Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Devil_May_Kare t1_ispghl4 wrote

Why are they trying to blame parabens? We have evidence showing that parabens are pretty thoroughly harmless as currently used. And you have formaldehyde, a perfectly good known carcinogen, right there in the suspected causes list.


footcandlez t1_isponom wrote

Interesting. Does this mean the product labels that say "no parabens" are as helpful as "non-GMO"?


Devil_May_Kare t1_isppeik wrote

I'd say they're probably closer to "certified organic" than "non-GMO" -- some of the things you can use instead of parabens are worse for the consumer's health (e.g., formaldehyde releasing preservatives). The alternative to GMO is typically less food, not worse food.


UrbanDryad t1_ispt8px wrote

Non-GMO is helpful, but only because the most common GMO strains are formulated to have higher levels of pesticides/herbicides dumped on them. So avoiding GMO is a roundabout way to ingest less of those chemicals, and to avoid supporting that farming practice.


Strazdas1 t1_issc5en wrote

The opposite is true. Most common GMO strains need less pesticides/herbicides because they are engineered to be resistant to some bugs/diseases.