the shameless dumping of chemicals like > dihydrogen monoxide into our rivers and streams. > > Chris Umm, correct me if I'm mistaken, but isn't dihydrogen monoxide = DHMO = H2O = water?? -Terry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 29, 2004 Report Share Posted March 29, 2004 I replied on this subject a few days ago but no one commented. Anyway, it seems in the US unless an herb or spice is clearly marked as such, it is irradiated and does not have to bear the radura symbol. All whole foods and packaged foods containing irradiated ingredients have to be marked however. -Terry RE: ionising electrons > Because I just did some checkin and ALL herbs will be irradiated ( and in > regards to price irradiated stuff pricing structure does NTO change ) I > still paud $7.40 unknowingly for these irradiated SMALL sachet of dandelion > root > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 29, 2004 Report Share Posted March 29, 2004 Governments suck and their " regulations " if anything gets done, taken added ort altered to food shit should ALL be labeled. The food industry tries its up most to be as deceptive as possible. And right now its doing a great bloody job _____ From: Terry Benouameur [mailto:tben@...] Sent: Tuesday, 30 March 2004 3:51 PM Subject: Re: ionising electrons I replied on this subject a few days ago but no one commented. Anyway, it seems in the US unless an herb or spice is clearly marked as such, it is irradiated and does not have to bear the radura symbol. All whole foods and packaged foods containing irradiated ingredients have to be marked however. -Terry RE: ionising electrons > Because I just did some checkin and ALL herbs will be irradiated ( and in > regards to price irradiated stuff pricing structure does NTO change ) I > still paud $7.40 unknowingly for these irradiated SMALL sachet of dandelion > root > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 29, 2004 Report Share Posted March 29, 2004 In a message dated 3/30/04 1:48:50 AM Eastern Standard Time, stordock@... writes: > And the carbolic acid in beer Ok, I'm on the verge of feeling stupid now... what the heck is " carbolic acid " ? Do you mean carbonic? Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 29, 2004 Report Share Posted March 29, 2004 In a message dated 3/30/04 12:46:40 AM Eastern Standard Time, tben@... writes: > Umm, correct me if I'm mistaken, but isn't dihydrogen monoxide = DHMO = H2O > = water?? Yeah, it's some nasty stuff. It's effects are greatly aggravated in the presence of hydrogen hydroxide, which is a really strong base once it dissociates. The worst part about it is that once it donates a hydroxide ion to the solution, there's a hydrogen left over too! So it acts as an acid at the same time, making it doubly reactive. But the question isn't really whether dihydrogen monoxide *itself* causes problems or whether hydrogen hydroxide *itself* causes problems, but what the combined effect is. Throw some hydroxylic acid into the mix and... *sigh* ... makes you wonder if there's any corner of the earth left with clean drinking water. :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 29, 2004 Report Share Posted March 29, 2004 > > By the way, what do you think about the alarmingly high levels of hydroxylic > acid in our nation's water supply? > And the carbolic acid in beer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 29, 2004 Report Share Posted March 29, 2004 >I was listening to our prime minister the other day and the whole society >functions on the fragility of the word economy. I love that phrase " the fragility of the world economy " (am assuming a typo, tho " word " is kind of neat too). For hunter-gatherers, it was about " getting enough to eat " . Now we have to worry that " they " sell enough cars to keep people employed. We've made life WAY too complicated, IMO. -- Heidi Jean Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 29, 2004 Report Share Posted March 29, 2004 In a message dated 3/30/04 6:47:16 AM Eastern Standard Time, stordock@... writes: > Definitions of carbolic acid on the Web: > 1. carbolic acid: phenol, hydroxybenzene, oxybenzene, phenylic acid -- (a > toxic white soluble crystalline acidic derivative of > benzene; used in manufacturing and as a disinfectant and antiseptic; > poisonous if taken internally) > www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn Interesting. I just call it phenol. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 30, 2004 Report Share Posted March 30, 2004 Right sorry carbonic acid is it. Co2 dissolved in solution with water. http://www.ence.umd.edu/~alba/ence433/F-96/sol4/sol4.html FYI: Definitions of carbolic acid on the Web: 1. carbolic acid: phenol, hydroxybenzene, oxybenzene, phenylic acid -- (a toxic white soluble crystalline acidic derivative of benzene; used in manufacturing and as a disinfectant and antiseptic; poisonous if taken internally) www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn Bruce From: ChrisMasterjohn@... > Ok, I'm on the verge of feeling stupid now... what the heck is " carbolic > acid " ? Do you mean carbonic? > > Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 30, 2004 Report Share Posted March 30, 2004 I think it rivals the frightening concentrations of hydrogen hydroxide-- but frankly, I'm more worried about the shameless dumping of chemicals like dihydrogen monoxide into our rivers and streams. - Chris -------------------------------- dihydrogen monoxide? smart aleck Deanna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 30, 2004 Report Share Posted March 30, 2004 > Re: ionising electrons > > >I replied on this subject a few days ago but no one commented. Anyway, it >seems >in the US unless an herb or spice is clearly marked as such, it is >irradiated and >does not have to bear the radura symbol. All whole foods and >packaged foods >containing irradiated ingredients have to be marked however. I think I read somewhere that Frontier doesn't irradiate their herbs. These are the ones that ubiquitous in the bulk section of health food stores in my area. Suze Fisher Lapdog Design, Inc. Web Design & Development http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg Weston A. Price Foundation Chapter Leader, Mid Coast Maine http://www.westonaprice.org ---------------------------- “The diet-heart idea (the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our times.” -- Mann, MD, former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt University, Tennessee; heart disease researcher. The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics <http://www.thincs.org> ---------------------------- >-Terry > > RE: ionising electrons > > >> Because I just did some checkin and ALL herbs will be irradiated ( and in >> regards to price irradiated stuff pricing structure does NTO change ) I >> still paud $7.40 unknowingly for these irradiated SMALL sachet of >dandelion >> root >> >> > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 30, 2004 Report Share Posted March 30, 2004 In a message dated 3/30/04 8:08:02 AM Eastern Standard Time, nativenutrition@... writes: > dihydrogen monoxide? smart aleck As I said before, it might not be harmful by itself, but when too pollutants are combined, their effects are often multiplied exponentially. The worst thing about a DHMO/hydroxylic acid combo is that only about 1% of the hydroxylic acid that the body attempts to detoxify is excreted in urine, and the rest is resorbed into the bloodstream. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 1, 2004 Report Share Posted April 1, 2004 - >Why do you say that? Do you actually know enough about electromagnetic >radiation and its effects on muscle tissue to draw an informed conclusion, >or are you just frightened by words like " radiation " and " gamma " and > " million? " Are you going to put your money where your mouth is and seek out and consume irradiated foods, or is this just a bunch of political baiting? - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2004 Report Share Posted April 2, 2004 ----- Original Message ----- From: " Idol " <Idol@...> > - > > >Why do you say that? Do you actually know enough about electromagnetic > >radiation and its effects on muscle tissue to draw an informed conclusion, > >or are you just frightened by words like " radiation " and " gamma " and > > " million? " > > Are you going to put your money where your mouth is and seek out and > consume irradiated foods, or is this just a bunch of political baiting? While I am certainly appalled at the fact that some people believe that they have the right to force irradiated food off the market using political coercion (but I repeat myself), my objection to Mr. Stordock's post was primarily scientific. The ratio of radiation used in a chest radiograph to that used in food irradiation is not in any way relevant to the question of the advisability of food irradiation, just as the fact that some particular substance may be used in rocket fuel is not in any way relevant to its safety as a food additive. A person consuming irradiated food will not be exposed to any radiation as a result. I am not saying that irradiated food is necessarily safe or healthful. The free radical damage created by the radiation presumably does degrade nutrients and create mildly toxic byproducts--just as cooking does (technically, some cooking methods could be considered irradiation)--but to what degree I don't know. If I happened to have the chance to purchase high-quality irradiated meat, I would not hesitate to try it, but I also would not likely make a habit of it--just as I do not make a habit of eating cooked meat. As someone who has access to cheap, high-quality meat, and who does not fear bacterial contamination, I have no particular reason to seek out irradiated food. Call it a cop-out, but as you said, it is foolish to base diet on ideology. Actually, I am rather curious now. Does anyone know where I could get some irradiated meat (whole, not ground) in or around Bellevue, Washington? Anyway, my main complaint is that most people know nothing about the effects of irradiation on food and of consuming such food, and simply jump to the conclusion that it is bad because they've heard that " radiation " is a bad thing. I would be willing to bet that a significant portion of the people opposed to irradiation actually believe that irradiated food is radioactive. Remember the time someone forwarded some warning about the dangers of sodium hydroxide in our food? It may be that there are good arguments against the safety of food irradiation, but I haven't heard any here, or elsewhere. I refuse to be moved by pseudoscientific scaremongering, and I'll do what I can to make sure that others aren't, either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2004 Report Share Posted April 2, 2004 > Re: ionising electrons > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: " Idol " <Idol@...> >> - >> >> >Why do you say that? Do you actually know enough about >electromagnetic >> >radiation and its effects on muscle tissue to draw an informed >conclusion, >> >or are you just frightened by words like " radiation " and " gamma " and >> > " million? " >> >> Are you going to put your money where your mouth is and seek out and >> consume irradiated foods, or is this just a bunch of political >baiting? > <snip> >I am not saying that irradiated food is necessarily safe or healthful. >The free radical damage created by the radiation presumably does degrade >nutrients and create mildly toxic byproducts--just as cooking does >(technically, some cooking methods could be considered irradiation)--but >to what degree I don't know. Neither do I, but as an anecdote on taste...when I flew to Seattle in Dec. I brought some crispy almonds with me. They went through the airport x-ray machine, and boy, did they taste different afterwards! They didn't taste nearly as good as they did *before* they went through the machine. They actually had kind of an odd taste afterwards. I didn't however notice a taste difference in the homemade jerky that went through the same machine, but perhaps the strong spicyness of it made it hard to tell if the meat tasted different. I wonder if irradiated foods typically taste worse after being zapped? Suze Fisher Lapdog Design, Inc. Web Design & Development http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg Weston A. Price Foundation Chapter Leader, Mid Coast Maine http://www.westonaprice.org ---------------------------- “The diet-heart idea (the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our times.” -- Mann, MD, former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt University, Tennessee; heart disease researcher. The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics <http://www.thincs.org> ---------------------------- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2004 Report Share Posted April 2, 2004 My reason for avoiding irradiated food would be for lack of bacteria. I'm getting far more radiation exposure just typing this message. -Terry > >> any way relevant to its safety as a food additive. A person consuming > irradiated food will not be exposed to any radiation as a result. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2004 Report Share Posted April 2, 2004 > > - > >> > While I am certainly appalled at the fact that some people believe that > they have the right to force irradiated food off the market using > political coercion (but I repeat myself), my objection to Mr. Stordock's > post was primarily scientific. The ratio of radiation used in a chest > radiograph to that used in food irradiation is not in any way relevant > to the question of the advisability of food irradiation, The comparison was simply ment to give people who are not as well versed in physics as your splendid self a relative reference point so they would have a better idea of the amount of radiation they subject foods to during this treatment. Namaste, Bruce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.