nikki2200 4 Posted October 2, 2012 Now I know why you are mad as a hatter. Almost all vaccines for children are mercury-free (thimerosol is the mercury-containing preservative). The CDC is your friend As far as the natural=good assumption, some of the most potent toxins known are natural (see ricin, botulin toxin, etc.). Regarding avoiding mercury, when will you let your kids eat seafood, if at all? Will you let your children get fillings for their cavities? When can the kids indulge in alcohol/pot - they are natural, after all? That wasn't the case for a long long time. And I will not let my children get injected with crap that I have no idea what is in there on the .000001% chance they are going to get some disease that has been dead in this country for decades. Sorry if that offends you as someone in the medical field. On the other note. I shop at organic supermarkets and I only buy organic produce and meat. I don't buy fish that are known to be high in mercury and I can only assume I will continue this behavior when I have kids as I have been conscious of this for over a decade. We will mostly live a predominantly vegetarian life except for the fact that my future husband likes meat too much but I think what will happen is he eats the deer meat that he kills every season (which is 100% natural and chemical free) and me and my children eat organic vegetables, cage-free non-chemical doused meat, and we're all happy and healthy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penultimatestraw 473 Posted October 2, 2012 That wasn't the case for a long long time. And I will not let my children get injected with crap that I have no idea what is in there on the .000001% chance they are going to get some disease that has been dead in this country for decades. Sorry if that offends you as someone in the medical field. On the other note. I shop at organic supermarkets and I only buy organic produce and meat. I don't buy fish that are known to be high in mercury and I can only assume I will continue this behavior when I have kids as I have been conscious of this for over a decade. We will mostly live a predominantly vegetarian life except for the fact that my future husband likes meat too much but I think what will happen is he eats the deer meat that he kills every season (which is 100% natural and chemical free) and me and my children eat organic vegetables, cage-free non-chemical doused meat, and we're all happy and healthy. Oh, I see. You won't get them vaccinated as a historical protest. Would you get them vaccinated if the risk of an adverse reaction to the vaccine was 0.0000001%? I am not offended, just surprised at your mercury-foil hat. If you have a boy, will you name it Rusty III? Kudos for your dietary choices. I think many people will be turning to plant-based diets as more data accumulates on the health consequences of eating meat. Organic is a little trickier, as the label is applied inconsistently and it is cost-prohibitive for many. Do you take any dietary/naturopathic supplements? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nikki2200 4 Posted October 2, 2012 Oh, I see. You won't get them vaccinated as a historical protest. Would you get them vaccinated if the risk of an adverse reaction to the vaccine was 0.0000001%? I am not offended, just surprised at your mercury-foil hat. If you have a boy, will you name it Rusty III? Kudos for your dietary choices. I think many people will be turning to plant-based diets as more data accumulates on the health consequences of eating meat. Organic is a little trickier, as the label is applied inconsistently and it is cost-prohibitive for many. Do you take any dietary/naturopathic supplements? Honestly until you linked me tonight I wasn't aware they stopped putting mercury in vaccinations. It's probably a Little Rusty like conspiracy theory I have in my head based on history. At the same time, I'm willing to roll the dice on my kids getting measles vs absorbing whatever the fock is in those vaccinations and I will wait as long as possible before I get them vaccinated. As for the food... yes it is more expensive... but at the end of the day I'm not sure it is. It's a lot cheaper to make homemade chocolate chip cookies than it is to buy a box of Chips Ahoy or some ######. The produce and meat are more expensive, but I really think at the end of the day it all works out and you are spending the same amount buying fresh organic produce and cage free chicken as you are buying some frozen focking chicken tenders or something. That stuff will never enter my house. No processed foods; no frozen processed meat. I do spend a lot of money at the grocery store (about $400 for two weeks for the two of us), but I think I would spend more if I were buying boxes of cereal and and fruit rollups and potato chips and cookies and all that other shiit. At the end of the day... eating natural foods is really important to me and I need to get a job soon after being unemployed for a year to ensure we can afford shopping at my organic markets and eating healthy foods. Isn't that kind of focked up though? You need to be rich to eat healthy? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penultimatestraw 473 Posted October 2, 2012 Honestly until you linked me tonight I wasn't aware they stopped putting mercury in vaccinations. It's probably a Little Rusty like conspiracy theory I have in my head based on history. At the same time, I'm willing to roll the dice on my kids getting measles vs absorbing whatever the fock is in those vaccinations and I will wait as long as possible before I get them vaccinated. As for the food... yes it is more expensive... but at the end of the day I'm not sure it is. It's a lot cheaper to make homemade chocolate chip cookies than it is to buy a box of Chips Ahoy or some ######. The produce and meat are more expensive, but I really think at the end of the day it all works out and you are spending the same amount buying fresh organic produce and cage free chicken as you are buying some frozen focking chicken tenders or something. That stuff will never enter my house. No processed foods; no frozen processed meat. I do spend a lot of money at the grocery store (about $400 for two weeks for the two of us), but I think I would spend more if I were buying boxes of cereal and and fruit rollups and potato chips and cookies and all that other shiit. At the end of the day... eating natural foods is really important to me and I need to get a job soon after being unemployed for a year to ensure we can afford shopping at my organic markets and eating healthy foods. Isn't that kind of focked up though? You need to be rich to eat healthy? I think it is a shame people are straying from vaccines (in large part due to falsified research results) when they have made such important strides in our collective health. Like I said earlier, they are arguably one of the greatest medical interventions ever. Only water sanitation compares for impact on disease IMO. If more people got on board we could truly eradicate several diseases from the planet, which is pretty awesome. The true "cost" of food should include the pollution, pesticides, animal cruelty and chronic health problems incurred from the agribusiness-inspired Western diet. When these are considered, organic may be a bargain. If people critically appraised what they put in their mouths as much as other decisions we'd all be the better for it. Fock, is that pretentious and judgemental???? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shovelheadt 71 Posted October 2, 2012 ABSOLUTELY NOT. And I am thinking about procreating in the next year. I will NOT get my kids vaccinated until they go to kindergarten and have to be vaccinated to enter. Or ideally I will send them to a private school because I don't want them to have anything to do with the public school system and if the private school does not require vaccinations, then I will never have them vaccinated. Are my kids seriously going to get the measles which has been a dead disease in this country for decades? You're the kind we read about in the news, where the authorities bring charges because you wanted to let God take care of your children. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nikki2200 4 Posted October 2, 2012 I think it is a shame people are straying from vaccines (in large part due to falsified research results) when they have made such important strides in our collective health. Like I said earlier, they are arguably one of the greatest medical interventions ever. Only water sanitation compares for impact on disease IMO. If more people got on board we could truly eradicate several diseases from the planet, which is pretty awesome. The true "cost" of food should include the pollution, pesticides, animal cruelty and chronic health problems incurred from the agribusiness-inspired Western diet. When these are considered, organic may be a bargain. If people critically appraised what they put in their mouths as much as other decisions we'd all be the better for it. Fock, is that pretentious and judgemental???? I know you are in the medical field so you probably have an innate bias towards thinking that vaccinations are in the best interest of society. I just don't feel that getting my child vaccinated against a disease that has been pretty much eradicated from earth is something positive. I know in history vaccinations were huge, but please show me any evidence that I should fear measles, mumps, rubella, if I had a kid right now that would make me want to "vaccinate" them against this heinous threat? Seriously... if I had a kid right now... where exactly would they pick up the mumps? These diseases are dead. We only continue to care about them because the pharma companies need us to care about them. Because if we didn't care about them, that would be a big loss in revenue. And I totally agree with you on the second point. However.... because I have made personal life decisions to eat organic whenever I can and support local organic farmers and unprocessed foods.... I would never in a million years criticize someone for not doing the same thing or expect someone else to live their life this way because I have deemed it the "right" way to live. People may resent me because I am like this, but never once have I ever suggested or tried to ram down anyone's throat that if they didn't do this they were a lesser person or they needed to re-evaluate their life. Do you get it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JackARoot 2 Posted October 2, 2012 I've been getting the flu vaccine for several years and have had good luck with it, so yes Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nikki2200 4 Posted October 2, 2012 You're the kind we read about in the news, where the authorities bring charges because you wanted to let God take care of your children. I'm an atheist so your post makes no sense. I am against vaccinations because they introduce a whole shiit load of bad stuff/chemicals/germs into your body to prevent diseases that have pretty much been eradicated from earth decades ago. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 4,063 Posted October 2, 2012 That wasn't the case for a long long time. And I will not let my children get injected with crap that I have no idea what is in there on the .000001% chance they are going to get some disease that has been dead in this country for decades. Sorry if that offends you as someone in the medical field. On the other note. I shop at organic supermarkets and I only buy organic produce and meat. I don't buy fish that are known to be high in mercury and I can only assume I will continue this behavior when I have kids as I have been conscious of this for over a decade. We will mostly live a predominantly vegetarian life except for the fact that my future husband likes meat too much but I think what will happen is he eats the deer meat that he kills every season (which is 100% natural and chemical free) and me and my children eat organic vegetables, cage-free non-chemical doused meat, and we're all happy and healthy. You sound like a rich kvnt in this thread. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nikki2200 4 Posted October 2, 2012 You sound like a rich kvnt in this thread. Eating natural unprocessed, non-genetically engineered, non-pesticide ridden, non-antibiotic and steroid doused food makes me sound like a rich kvnt? Okie dokie. How about educated? Or is that synonymous with rich kvnt? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 4,063 Posted October 2, 2012 Eating natural unprocessed, non-genetically engineered, non-pesticide ridden, non-antibiotic and steroid doused food makes me sound like a rich kvnt? Okie dokie. How about educated? Or is that synonymous with rich kvnt? No, what makes you sound like a rich kunt is talking about how enlightened you are for only shopping at Whole Foods. Let's do a little math. You said you spend $400 every two weeks on healthy organic food for you and your boyfriend. For a family of four, that would average out to approximately $1600 per month. That's fockin damn near $20,000 per year, or 40% of the median household income in this country. So congrats on being rich and having the money to afford healthy food. It doesn't make you any better or smarter than people who can't afford that kind of grocery bill. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JT 137 Posted October 2, 2012 I'm an atheist so your post makes no sense. I am against vaccinations because they introduce a whole shiit load of bad stuff/chemicals/germs into your body to prevent diseases that have pretty much been eradicated from earth decades ago. You keep saying this and it's simply not true. While measles and pertussis (whooping cough) were close to eradicated decades ago, both have seen a significant resurgence in the last decade. There have been pertussis outbreaks in several states this year, and projections show the disease will reach the highest levels in 50 years in the USA. Why are we seeing this increase in what could have been largely eradicated diseases? Because people decided to stop having their kids vaccinated. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penultimatestraw 473 Posted October 2, 2012 You keep saying this and it's simply not true. While measles and pertussis (whooping cough) were close to eradicated decades ago, both have seen a significant resurgence in the last decade. There have been pertussis outbreaks in several states this year, and projections show the disease will reach the highest levels in 50 years in the USA. Why are we seeing this increase in what could have been largely eradicated diseases? Because people decided to stop having their kids vaccinated. Thank Jebus somebody gets it! Don't know why Nikki is clinging to this totally inacurate opinion, or the fear of the "shiitload of bad stuff" in vaccines. I guess the CDC link regarding disease resurgence wasn't convincing enough, nor educating her regarding mercury content of modern vaccines. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 4,063 Posted October 2, 2012 Thank Jebus somebody gets it! Don't know why Nikki is clinging to this totally inacurate opinion, or the fear of the "shiitload of bad stuff" in vaccines. I guess the CDC link regarding disease resurgence wasn't convincing enough, nor educating her regarding mercury content of modern vaccines. I'm gonna actually defend Nikki a bit here. You cite the CDC as if their word is Gospel, but they could possibly be wrong, right? It wouldn't be the first time people were told that something was safe, only to find out later that wasn't entirely true. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penultimatestraw 473 Posted October 2, 2012 I know you are in the medical field so you probably have an innate bias towards thinking that vaccinations are in the best interest of society. I just don't feel that getting my child vaccinated against a disease that has been pretty much eradicated from earth is something positive. I know in history vaccinations were huge, but please show me any evidence that I should fear measles, mumps, rubella, if I had a kid right now that would make me want to "vaccinate" them against this heinous threat? Seriously... if I had a kid right now... where exactly would they pick up the mumps? These diseases are dead. We only continue to care about them because the pharma companies need us to care about them. Because if we didn't care about them, that would be a big loss in revenue. And I totally agree with you on the second point. However.... because I have made personal life decisions to eat organic whenever I can and support local organic farmers and unprocessed foods.... I would never in a million years criticize someone for not doing the same thing or expect someone else to live their life this way because I have deemed it the "right" way to live. People may resent me because I am like this, but never once have I ever suggested or tried to ram down anyone's throat that if they didn't do this they were a lesser person or they needed to re-evaluate their life. Do you get it? Vaccines aren't very profitable. They are the antithesis of what pharm companies desire from a profit standpoint - high production cost and risk in development, with only one or a few doses administered. Economically, drugs people take for a long time are the cash cows - cholesterol lowering meds, anthypertensives, etc. Sure all kids are supposed to get vaccinated, so there is the theoretically incentive to hit such a big segnment of the population. From wikipedia: One challenge in vaccine development is economic: many of the diseases most demanding a vaccine, including HIV, malaria and tuberculosis, exist principally in poor countries. Pharmaceutical firms and biotechnology companies have little incentive to develop vaccines for these diseases, because there is little revenue potential. Even in more affluent countries, financial returns are usually minimal and the financial and other risks are great.[30] Most vaccine development to date has relied on "push" funding by government, universities and non-profit organizations.[31] Many vaccines have been highly cost effective and beneficial for public health.[30] The number of vaccines actually administered has risen dramatically in recent decades.[when?] This increase, particularly in the number of different vaccines administered to children before entry into schools[32] may be due to government mandates and support, rather than economic incentive Regarding your second paragraph, I see your point, but it still comes across as sanctimonious. Ask IGW. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penultimatestraw 473 Posted October 2, 2012 I'm gonna actually defend Nikki a bit here. You cite the CDC as if their word is Gospel, but they could possibly be wrong, right? It wouldn't be the first time people were told that something was safe, only to find out later that wasn't entirely true. On second thought, don't ask IGW. The positive effects of vaccination are nearly indisputable. Their impact on disease is measurable. Fear of unknown or future side effects does not justify avoiding all vaccines, IMO. The CDC and every other major health organization agree with this stance. Disputing it is about as sensible as climate change skepticism (cue the usual crowd). If Nikki want to avoid them herself, great, but her kids won't have a choice in the matter. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MedStudent 56 Posted October 2, 2012 Yes, but one doesn't use antibiotics to treat colds or the flu - unless you are counting neuramidase inhibitors as antibiotics. Building up one's immunity to viral illness will have little impact in tolerating subsequent bacterial infection. And Phurfur was arguing about building immunity in the context of not taking the flu vaccine. Listen, I get your point, but lay people could easily misconstrue it. As an aside, there is evidence that remote immunity to the last swine flu attenuated the course of novel H1N1 (more recent swine flu) in the elderly. Although immunity to vaccination wanes and strains change, there may be some benefit beyond the immediate flu season. If you don't know the data or recommendations about flu, I suggest you learn it before giving advice. Like it or not, people will start to value your opinion a little more now that you have your MD. I'm not urging people to get or not get a flu vaccine. I stated I took them and never got the flu.--> they work. an ounce of prevention... If a young adult wants to take a chance knowing those facts then let him. I do agree with you about the children's vaccines and if more people think like Nikki we are going backwards. as for the antibiotics--- yes, i know they have no use against colds but you do know that they are prescribed for colds all teh time. Either because the patient really wants it or expects it or if the doctor is not sure if there is an infection so he prescribes it "just in case" If you bring your kid in to the pediatrician and the Dr is not sure if there is a bacterial infection then the Dr should wait a couple of days and see if it develops instead of prescribing anti biotics on a pre-emptive basis. Or better yet, if your kid has a cold, see if he gets better in few days. If it continues to get worse or it really starts to effect him THEN bring him in to the Doctor. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penultimatestraw 473 Posted October 2, 2012 I'm not urging people to get or not get a flu vaccine. I stated I took them and never got the flu.--> they work. an ounce of prevention... If a young adult wants to take a chance knowing those facts then let him. I do agree with you about the children's vaccines and if more people think like Nikki we are going backwards. as for the antibiotics--- yes, i know they have no use against colds but you do know that they are prescribed for colds all teh time. Either because the patient really wants it or expects it or if the doctor is not sure if there is an infection so he prescribes it "just in case" If you bring your kid in to the pediatrician and the Dr is not sure if there is a bacterial infection then the Dr should wait a couple of days and see if it develops instead of prescribing anti biotics on a pre-emptive basis. Or better yet, if your kid has a cold, see if he gets better in few days. If it continues to get worse or it really starts to effect him THEN bring him in to the Doctor. I'm not forcing anyone to do anything against their will, but think physicians have an obligation to educate the public regarding the best possible practice. Is this somewhat subjective? Can it change? Is it infallible? Yes, yes and no. Agree regarding antibiotics, but I don't think that was Phurfur's original point which started your discussion. While pediatricians are notorious overprescribers, surgeons actually do pretty well BTW. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MedStudent 56 Posted October 2, 2012 On second thought, don't ask IGW. The positive effects of vaccination are nearly indisputable. Their impact on disease is measurable. Fear of unknown or future side effects does not justify avoiding all vaccines, IMO. The CDC and every other major health organization agree with this stance. Disputing it is about as sensible as climate change skepticism (cue the usual crowd). If Nikki want to avoid them herself, great, but her kids won't have a choice in the matter. The problem is the age we now live in. A vaccine may save a million lives but there may be 2 people out of 50 million who died from some unusual complication that developed because of the vaccination. A blogger will blog about the 2 deaths. Some celebrity will latch on to the story and make the talk show rounds. And a bogus 'study' will be written. People don't trust the government but agencies like the NIH and CDC are your best sources of legitimate information. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cruzer 1,996 Posted October 2, 2012 Never had one, never had the flu. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JT 137 Posted October 2, 2012 Thank Jebus somebody gets it! Don't know why Nikki is clinging to this totally inacurate opinion, or the fear of the "shiitload of bad stuff" in vaccines. I guess the CDC link regarding disease resurgence wasn't convincing enough, nor educating her regarding mercury content of modern vaccines. Transplant recipient who works daily with immunodeficient and Alpha 1 patients. Gotta know what you gotta know. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penultimatestraw 473 Posted October 3, 2012 No, what makes you sound like a rich kunt is talking about how enlightened you are for only shopping at Whole Foods. Let's do a little math. You said you spend $400 every two weeks on healthy organic food for you and your boyfriend. For a family of four, that would average out to approximately $1600 per month. That's fockin damn near $20,000 per year, or 40% of the median household income in this country. So congrats on being rich and having the money to afford healthy food. It doesn't make you any better or smarter than people who can't afford that kind of grocery bill. This looks similar to Nikki ripping into me for disparaging drug use. Sure, there is almost no data to support benefit from eating expensive organic food. But if she has the cash, can't she do so without implicitly insulting others who don't, for whatever reason? On a related note, why have we convinced ourselves that food should be so cheap and convenient? Eating a good diet and exercise, coupled with avoiding tobacco and substance abuse, are the most important things one can do for their health. Is 40% of your income too much to spend on it? If not, how much should we spend? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penultimatestraw 473 Posted October 3, 2012 Never had one, never had the flu. Ever been in a serious car wreck? If not, why do you wear a seatbelt? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Recliner Pilot 61 Posted October 3, 2012 The problem is the age we now live in. A vaccine may save a million lives but there may be 2 people out of 50 million who died from some unusual complication that developed because of the vaccination. A blogger will blog about the 2 deaths. Some celebrity will latch on to the story and make the talk show rounds. And a bogus 'study' will be written. People don't trust the government but agencies like the NIH and CDC are your best sources of legitimate information. It's kinda like when some nutwad shoots up some movie theatre or something and all the sudden libtards come out of the woodwork saying guns should be severely limited. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OilFieldTrash 0 Posted October 3, 2012 http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=URHhyP4lmQ4 Scary stuff Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 4,063 Posted October 3, 2012 This looks similar to Nikki ripping into me for disparaging drug use. Sure, there is almost no data to support benefit from eating expensive organic food. But if she has the cash, can't she do so without implicitly insulting others who don't, for whatever reason? On a related note, why have we convinced ourselves that food should be so cheap and convenient? Eating a good diet and exercise, coupled with avoiding tobacco and substance abuse, are the most important things one can do for their health. Is 40% of your income too much to spend on it? If not, how much should we spend? I'd say 40% is too much to spend. You figure you spend about 30% on housing, right? And 40% for food and then you've got very little for utilities, transportation, clothing, etc. We can certainly debate about whether it's "worth it" to spend more money on better food, but 40% of your income is ridiculous. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MedStudent 56 Posted October 3, 2012 1349227619[/url]' post='4855497']This looks similar to Nikki ripping into me for disparaging drug use. Sure, there is almost no data to support benefit from eating expensive organic food. But if she has the cash, can't she do so without implicitly insulting others who don't, for whatever reason? On a related note, why have we convinced ourselves that food should be so cheap and convenient? Eating a good diet and exercise, coupled with avoiding tobacco and substance abuse, are the most important things one can do for their health. Is 40% of your income too much to spend on it? If not, how much should we spend? I agree that processed foods should be avoided Can u dispute any of these statements? Organic farms do not yield more nutritious produce. Organic farms use land less efficiently. Organic farms USE pesticides. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
frank 2,345 Posted October 3, 2012 Fluuuuuuuuuuu Are you? Flu, flu Flu, flu Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shovelheadt 71 Posted October 3, 2012 Eating natural unprocessed, non-genetically engineered, non-pesticide ridden, non-antibiotic and steroid doused food makes me sound like a rich kvnt? Okie dokie. How about educated? Or is that synonymous with rich kvnt? Some of your comments in this thread indicate you're anything but. That's not meant to be an insult, but when you make catch all statements like 'diseases that have pretty much been eradicated for decades', you don't come off too intelligent. What are you gonna do if you have a girl someday when she reaches puberty? You gonna deny her the HPV vaccine? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shovelheadt 71 Posted October 3, 2012 http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=URHhyP4lmQ4 Scary stuff I know it's so wrong, but did anyone else giggle a few times while watching this? I mean, it's so focking crazy it almost looks fake..especially the part where she goes from a normal jog into a peewee herman dance. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 4,063 Posted October 3, 2012 I know it's so wrong, but did anyone else giggle a few times while watching this? I mean, it's so focking crazy it almost looks fake..especially the part where she goes from a normal jog into a peewee herman dance. It is fake. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penultimatestraw 473 Posted October 3, 2012 I agree that processed foods should be avoided Can u dispute any of these statements? Organic farms do not yield more nutritious produce. Organic farms use land less efficiently. Organic farms USE pesticides. From a health standpoint, justifying organic is problematic. The evidence doesn't support much. My linkBackground: The health benefits of organic foods are unclear. Purpose: To review evidence comparing the health effects of organic and conventional foods. Data Sources: MEDLINE (January 1966 to May 2011), EMBASE, CAB Direct, Agricola, TOXNET, Cochrane Library (January 1966 to May 2009), and bibliographies of retrieved articles. Study Selection: English-language reports of comparisons of organically and conventionally grown food or of populations consuming these foods. Data Extraction: 2 independent investigators extracted data on methods, health outcomes, and nutrient and contaminant levels. Data Synthesis: 17 studies in humans and 223 studies of nutrient and contaminant levels in foods met inclusion criteria. Only 3 of the human studies examined clinical outcomes, finding no significant differences between populations by food type for allergic outcomes (eczema, wheeze, atopic sensitization) or symptomatic Campylobacter infection. Two studies reported significantly lower urinary pesticide levels among children consuming organic versus conventional diets, but studies of biomarker and nutrient levels in serum, urine, breast milk, and semen in adults did not identify clinically meaningful differences. All estimates of differences in nutrient and contaminant levels in foods were highly heterogeneous except for the estimate for phosphorus; phosphorus levels were significantly higher than in conventional produce, although this difference is not clinically significant. The risk for contamination with detectable pesticide residues was lower among organic than conventional produce (risk difference, 30% [CI, −37% to −23%]), but differences in risk for exceeding maximum allowed limits were small. Escherichia coli contamination risk did not differ between organic and conventional produce. Bacterial contamination of retail chicken and pork was common but unrelated to farming method. However, the risk for isolating bacteria resistant to 3 or more antibiotics was higher in conventional than in organic chicken and pork (risk difference, 33% [CI, 21% to 45%]). Limitation: Studies were heterogeneous and limited in number, and publication bias may be present. Conclusion: The published literature lacks strong evidence that organic foods are significantly more nutritious than conventional foods. Consumption of organic foods may reduce exposure to pesticide residues and antibiotic-resistant bacteria. As far as using the land efficiently, growing non-modified crops with little or no pesticide use requires a greater amount of land for the same crop yield. One could argue massive crop monocultures employed in conventional farms are less healthy than rotating crops for the ecosystem. Plants produce their own pesticides, but organic farmers traditionally try to minimize added pesticides. The pesticides they use should not be synthetically derived. I was really applauding Nikki's mostly vegetarian diet. Unlike organic foods, there is decent research that suggests we should minimize meat intake. If not done for health reasons, I think it is justifiable to do so for other reasons like minimizing animal cruelty, pollution, fossil fuel use and antibiotic resistance (notice resistant bacteria were more common in non-organic meats). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penultimatestraw 473 Posted October 3, 2012 Some of your comments in this thread indicate you're anything but. That's not meant to be an insult, but when you make catch all statements like 'diseases that have pretty much been eradicated for decades', you don't come off too intelligent. What are you gonna do if you have a girl someday when she reaches puberty? You gonna deny her the HPV vaccine? Any fruit of Nikki's loins will be riddled with STI's, including HPV, in utero. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penultimatestraw 473 Posted October 3, 2012 While we're on the topic of dietary choices, what do people think about gluten? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penultimatestraw 473 Posted October 3, 2012 I'd say 40% is too much to spend. You figure you spend about 30% on housing, right? And 40% for food and then you've got very little for utilities, transportation, clothing, etc. We can certainly debate about whether it's "worth it" to spend more money on better food, but 40% of your income is ridiculous. It's pretty arbitrary. Our health is more important than our lodging, isn't it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MedStudent 56 Posted October 3, 2012 While we're on the topic of dietary choices, what do people think about gluten? Overblown. I'm sure there are people who have a gluten intolerance that are helped by it. What is the disease? Celiac? They need a gluten free diet. But for the vast majority of people, there is no need to cut out gluten. If you have gastrointestinal problems maybe you should look into it. But otherwise, save your money. And it's another unproven treatment for autism. Along with casein free. I feel bad for the mothers who will try anything. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cyclone24 1,935 Posted October 3, 2012 I'm an atheist so your post makes no sense. I am against vaccinations because they introduce a whole shiit load of bad stuff/chemicals/germs into your body to prevent diseases that have pretty much been eradicated from earth decades ago. Agreed. We didnt vaccinate our duaghter....and she only eats organic food. Im not sure this kid has ever even had a cold....certainly not sick and she getting close to 2. I asked these doctors point blank....."Is there anything she can get...if we dont get her shots....that you cant cure or fix?" "No"...all of them said. if thats the case....ill take my chances not loading my kid up with all sorts of shots with all kinds of stuff in them. Now some of it is based off we live in Iowa, a relatively healthy state, no smog, no widespread incidences of disease. My view may be different if we lived in say..LA. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JT 137 Posted October 3, 2012 It's kinda like when some nutwad shoots up some movie theatre or something and all the sudden libtards come out of the woodwork saying guns should be severely limited. Not really, Sport. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MedStudent 56 Posted October 3, 2012 Agreed. We didnt vaccinate our duaghter....and she only eats organic food. Im not sure this kid has ever even had a cold....certainly not sick and she getting close to 2. I asked these doctors point blank....."Is there anything she can get...if we dont get her shots....that you cant cure or fix?" "No"...all of them said. if thats the case....ill take my chances not loading my kid up with all sorts of shots with all kinds of stuff in them. Now some of it is based off we live in Iowa, a relatively healthy state, no smog, no widespread incidences of disease. My view may be different if we lived in say..LA. There is no cure for Polio. you don't find many cases in the us anymore but I did read about a case where 4 children in a rural community who eat all organic foods developed polio. They were Amish. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites