See. And I didn't even ask you for a plastic bag!*looks at SMS strangely*

canucklehead wrote:hi, cant believe this is my first post. i'm brand-new . i also ... it's so backward in today's world. grew up in vancouver, and lived in hong kong ....
Although it's edible, how safe is it? Doesn't the plastic leach into the food, especially in hot weather?WanWanWan wrote:Oh, and if you want a good accessible example of a plastic that decomposes with water? Try a Cadbury's Milk Tray (not sure if they sell them in Singapore). The 'tray' part dissolves pretty quickly if you get it wet, and is then edible (but it tastes like cardboard).
The damage caused due to the side effects on human/animals due to long term exposure of plastics far outweighs any other merit [other than convenience] that our current plastic usage provides.WanWanWan wrote:I have some experience with chemistry, and let me tell you, the recyclable materials thing is actually much worse than it looks like at first glance.
It's made from cornstarch. Perfectly safe and edible, don't you worry. You get all the same substances in a corn fritter, plus some actual flavour.Brah wrote:Although it's edible, how safe is it? Doesn't the plastic leach into the food, especially in hot weather?
No, just as I said, a lot of the default 'go-to' recyclable products aren't actually much better, or are worse. There are of course better options out there, but many companies don't encourage recylables for the interest of the environment so much as for their own corporate image or requirements. Yes, a lot of what we use is bad, and also a lot is not. But many of our 'solutions' are really just ways to satisfy company requirements and don't have any actual positive effects in the end. It is just worth keeping in mind that many marketed recyclable and biodegradable plastics are not by default better. Even a quick net search can help sort things out.rajagainstthemachine wrote:3W are you trying to say that the stuff we currently use are better off than using products which are recyclable?
You might believe that but I don't.WanWanWan wrote:It's made from cornstarch. Perfectly safe and edible, don't you worry. You get all the same substances in a corn fritter, plus some actual flavour.Brah wrote:Although it's edible, how safe is it? Doesn't the plastic leach into the food, especially in hot weather?
I've seen those, we have coffee cups in the office made of that substanceWanWanWan wrote: It's made from cornstarch. Perfectly safe and edible, don't you worry. You get all the same substances in a corn fritter, plus some actual flavour.
I see what you mean and yes I agree with you on that point.WanWanWan wrote: No, just as I said, a lot of the default 'go-to' recyclable products aren't actually much better, or are worse. There are of course better options out there, but many companies don't encourage recylables for the interest of the environment so much as for their own corporate image or requirements. Yes, a lot of what we use is bad, and also a lot is not. But many of our 'solutions' are really just ways to satisfy company requirements and don't have any actual positive effects in the end. It is just worth keeping in mind that many marketed recyclable and biodegradable plastics are not by default better. Even a quick net search can help sort things out.
My Mom is a pretty old lady so she has naturally some health related problems and often goes to a doctor. The doctor prescribes her medicine, she goes back home and then before she starts to take it, reads first all the data available especially on side effects and hazards. So for example, she may find that the medicine can damage her liver if taken too long or overdosed, or kidneys, stuff like this. She is sometimes so impressed by the list of hazards that she does not take the medicine. She probably thinks a bit over the line that it must be a very dangerous medicine if on the list of possible hazards there is anything that sounds not quite right. I already gave up long time ago trying to explain to her that the exposure level and time is a key (no, I am not using with her this kind kind of language) and that practically everything including Oxygen can be toxic. She is a sort of victim of her own fears but in other areas people are often victims of various eco-terrorists.rajagainstthemachine wrote:2. Plasticizers (phthalates) and bisphenol A (BPA) are chemicals found in lots of household products.[..]
Hazards:
Bisphenol A is thought to be an endocrine disruptor which can mimic estrogen and may lead to negative health effects
in fact this particular product has so many health hazards that you need to read this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisphenol_A#Health_effects
Excellent point. Nothing is either "good" or "bad"; there is a spectrum. Even water is toxic in big enough volumes. It is easy to be mislead by the many minor side effects things can have. What is sometimes worse is how correlation-causation confounds things. A person rich enough to buy things made of some materials, or rich enough to buy certain medicines, is less likely to die of some diseases caused by poverty/malnutrition and more likely to die of diabetes and cancer (cancer being what you will almost always eventually die of if enough of the other diseases can be treated, and if you don't get in any accidents in the meantime). So you can draw all sorts of correlations like "driving more expensive cars makes you more likely to die of cancer" (obviously rubbish) and "using certain expensive medicines makes you more likely to get cancer" (not as clear-cut: could be rubbish, but also might have something to it). Things that say "toxic", "cancer", "diabetes", "liver/kidney damage", etc. can easily fall prey to this and need to be read very carefully.x9200 wrote:My Mom is a pretty old lady so she has naturally some health related problems and often goes to a doctor. The doctor prescribes her medicine, she goes back home and then before she starts to take it, reads first all the data available especially on side effects and hazards. So for example, she may find that the medicine can damage her liver if taken too long or overdosed, or kidneys, stuff like this. She is sometimes so impressed by the list of hazards that she does not take the medicine. She probably thinks a bit over the line that it must be a very dangerous medicine if on the list of possible hazards there is anything that sounds not quite right. I already gave up long time ago trying to explain to her that the exposure level and time is a key (no, I am not using with her this kind kind of language) and that practically everything including Oxygen can be toxic. She is a sort of victim of her own fears but in other areas people are often victims of various eco-terrorists.
Styrene is one of the more benign industrially used unsaturated monomers and the likelihood of significant exposure from any of the styrofoam products is in practical terms ZERO. Of course you can buy it from fine chemical suppliers pour to your eyes or drink it and get what you described above.rajagainstthemachine wrote:Styrene is regarded as a "hazardous chemical", especially in case of eye contact, but also in case of skin contact, of ingestion and of inhalation, according to several sources. Styrene is largely metabolized into styrene oxide in humans, resulting from oxidation by cytochrome P450. styrene oxide is considered toxic, mutagenic, and possibly carcinogenic
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has described styrene to be "a suspected toxin to the gastrointestinal tract, kidney, and respiratory system, among others. On 10 June 2011, the U.S. National Toxicology Program has described styrene as "reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen"
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests