Why the MAHA obsession with chemicals in food, but not the environment?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone make it make sense? MAHA seems obsessed with *bad* chemicals such as synthetic dyes in food that we consume - i.e. what MORE and tighter regulation to supposedly keep us healthy.

Yet MAHA does not care one iota about deregulation at EPA which would lead to..... MORE bad chemicals (worse chemicals, frankly) in our food, drinking water, and air - whatever is used in the environment/farming leaches into our water and soil so often is present in foods (e.g. PFAs and microplastics for one, but there are others).

Why the direct contradiction in approaches to chemicals in general?

MAGA voters are more rural and aren't as exposed to chemicals as your common dirty urbanite. MAGA voters tend be more agricultural and are more concerned about quality of products. Furthermore, MAGA voters may care more so about the environment than you expect but disagree on the approach to handle such regulations. There is an argument that environmental regulations are better to be done locally than nationally. EG California's problems are unique to California. We don't have to all drive EVs because we live in a desert bowl with millions of people. Furthermore, the EPA itself was contentious because it was created by Nixon at the behest of his oil backers who didn't want to deal with regulations state by state, and in many ways the EPA has been used as a tool by the industries to limit states from setting regulations.

PFAs happen with farming (sludge) and near military bases. Rural doesn't matter. Same with pestide runoff.

Personally, I'd prefer if Maryland did something about that asphalt reprocessing facility that I smell every morning.

I live in Fairfax county and know that there are PFAs in my drinking water - they are in the Occoquan River.

Why doesn't some local authority do something about it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone make it make sense? MAHA seems obsessed with *bad* chemicals such as synthetic dyes in food that we consume - i.e. what MORE and tighter regulation to supposedly keep us healthy.

Yet MAHA does not care one iota about deregulation at EPA which would lead to..... MORE bad chemicals (worse chemicals, frankly) in our food, drinking water, and air - whatever is used in the environment/farming leaches into our water and soil so often is present in foods (e.g. PFAs and microplastics for one, but there are others).

Why the direct contradiction in approaches to chemicals in general?

MAGA voters are more rural and aren't as exposed to chemicals as your common dirty urbanite. MAGA voters tend be more agricultural and are more concerned about quality of products. Furthermore, MAGA voters may care more so about the environment than you expect but disagree on the approach to handle such regulations. There is an argument that environmental regulations are better to be done locally than nationally. EG California's problems are unique to California. We don't have to all drive EVs because we live in a desert bowl with millions of people. Furthermore, the EPA itself was contentious because it was created by Nixon at the behest of his oil backers who didn't want to deal with regulations state by state, and in many ways the EPA has been used as a tool by the industries to limit states from setting regulations.

PFAs happen with farming (sludge) and near military bases. Rural doesn't matter. Same with pestide runoff.

Personally, I'd prefer if Maryland did something about that asphalt reprocessing facility that I smell every morning.

I live in Fairfax county and know that there are PFAs in my drinking water - they are in the Occoquan River.

Why doesn't some local authority do something about it?

A democrat is trying. https://www.fairfaxwater.org/news/fairfax-wat...s-occoquan-reservoir

There was federal legislation to set limits on a few of them but Trump immediately rolled that back so now it goes to local municipalities. But if the federal government is now interested in banning food dyes, I don't get why they wouldn't be far, far, far more vigilant about banning PFAs. Legislation did not pass under Biden, and while there are both Democrats and Republicans to blame, most of the blame falls on Republicans.

Has anyone on Trump's platform even mentioned them?

[Anonymous]

Scotchguard and other forever chemicals should be completely banned. I sprayed stuff around my whole house with that before I had my baby and I’m sure that was one of the reasons my child has health issues. I can’t believe stuff that’s basically poison is allowed to be sold with no problem. Meanwhile we’re not allowed to choose to buy milk that comes from cows because it’s “dangerous” and the government claims to be protecting us. It’s BS. I can’t handle the hypocrisy. It seems that if there isn’t a billion dollar industry paying off politicians with lobby money then there aren’t laws.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Treat yourself with whatever medicines you like. By all means, get topical fluoride treatments to strengthen your teeth and your childrens’ teeth if you like. You can even add some to your water if you really want to. Just don’t force everyone else to “strengthen their teeth” with every single glass of water they drink for their entire lives. It’s weird. No matter how sure you are that small doses of poison are actually worth it for teeth, forced medication via water supply is weird. We don’t do this with other medicines, not evn ones with far less toxicity risk.

I think we found the low IQ participant. Read the thread. Read the science. The real science, not the Instagram crap.

And if you’re still not convinced, you can drink all the plastic bottled water you want. You can install a filter in your house. You can shovel out tens of thousands of dollars on your kids’ teeth. No one is stopping you.

Fluoride lowers IQs. Read the studies.

- Science PhD

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone make it make sense? MAHA seems obsessed with *bad* chemicals such as synthetic dyes in food that we consume - i.e. what MORE and tighter regulation to supposedly keep us healthy.

Yet MAHA does not care one iota about deregulation at EPA which would lead to..... MORE bad chemicals (worse chemicals, frankly) in our food, drinking water, and air - whatever is used in the environment/farming leaches into our water and soil so often is present in foods (e.g. PFAs and microplastics for one, but there are others).

Why the direct contradiction in approaches to chemicals in general?

MAGA voters are more rural and aren't as exposed to chemicals as your common dirty urbanite. MAGA voters tend be more agricultural and are more concerned about quality of products. Furthermore, MAGA voters may care more so about the environment than you expect but disagree on the approach to handle such regulations. There is an argument that environmental regulations are better to be done locally than nationally. EG California's problems are unique to California. We don't have to all drive EVs because we live in a desert bowl with millions of people. Furthermore, the EPA itself was contentious because it was created by Nixon at the behest of his oil backers who didn't want to deal with regulations state by state, and in many ways the EPA has been used as a tool by the industries to limit states from setting regulations.

PFAs happen with farming (sludge) and near military bases. Rural doesn't matter. Same with pestide runoff.

Personally, I'd prefer if Maryland did something about that asphalt reprocessing facility that I smell every morning.

I live in Fairfax county and know that there are PFAs in my drinking water - they are in the Occoquan River.

Why doesn't some local authority do something about it?

i

Because Fairfax County is a one party county. It’s the same reason why there’s crime (and feces) in San Francisco. The voters there CAN’T psychologically consider voting for a law-and-order Republican, no matter how many times their cars get broken into. In a one party county, politicians don’t have to hustle for your vote. They have you. Cleaning up rivers is hard and expensive. Pushing for trans rights is easier and free. And popular.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Treat yourself with whatever medicines you like. By all means, get topical fluoride treatments to strengthen your teeth and your childrens’ teeth if you like. You can even add some to your water if you really want to. Just don’t force everyone else to “strengthen their teeth” with every single glass of water they drink for their entire lives. It’s weird. No matter how sure you are that small doses of poison are actually worth it for teeth, forced medication via water supply is weird. We don’t do this with other medicines, not evn ones with far less toxicity risk.

I think we found the low IQ participant. Read the thread. Read the science. The real science, not the Instagram crap.

And if you’re still not convinced, you can drink all the plastic bottled water you want. You can install a filter in your house. You can shovel out tens of thousands of dollars on your kids’ teeth. No one is stopping you.

Fluoride lowers IQs. Read the studies.

- Science PhD

The studies with multiple times the limits in US water? If there is a study that shows this effect with current levels of US drinking water, please post it. I'm for reasonable guidelines such as for pregnant women, water used for mixing infant formula, if benefits truly outweigh risks. It's worth noting, however, that when Calgary removed fluoride, IV antibiotic use for children under age 5 (i.e. still with baby teeth) increased by 700%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone make it make sense? MAHA seems obsessed with *bad* chemicals such as synthetic dyes in food that we consume - i.e. what MORE and tighter regulation to supposedly keep us healthy.

Yet MAHA does not care one iota about deregulation at EPA which would lead to..... MORE bad chemicals (worse chemicals, frankly) in our food, drinking water, and air - whatever is used in the environment/farming leaches into our water and soil so often is present in foods (e.g. PFAs and microplastics for one, but there are others).

Why the direct contradiction in approaches to chemicals in general?

MAGA voters are more rural and aren't as exposed to chemicals as your common dirty urbanite. MAGA voters tend be more agricultural and are more concerned about quality of products. Furthermore, MAGA voters may care more so about the environment than you expect but disagree on the approach to handle such regulations. There is an argument that environmental regulations are better to be done locally than nationally. EG California's problems are unique to California. We don't have to all drive EVs because we live in a desert bowl with millions of people. Furthermore, the EPA itself was contentious because it was created by Nixon at the behest of his oil backers who didn't want to deal with regulations state by state, and in many ways the EPA has been used as a tool by the industries to limit states from setting regulations.

PFAs happen with farming (sludge) and near military bases. Rural doesn't matter. Same with pestide runoff.

Personally, I'd prefer if Maryland did something about that asphalt reprocessing facility that I smell every morning.

I live in Fairfax county and know that there are PFAs in my drinking water - they are in the Occoquan River.

Why doesn't some local authority do something about it?

i

Because Fairfax County is a one party county. It’s the same reason why there’s crime (and feces) in San Francisco. The voters there CAN’T psychologically consider voting for a law-and-order Republican, no matter how many times their cars get broken into. In a one party county, politicians don’t have to hustle for your vote. They have you. Cleaning up rivers is hard and expensive. Pushing for trans rights is easier and free. And popular.

Um, it's a Democrat putting forth legislation for this in Fairfax county, and historically at the federal level, it's been more pushback from the GOP side though both sides are accountable. Can you literally not focus on a straightforward issue without bringing up trans rights? Because it certainly seems I hear more about it from the right side when I'm here worried about PFAs in water.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are you even talking about? Any “environmental agency” that studies PFAs for 30 years and doesn’t ban them is hopelessly corrupt, obviously.

We are run by corporate interests for the most part, as Ike warned us. Profit outweighs human health concerns in our system. Both parties are complicit, but the Rs have always been more gung-ho about treating people like roadkill.

It’s a distinction without a difference. The Democrats have done less than nothing about this, and ALL the Big Dem pols were quite hapoy for the DNC to handicap RFK Jr fatally in the Dem primaries. Not even Bernie (who had the same thing done to him) stood ip for democratic fairness. Any time we sneak in our little preferences, that our hearts are more in the right place than the other team’s, we lose again to corporate power. The big money isn’t partisan, it’s us useful idiots who are. Divide and conquer works. And that’s why toxins are never banned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are you even talking about? Any “environmental agency” that studies PFAs for 30 years and doesn’t ban them is hopelessly corrupt, obviously.

We are run by corporate interests for the most part, as Ike warned us. Profit outweighs human health concerns in our system. Both parties are complicit, but the Rs have always been more gung-ho about treating people like roadkill.

It’s a distinction without a difference. The Democrats have done less than nothing about this, and ALL the Big Dem pols were quite hapoy for the DNC to handicap RFK Jr fatally in the Dem primaries. Not even Bernie (who had the same thing done to him) stood ip for democratic fairness. Any time we sneak in our little preferences, that our hearts are more in the right place than the other team’s, we lose again to corporate power. The big money isn’t partisan, it’s us useful idiots who are. Divide and conquer works. And that’s why toxins are never banned.

.... Do you not understand that it's been mostly the Republicans voting against legislation to ban PFAs? That Trump immediately rolled back actual legislation to limit PFAs in drinking water? And Democrats don't like RFK Jr as he is horrible for health, blathering about dyes, ignoring PFAs, and recommending BEEF TALLOW like it's healthier for you when you eat a big mac. Nevermind his misinterpretation of studies on Vitamin A on measles and ignoring decades of research on vaccines in favor of cherry picking and mis-citing studies. RFK Jr is a nightmare and I have MAGA friends that agree on that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone make it make sense? MAHA seems obsessed with *bad* chemicals such as synthetic dyes in food that we consume - i.e. what MORE and tighter regulation to supposedly keep us healthy.

Yet MAHA does not care one iota about deregulation at EPA which would lead to..... MORE bad chemicals (worse chemicals, frankly) in our food, drinking water, and air - whatever is used in the environment/farming leaches into our water and soil so often is present in foods (e.g. PFAs and microplastics for one, but there are others).

Why the direct contradiction in approaches to chemicals in general?

MAGA voters are more rural and aren't as exposed to chemicals as your common dirty urbanite. MAGA voters tend be more agricultural and are more concerned about quality of products. Furthermore, MAGA voters may care more so about the environment than you expect but disagree on the approach to handle such regulations. There is an argument that environmental regulations are better to be done locally than nationally. EG California's problems are unique to California. We don't have to all drive EVs because we live in a desert bowl with millions of people. Furthermore, the EPA itself was contentious because it was created by Nixon at the behest of his oil backers who didn't want to deal with regulations state by state, and in many ways the EPA has been used as a tool by the industries to limit states from setting regulations.

PFAs happen with farming (sludge) and near military bases. Rural doesn't matter. Same with pestide runoff.

Personally, I'd prefer if Maryland did something about that asphalt reprocessing facility that I smell every morning.

I live in Fairfax county and know that there are PFAs in my drinking water - they are in the Occoquan River.

Why doesn't some local authority do something about it?

i

Because Fairfax County is a one party county. It’s the same reason why there’s crime (and feces) in San Francisco. The voters there CAN’T psychologically consider voting for a law-and-order Republican, no matter how many times their cars get broken into. In a one party county, politicians don’t have to hustle for your vote. They have you. Cleaning up rivers is hard and expensive. Pushing for trans rights is easier and free. And popular.

Um, it's a Democrat putting forth legislation for this in Fairfax county, and historically at the federal level, it's been more pushback from the GOP side though both sides are accountable. Can you literally not focus on a straightforward issue without bringing up trans rights? Because it certainly seems I hear more about it from the right side when I'm here worried about PFAs in water.

PFAs are partly responsible FOR trans folks

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Treat yourself with whatever medicines you like. By all means, get topical fluoride treatments to strengthen your teeth and your childrens’ teeth if you like. You can even add some to your water if you really want to. Just don’t force everyone else to “strengthen their teeth” with every single glass of water they drink for their entire lives. It’s weird. No matter how sure you are that small doses of poison are actually worth it for teeth, forced medication via water supply is weird. We don’t do this with other medicines, not evn ones with far less toxicity risk.

I think we found the low IQ participant. Read the thread. Read the science. The real science, not the Instagram crap.

And if you’re still not convinced, you can drink all the plastic bottled water you want. You can install a filter in your house. You can shovel out tens of thousands of dollars on your kids’ teeth. No one is stopping you.

Fluoride lowers IQs. Read the studies.

- Science PhD

In high doses. The list of things that are toxic in the wrong dose and helpful in the correct dose is long. I think you only play a PhD on the internet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are you even talking about? Any “environmental agency” that studies PFAs for 30 years and doesn’t ban them is hopelessly corrupt, obviously.

We are run by corporate interests for the most part, as Ike warned us. Profit outweighs human health concerns in our system. Both parties are complicit, but the Rs have always been more gung-ho about treating people like roadkill.

It’s a distinction without a difference. The Democrats have done less than nothing about this, and ALL the Big Dem pols were quite hapoy for the DNC to handicap RFK Jr fatally in the Dem primaries. Not even Bernie (who had the same thing done to him) stood ip for democratic fairness. Any time we sneak in our little preferences, that our hearts are more in the right place than the other team’s, we lose again to corporate power. The big money isn’t partisan, it’s us useful idiots who are. Divide and conquer works. And that’s why toxins are never banned.

.... Do you not understand that it's been mostly the Republicans voting against legislation to ban PFAs? That Trump immediately rolled back actual legislation to limit PFAs in drinking water? And Democrats don't like RFK Jr as he is horrible for health, blathering about dyes, ignoring PFAs, and recommending BEEF TALLOW like it's healthier for you when you eat a big mac. Nevermind his misinterpretation of studies on Vitamin A on measles and ignoring decades of research on vaccines in favor of cherry picking and mis-citing studies. RFK Jr is a nightmare and I have MAGA friends that agree on that.

In addition to partisanship, our pro-establishment bias around here is why we’ll never beat corporations or their experts on any toxin issues. This isn’t the 1970s. The entire environmental movement got co-opted into focusing on carbon dioxide (an inert gas). We were completely neutered, in a way that the corporations think is funny. Everyone knows PFAs are bad, but no-one around DC will EVER get anything done about it. Money talks. Power talks. Partisanship talks. Clean water? Not so much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Treat yourself with whatever medicines you like. By all means, get topical fluoride treatments to strengthen your teeth and your childrens’ teeth if you like. You can even add some to your water if you really want to. Just don’t force everyone else to “strengthen their teeth” with every single glass of water they drink for their entire lives. It’s weird. No matter how sure you are that small doses of poison are actually worth it for teeth, forced medication via water supply is weird. We don’t do this with other medicines, not evn ones with far less toxicity risk.

I think we found the low IQ participant. Read the thread. Read the science. The real science, not the Instagram crap.

And if you’re still not convinced, you can drink all the plastic bottled water you want. You can install a filter in your house. You can shovel out tens of thousands of dollars on your kids’ teeth. No one is stopping you.

Fluoride lowers IQs. Read the studies.

- Science PhD

In high doses. The list of things that are toxic in the wrong dose and helpful in the correct dose is long. I think you only play a PhD on the internet.

Neurotoxins are not “helpful in the correct dose”. Let me guess, you love homeopathy too.

Cavities are not a fluoride deficiency.

[Anonymous]

Of course people around DC don’t like RFK. Pfizer is THE single most powerful corporation in politics and news, by FAR. If you have any kind of a career in DC, listening to RFK is a big no-no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Treat yourself with whatever medicines you like. By all means, get topical fluoride treatments to strengthen your teeth and your childrens’ teeth if you like. You can even add some to your water if you really want to. Just don’t force everyone else to “strengthen their teeth” with every single glass of water they drink for their entire lives. It’s weird. No matter how sure you are that small doses of poison are actually worth it for teeth, forced medication via water supply is weird. We don’t do this with other medicines, not evn ones with far less toxicity risk.

I think we found the low IQ participant. Read the thread. Read the science. The real science, not the Instagram crap.

And if you’re still not convinced, you can drink all the plastic bottled water you want. You can install a filter in your house. You can shovel out tens of thousands of dollars on your kids’ teeth. No one is stopping you.

Fluoride lowers IQs. Read the studies.

- Science PhD

In high doses. The list of things that are toxic in the wrong dose and helpful in the correct dose is long. I think you only play a PhD on the internet.

Neurotoxins are not “helpful in the correct dose”. Let me guess, you love homeopathy too.

Cavities are not a fluoride deficiency.

We’ve got an RFK fan! Let me guess—you work in the private sector, nit government.