That's much closer to useful information! Can you tell me specifically what her diet was before and after you began care-giving? Note that if you changed the nutritional content of her food, I will probably believe that that's why her health improved, rather than an elimination of unnamed toxins. Another way to test your theory would be to continue feeding people low-nutrition food, but without the "toxins". This should also result in improved health if your theory is correct.
Perhaps the most obvious to prove case would be, since you list fluoride, comparing two groups, between which the only difference is fluoridated or non-fluoridated water. I know you don't trust science because of who funds it, but this is something you could do yourself, then you can trust the data, right?
Posted using Partiko Android
She only ate processed food before I started cooking for her and was drinking sodas etc. Any garbage food you can think of was in her diet.
The toxins are named - all are listed in the GRAS file at the cdc. As I have already mentioned, they tell you the risks there - although nothing about the risks when combining the substances. Have you even looked at the GRAS list? Why are you so sure these products are not a problem when the cdc (scientists paid by the evil-doers) clearly state that they are?
It is almost impossible to find people who are not ingesting fluoride in the us. It is in every food and drink in the us that includes the ingredient "water." So therefore, only people who drink distilled/RO water and never eat processed food or drinks have a possibility of avoiding it.
I'm not sure these products aren't a problem. I am sure your antipathy towards science is a problem.
As I've stated before, I (and SCIENCE insofar as there is a voice called SCIENCE) agree that diets can be improved by substituting high-nutrition foods for low-nutrition foods.
Furthermore, I agree that corporations will do anything to protect their profits, including things that are detrimental to human health.
What I have a problem with is your rejection of science. We can't have a conversation about cause and effect, about evidence, about what is harmful, beneficial, or simply benign if we can't agree on how we gather reliable information.
Science has nothing to do with my work with individuals helping them to lose weight and get healthy. It is completely off the topic and irrelevant to the work I do.
Check into the effects of potato pesticides if you want to spend the time. A lot of it is in my post already. Then if you think you are your family should still be eating regular potatoes, I would love to know how you come to that conclusion. I do not bother looking anymore - I just don't eat that product.
I gather information from the 1000's of people I see in groups who are much more reliable then paid lackeys who are scared for their jobs and their lives. They cannot buck the company and govt lies or they will not have a job at the very least.
You say, "Furthermore, I agree that corporations will do anything to protect their profits, including things that are detrimental to human health." But I don't think you get the ramifications of this yet.
And I don't think you understand the ramifications of rejecting the scientific method. We're talking in circles. Science is entirely relevant to the work you do. I don't want to sound rude, but I feel like you don't understand what science is and you're rejecting it instead of capitalism, when capitalism is the villain here and science is a tool anyone can wield.
Posted using Partiko Android
All current science is funded by the people poisoning the food supply. No scientist is free to study anything but what they are paid to do. I avoid all of the toxic products and suggests others do too.
The vast majority of healthy food is free of all the toxins created by science. They only problem is finding it if you are in the us.
My only interest is to find out when more toxin is being applied. For example - a 2012 law forces warehouses to spray fungicide on all food stored in them every 36 hours. This is a whole new level of poison and can be avoided - though not easily.
"science is a tool anyone can wield" <<< No it is not. You need money. No one has money but the big guys. They also crush, fire, jail, kill, or find a way to remove funding for, anyone who tries to do any studies they do not like.
This is why few studies have been done about the cancer-causing effects of gmos and all of them occurred outside of the us. And the same goes for round-up - the toxin used on gmo fields.
No studies are done. The American people are the lab rats and most other countries in the world do not let this stuff over their borders.
Are you being hyperbolic or do you really believe you can only do science with massive funding? Do you think this ( https://leader.pubs.asha.org/article.aspx?articleid=2423607 ) is in some way a lie?
Posted using Partiko Android
Feel free to summarize - but just guessing - yes.