Nature is killing us

[Exnihiloest]

"some bacteria and fungi produce antibiotics to kill other microbes. We don't call these antibiotics 'pesticides', but that is exactly what they are. For a bacterial cell, a microbe of a species different is often nothing more than a competitive pest that should die, so it produces chemicals with the intention of killing it.It's a pesticide.

The plants do the same thing. From the plants' point of view, many insects are nothing more than dangerous leaf-eating parasites that should die. Plants therefore produce insecticides, such as caffeine and nicotine, to ward off the odious six-legged vegetarians. (They also produce pesticides to keep furry and furry vegetarians away).

And guess what? When we eat plants, we also eat these pesticides. A document co-written in 1990 by the venerable Bruce Ames revealed that 99,99% of the pesticides we consume in our diet are produced by the plants themselves."

https://www.acsh.org/news/2017/06/13/99 ... lves-11415

Dr Ames believes that "Americans eat about 1,5 g of natural pesticides per person per day, about 10 000 times more than they eat synthetic pesticide residues".

[Janic]

not possible to be as bad to confuse a synthetic product with a natural product in all its complexity. An artificial leg can also reproduce some functions of a natural leg and you have to be really narrow minded to not understand it.

[izentrop]

https://www.acsh.org/news/2017/06/13/99 ... lves-11415
Dr Ames estimates that "Americans eat about 1,5g of natural pesticides per person per day, about 10 times more than they eat synthetic pesticide residues."

Absolutely and it was taken over and confirmed by Hervé This, physico-chemist and director of the International Center for molecular gastronomy Agro-ParisTech-INRA. He is also Scientific Director of the Science and Food Culture Foundation of the Académie des Sciences, Secretary of the Human Nutrition Section of the Académie d'Agriculture de France. https://www.pseudo-sciences.org/spip.php?article2613
The dress does not make the monk, but here it is not a fun.

[sen-no-sen]

Nature is killing us

A title worthy of a tabloid!
To the extent that nature is "all that exists", write that "nature is killing us"is as tasteless as saying the other way around! Nice truism!: lol:

"some bacteria and fungi produce antibiotics to kill other microbes. We don't call these antibiotics 'pesticides', but that is exactly what they are. For a bacterial cell, a microbe of a species different is often nothing more than a competitive pest that should die, so it produces chemicals with the intention of killing it.

The evolution of life is the result of an arms race between prey and predators, ecosystems and hosts (type effect red queen*), without such processes we would not be here ...



*https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypoth%C3%A8se_de_la_reine_rouge

[Janic]

Dr Ames estimates that "Americans eat about 1,5g of natural pesticides per person per day, about 10 times more than they eat synthetic pesticide residues."

Absolutely and it was taken over and confirmed by Hervé This, physico-chemist and director of the International Center for molecular gastronomy Agro-ParisTech-INRA. He is also Scientific Director of the Science and Food Culture Foundation of the Académie des Sciences, Secretary of the Human Nutrition Section of the Académie d'Agriculture de France. https://www.pseudo-sciences.org/spip.php?article2613
The dress does not make the monk, but here it is not a fun.

[*]
This is not a fun, it's a funny. The concept of dose poison (although real too) is exceeded and replaced by the presence that makes the poison which emphasizes that even in minute amounts (so virtually non-toxic) its "toxic" effects are present, everything depends on the product considered.
The doses of natural "pesticides" in a culturally customary diet are not a problem because biological systems adapt to this situation (otherwise all coffee drinkers would be dead today) even if this adaptation is not the same. health rule for certain products.
Thus will we find the prohibition of homeopathic medicines, whose dilution is so strong that no (according to the allopathic discourse) compound could be toxic and yet these products (over a hundred) have been removed from the market because of probable toxicity: the world upside down!
But a synthetic product is not perceived by the living organism as adapted to the physiology of the living and therefore acts, even at low dose, as can an artificial leg compared to a natural leg, so your gus is a good Funny by confusing the two!
So your pseudoscientist is only pseudoscience.

[*] Weird, weird! When Montagnier thought he had discovered the cause of AIDS with HIV, he rose to the skies, the second French Pastor. but as soon as he says and repeats that it is only a virus (out of the billions that we absorb in our life) and that a good hygiene of life is enough to get rid of it, he becomes the evil black sheep of medicine and worse if it speaks of water memory! It is the inconstancy of human nature. Your guy may be the Montagnier of his discipline that is chemistry (not biology!)

[izentrop]

The concept of dose poison (although real too) is exceeded and replaced by the presence that makes the poison which emphasizes that even in minute amounts (so virtually non-toxic) its "toxic" effects are present, everything depends on the product considered.

Still, these suspicions should be a scientific reality and not just a journalist's fantasy based on a misinterpretation. https://www.pseudo-sciences.org/spip.php?article2907

[Janic]

janic wrote: The notion of dose making the poison (although real too) is outdated and replaced by the presence that makes the poison which underlines that even in minute quantities (so virtually non-toxic) its "toxic" effects are present, everything depends on the product under consideration.

Still, these suspicions should be a scientific reality and not just a journalist's fantasy based on a misinterpretation. https://www.pseudo-sciences.org/spip.php?article2907

I may surprise you, but I broadly agree with what Hill says, from a biostatistical point of view.
But when it comes to applying his speech to his own beliefs, it seriously slips into presuppositions and a priori without serious support in bio statistics just like vaccines, homeopathy (where it is in all respects incompetent as his colleagues who speak to his aficionados who swallow their speeches). But it is in human nature that it is so, so we must do with and disassemble their arguments with their own pseudo-scientific arguments precisely.
Indeed, if his speech had been applied in his time to the unique experience on rabies, today no one would talk about it and because of this the myth of vaccination would not have emerged with all its series of victims.

[Forhorse]

The basic troll in all its splendor!

[Exnihiloest]

not possible to be as bad to confuse a synthetic product with a natural product

It is impossible to be so ignorant as to ignore the fact that what distinguishes two chemicals is not their origin, but their formula.

[oli 80]

Good evening, here is a video that explains the reason for obesity https://solutionintestin.com/index0707d ... =125843050

who seems to be in the subject of this discussion