Are you worried?

Funnily enough, I was thinking only this morning, that there is a distinct lack of common sense these days. They should teach it in schools!

I cook everything from scratch and try to avoid any prepared food like bacon ( not terribly good at that-love bacon).

I have recently discovered that I'm gluten intolerant, and am convinced it may well be associated with stuff put into bread etc which has brought it on.

I think the flour has been developed to be stronger with more gluten in these days whitewave

There are so many alternatives with gf flour and they can make excellent cakes and biscuits, but gf bread is the one thing that is not so good as ordinary bread

Hello I am new to gransnet but would like to make the comment, I believe in keeping everything as far as possible simple, hence use pure organic ciconut oil, organic cider vinegar, being a veggie, fruit, salads and veg, plus 2 cocker spaniels that I walk which helps to keep me in shape, plus pottering in garden, and crafts, may sound dull but am happy to avoid as much az poss chemicals and all the nasties in cleaning products and food

I think this i tablet has a mind of its own! Sorry for spelling!

I don't buy organic, £1.10 for a cucumber instead of 45p is just plain bonkers, and I don't think a few slices from an 'ordinary' cucumber will kill me.

I cook from scratch as long as I have the time, a series of long days of grandparenting will eventually require a quick heat up of something when they go home. (and !)

Lots of fish, veg, fruit, and smaller portions of chicken, pork and red meat, with daily olive oil works for me. Since we are told Hygge is the new nirvana, www.telegraph.co.uk/wellbeing/mood-and-mind/Danish-cosy-hygge-lifestyle-cosiness-winter-warmth-Nordic-Danes-Scandi-home-interiors/ if I feel like a small drizzle of cream on my raspberries, I will go for it!

The skin isn't actually waterproof (look at it after a long bath) and drugs permeate well (HRT patches anyone?) but I have yet to find anything that makes any difference to the aging process. There is a '24 hour freeze' cream DH bought me that I try to convince myself makes a difference for an evening out, but probably only a psychological boost! Cheap and pleasant smelling is what I go for.

Moderation in all things, a little of what you fancy .....

We knew a bank manager who dealt with business accounts. He said that Marks and Spencer buy the best quality food, fruit and vegetables and then the others take the rest. That seemed to indicate that, while expensive, the quality was good.

One point to remember about cosmetics is that there is a clue in the term 'cosmetic'. If any product was to make permanent changes or improvement to skin it would have to be registered as a pharmaceutical which is a whole new area of testing and regulation. Thus, all the creams which claim to 'improve the appearance of lines and wrinkles'. Also, animal testing on cosmetics has been against the law in Eu countries for some time. It is however, a very good idea to always use a moisturiser with sun protection, even in our climate. There are always ethical products available with good quality and clear ingredients.

I'm with jalima. I remember years ago a scrub which contained ground almond kernels - natural and all good but then the greedy, amoral, totally irresponsible petro chemical industry saw an opportunity and hey ho! another environmental disaster. It's up to us as consumers to take control and simply not buy these damaging - and half the time unecessary - products. And don't even get me started on those vile perfume beads you chuck in the washer! Who buys them? Where do they think the waste water goes?

^ I have yet to find anything that makes any difference to the aging process^
A smile!

DD met someone who worked for a firm that produced cosmetics and skin products for M&S among others. She said M&S always chose the highest quality ingredients but put the lowest mark up on the products.

I fully accept the microbead argument jalima and in the days when I used to bother with such things I bought a product which had, I think, minute fragments of apricot kernels. Can't remember the name though.
I agree accurate labelling is essential and a complete ban on the bl**dy little things while we are at it.

patriciageegee

Apricot and almonds naturally contain chemical substances which are closely related to cyanide.

www.food.gov.uk/news-updates/news/2016/15138/advice-on-apricot-kernels-and-bitter-almond-kernels

We advise that bitter apricot kernels including the powdered forms should not be eaten. This is because a naturally-occurring substance in the kernels changes – after people eat the products – to cyanide. Our updated advice follows a recent evaluation by the European Food Safety Authority.
almonds naturally contain cemical substances that can change into cyanide

Just because a product occures naturally does not mean it is healthy. An awful lot of garden plants contain poisonous substances.

jalima there's probably something in that idea of stronger gluten. Made a lemon drizzle for DD yesterday and quite without thinking I licked the spoon. Up until 1am with stomach cramps -then gave in and took a pain killer. Ridiculous.

Oh dear, DD suffers like that, if she eats out she always asks but not everyone understands even now.

Yes, Nelliemoser, this belief that 'natural' is always good and artificial is always bad is ridiculous! People distrust chemicals they haven't heard of. But they are often harmless.
I think GM foods bred to resist disease are preferable to foods treated with pesticides!
I don't get worked up about foods apart from preferring to cook from scratch and not to buy processed products. However my real concern is Climate Change which I think is a complete disaster and will affect all our children's and grandchildren's lives adversely. I'm anti fracking as yet more fossil fuels will be burnt releasing more CO2 into the atmosphere. Also not keen on nuclear power, so support green methods of energy production. We have solar panels on our roof and I think all houses and other buildings should have them. I much prefer the appearance of wind farms to coal fired power stations (and also electricity pylons which we have come to accept through familiarity.).
I realise that I have rather gone off the subject of the thread but I feel strongly about this.

We are not taught to appreciate innovation but are bombarded with constant catastrophism. Meanwhile it is an undeniable truth that "more people are living longer, healthier, freer, more peaceful, lives than at any time in human history". So, among other things, whatever is being done to food is, overall, having a beneficial effect on people's lives.

I think a lot of people don't realise that everything, repeat everything, is made of chemicals (including us of course) so when they see or think of the word chemicals they are afraid.

Agreed thatbags. We are always reading portents of doom, and although I do not wish to be a Pollyanna, there are many things that have happened in my lifetime that we should be proud of. The Thames is now so much cleaner that Salmon are in it quite a long way up. The buildings in London are clean, all the soot has gone, we are, in the West at least, living longer and healthier lives. I agree about the microbeads argument and applaud those retailers who will no longer stock them. Not all chemicals are bad, many of them keep our homes and schools, hospitals, public buildings clean, sanitised and safe. I for one do not wish to return to grandmother's carbolic.

So are we not allowed to think that we'd rather not put unnecessary chemicals on or in our bodies?

Antibiotics are chemicals. Look what's happening with the overuse of those.

secure.avaaz.org/en/oceans_30_loc_2c/?ckHcnjb

'This week could decide whether collapse or conservation wins the race. Scientists say if we conserve 30% of our oceans, that will be enough to regenerate the rest -- and this plan is actually on the table at the powerful World Conservation Congress in 3 days!

Countries with fishing lobbies like Japan are opposing the plan, so it's up to us to bring a massive counterweight of people power. This could be the tipping point for our oceans -- let's send 1 million voices to save them straight into the summit. '

From the Avaaz petition.

By the way, organic September starts today, Soil Association, so there should be some good offers in the shops.
Going to send my order off now.

Think what you like, durhamjen Overuse of chemicals is indeed a danger.

But being a "chemical" is not in itself a danger. Every living thing (and every no-living one too) is made up of chemicals. Without chemicals we would not digest our food, react to stimuli, move our muscles, we could not exist. Without chemicals there would be no life on earth, no structure to the earth or the universe, just an infinity and an eternity of nothingness.

If we want to check our food, cosmetics etc, we have to identify the chemical, determine whether it is a part of the food from the start or has been added, what is is there for, how it will affect us, and THEN decide whether we want it or not. We don't just condemn "chemicals" universally - or we would end up starving, dying of thirst, naked and freezing. Or dead.

Talking about "Chemicals" is far too general to have any meaning. Chemicals have been in existence for thousands of years.

We are in a much better position to decide which one are potentially harmful now, than we ever were, and documentation is much better.
Who would now use mercury as a treatment for syphilis, typhoid fever, or parasites.
Would you want the water from your tap to not be treated with chlorine?

Someone mention Carbolic, were we happy with that ? If we called it Phenol C6H5OH would we still be happy, it's quite a nasty chemical, which is why it kills things.

We all have a choice what we put in or use on our bodies and are better informed. Without antibiotics disease would be rife, overuse is to be blamed on the users, not the antibiotic or it's developer.

x post Elegran, very similar opinions.

Bacteria harm us by causing chemicals to be produced in our bodies which have deleterious effects. Antibiotics get rid of the bacteria and those chemicals. In the past, many many people died of infections. In my family tree I have a butcher who died from blood poisoning after a small cut on his hand.. Chemicals are not evil, they are neutral.

We have to differentiate use from OVEruse, necessary from UNnecessary, appropriate from INappropriate - use our judgment in fact.

Ranting against chemicals full stop is not helpful. no-one has said "we not allowed to think that we'd rather not put unnecessary chemicals on or in our bodies"