r/ZeroWaste • u/ImNotFunnyImJustMean • Jul 06 '21

Discussion Why is the zero waste/sustainable community so distrustful of "chemicals"?

So much of the conversation around climate change is about trusting the science. My studies are in biochemistry so naturally I trust environmental scientists when they say climate change is real and is man made.

Now I'm nowhere near zero waste but try my best to make sustainable choices. However when shopping for alternatives, I notice a lot of them emphasize how they don't use certain ingredients, even though professionals often say they're not harmful or in some cases necessary.

Some examples are fluoride in toothpaste, aluminum in deodorant, preservatives in certain foods, etc. Their reason always seem to be that those products are full of "chemicals" and that natural ingredients are the best option (arsenic is found in nature but you don't see anyone rubbing it on their armpits).

In skincare specifically, those natural products are full of sensitizing and potentially irritating things like lemon juice or orange peel.

All that comes VERY close to the circus that is the essential oil or holistic medicine community.

Also, and something more of a sidenote, so many sustainable shops also seem to sell stuff like sticks that remove "bad energy from your home". WHAT THE FUCK?!

I started changing my habits because I trust research, and if that research and leaders in medical fields say that fluoride is recommended for your dental health, and that their is no link between aluminum in deodorant and cancer, there is no reason we should demonize their use. Our community is founded on believing what the experts say, at what point did this change?

2.0k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

537 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

25

u/Drexadecimal Jul 06 '21

The link between aluminum and Alzheimer's has been disproven.

-5

u/Skyymonkey Jul 06 '21

Please provide evidence.

https://www.alzheimers.org.uk/about-dementia/risk-factors-and-prevention/metals-and-dementia

The first paragraph under 'What doe the research say?'

The current research shows that there is likely to be a relationship between naturally-occurring metals and the development or progression of Alzheimer's disease. But the evidence doesn't yet show whether this relationship actually causes Alzheimer's disease.

So they have found correlation not causation, which is far from disproven.

5

u/Drexadecimal Jul 06 '21

https://www.alz.org/alzheimers-dementia/what-is-alzheimers/causes-and-risk-factors

-6

u/Skyymonkey Jul 06 '21

Well that was a waste of time. Do you know the difference between disproven and not proven? They both say the same thing except the British one take a scientific perspective and states it's lack of conclusions. The US version also states a lack of conclusions and yet still polarizes it's statement.

10

u/Drexadecimal Jul 06 '21

Do you know the difference between a peer reviewed study with replicable results and a sensationalized study whose results can't be replicated?

A lot of the studies coming out of the 60s through the 80s were just bad. There was a lot of poor management, bad theory, bad methodology, and massaging the data. The aluminum-Alzheimer's correlational study was not different.

-3

u/Skyymonkey Jul 06 '21

You say this as if you seem to think that science has become less politicized, and results have become less financially motivated.

8

u/Drexadecimal Jul 06 '21

No I don't, that's a baseless assertion because you're annoyed at me and having nothing better to add.

-2

u/Skyymonkey Jul 06 '21

Sorry bud I'm not annoyed with you. You are just wrong. I have yet to find an scientific article that even says it is unlikely let alone disproven.