Page 2 of 3
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 9:36 am
by contadina
To say nothing of the cocktail effect caused by the amount of food and cleaning products consumed which contain chemicals. For me, and I'm not pregnant, it just makes so much sense to avoid chemicals at all costs. Making and growing your own is the way to go.
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 10:03 am
by MKG
There does appear to be (no offence intended to anyone) a trend toward people not liking "chemicals" as though they were all, per se, evil. Certain chemicals are certainly extremely bad for humans, but there's no getting away from it - the world is made of chemicals. Water is a chemical, as is the sugar I so lovingly turn into alcohol (another one). I think that we could be in danger of knee-jerking every time the word chemical is mentioned, which would be silly - on a par with the people who avoid products on the grounds that they contain E numbers, not all of which are substances designed to alter the future of the human race.
Couple that with the cock-a-hoop reporting of anything which may stir up a chemical storm, even though that "anything" is based upon the most tenuous of statistical data, and you have a lot of justifiably frightened (but sadly misinformed) people.
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 11:22 am
by Brij
It's pretty important for us to be able to distinguish potentially toxic chemicals (and other materials) though, right? Which surely ought to be the responsibility of the bodies that are recommending their use.
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 11:27 am
by MKG
Oh, absolutely. Not sure I'd trust the judgement of the bodies advocating their use, but there certainly should be some body with no vested interest (non-political, non-commercial) doing that job. Question is, how would it be financed?
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 2:46 pm
by contadina
I’m not saying we should get rid of chemicals; modern living would be impossible without them. Like many people, however, I’m very concerned the chemical industry is not regulated strongly enough and while vested interests and cosy relationships between agro-chemical companies and governments continue it’s hardly surprising that so many of us are less than reassured by the reassurances given about the links between chemicals and their damage to the environment and human health.
If pesticides are not dangerous then why the hell do successive governments advise us to peel all fruit and vegetables?
The British Medical Association has been sounding warnings about the unforeseen consequences of the use of chemicals in farmyards, homes and gardens for the past twenty years.
While it’s difficult to prove that the build up of pesticide residues can cause cancer, the lack of research and monitoring of chemical usage is negligent. It could just be coincidence that the alarming rise in ADD and asthma in children and an increase in young people diagnosed with Alzheimer’s has coincided precisely with the use of organophosphates, whose side effects just happen to include disrupting signals from one nerve ending to another and respiratory problems.
And you could disregard the links between the rise in superbugs and the use of antibiotics in farming, but when the World Health Organisation warns we could be on the road to a pre-antibiotic era then I think it’s time to do what you can to limit their usage as much as you can.
I’m pretty sure I’m not the only isher who’s chosen this way of life as a means of controlling what goes into my body. I’m afraid neither the agro-chemical companies, governments, pharmaceutical and food industries have a good track record.
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 3:09 pm
by MKG
contadina wrote:If pesticides are not dangerous then why the hell do successive governments advise us to peel all fruit and vegetables?
Precisely my point, Contadina - and there's no change in that advice for organic produce. That's knee-jerking.
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 4:27 pm
by contadina
I don't think the decision to make my own chemical-free cleaning products and toiletries is knee-jerking, just as I don't think following a fresh and varied, organic diet to keep me healthy and in less need of pills is.
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 6:18 pm
by MKG
??? Now I'm confused.
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 8:39 pm
by Rachel Squires
The really worrying thing is that a lot of herbal remedy type stuff is not regulated at all and can (as pointed out earlier) still be dangerous.
I'm beginning to think about sprog hosting (yep, I'm getting toward the age where it's now or never) and I'm looking at all my habits. One of those is a clipper tea based on vervain to promote good sleep. Now.. the box doesn't mention any contraindications and yet I know that vervain can be harmful during pregnancy as it can promote muscular spasms 'down there' to the point that it's also considered to be an aphrodysiac. So what to do????? (it's the good nights sleep I drink it for - honest!

)
I'm getting as anti man-made products as the next born-again hippy chick but in their favour, at least they are regulated a bit. Really still don't know what to say about the whole aspartamine argument though.
Rach.
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 9:05 pm
by Annpan
When I was 'baby-hosting' (I like that lol) I just did what seemed sensible... you do end up avoiding loads of stuff but you get used to it and it isn't a big deal. I think the important thing is to look after yourself and the wee guy, and don't get stressed about the time you walk past a car spray painter.
You should avoid (unless told otherwise by a very trustworthy and trained professional- or 2)
All aromatherapy stuff
All herbal teas
All medicines (including paracetamol and all herbal remedies)
Caffeine
Alcohol
All 'alternative therapies' (like reflexology, acupuncture, etc)
Shell fish
Unpasteurised dairy products
uncooked (or semi-cooked eggs)
Cured meats (salami etc)
I also read that you should avoid nuts... but that was too much for me (plus I was already 5 months when I heard that)
Most of the above is regarded as OTT, but I didn't want to be the one who got salmonella (or whatever) and JohnM watched me like a hawk

Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 9:08 pm
by red
and liver.
midn you they served it in the hospital canteen when i was in, but before my son was born.... I pointed it out.. they said 'oh once wont matter' oh for goodness sake...
Posted: Sat May 24, 2008 11:57 am
by Ratty
Reports like that are very very upsetting. Having had a son who was autistic and then died very very suddenly (28 hours after diagnosis) at the age of 8 years from a rare form of Leukaemia, I ask myself every single day what did I do wrong? He never ate meat, we have had organic food for as long as it has been available, no one smokes in our family, etc etc. But the house we moved into 9 months before his sudden death had new carpets throughout - could it have been that I ask myself? Ultimately though the Oncologist told us that we just don't know why this happens.
I know plenty of children who are brought up in less than eco households who grow to be big & strong. I think Nature is just very cruel to a select few sometimes.
Yes, its wise to avoid anything which is blatently 'toxic' or 'chemical' but mothers have enough to contend with in this day & age without worrying that we have harmed our children in some way.
Posted: Sat May 24, 2008 9:23 pm
by Annpan
I am really sorry to hear that Ratty... I guess sometimes we just don't know why it happens

Posted: Sun May 25, 2008 3:09 pm
by Brij
Sorry to hear that, too Ratty. It's true that nature can be very cruel.
Posted: Mon May 26, 2008 3:27 pm
by KellyB
There's no need for "toxic" chemicals to be in anything we use we all know there are alternatives it's just easier which means cheaper for companies to use toxic chemicals. We have a choice not to use them trouble is they hide them behind the words Natural and Organic etc We have to get educated to find out about these chemicals which are usually huge long words!! I keep a chemical checklist in my bag so I know what I am buying. If we all knew about these chemicals and avoided them they would stop using them. Then I suppose again it all comes down to time and money.