I'm no nutritional expert but from what I understand: If you look at traditional food people ate very different around the world but by some miracle all of those traditional diets cover all angles of nutrition. It seems to suggest that in the long run only cultures who eat a complete diet survive. You can of course survive for a really long time with all kinds of deficiencies but apparently time will catch up. How this happens I don't know but it isn't actually important. The point I wanted to make is that poison isn't even required. Unless you have experimental success after perhaps thousands of years of trial and error we would have to actively monitor and adjust everything with an iron fist. Specially this idea that anything goes unless harm is proven needs to go. There is an enormous amount of low hanging fruit but to do the entire job entirely will be a humongous undertaking.

A former coworker who was a serious gun enthusiast experienced dangerously high levels of lead in his bloodstream - he had chronic headaches and other bodily pains. He visited shooting ranges several times per week, and also packed (assembled? made? I'm not sure the nomenclature) his own bullets. His doctors believe he aspirated atomized lead particulate doing so much shooting practice, and/or bullet manufacture. He underwent chelation therapy (a protocol involving taking certain medications that bind to heavy metals in the blood, and the patient excretes it out via urination) to reduce lead levels.

Climate change seems to be a topic that's "OK" to be skeptical about because you can't see it right now, today, with your own eyes.

I wonder if folks who aren't so keen on the idea of climate change would be more open to the idea of population-level poisoning?

These two issues seem to get lumped in the same bucket but it does seem that population-level poisoning seems to be more of an acute threat. Lead, asbestos, microplastics, PFAs, pesticides... Who knows what these will do over generations, and there is certainly more chemical poisons we've introduced into our environment that we haven't even discovered.

> In Germany, there’s a popular nonprofit which tests consumer goods for safety and publishes the results.

In the USA too: https://www.consumerreports.org/about-us/what-we-do/

I'm curious, how many more years do we need to get decent data points to have a controller experiment between "people who min/maxed their health" vs an average person? Life expectancy here in Tokyo is 81/87 years (for men/women), and if constant chase for the "peak health" results in the same average... I'm not sure if it's worth it other than the general 80/20 rule of suggestions?

This reminds me a bit of a private group that did a big study (I thought in SFBA) looking at the amount of microplastics in different stuff, for example delivered food. Just thinking about it because of the startup he mentioned and I was wondering if it was them, but can’t find the article now. I know it was discussed at length here.

Edit: see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42525633

Given almost anything can do something bad to you I've got a rule of thumb not to worry much about things unless they can quantify how many years they take off your life. There are still quite a lot of those around - smoking, air pollution and obesity being some of the top ones that can do >10 years. I'm not to bad on smoking and air pollution but could lose a pound or two. I figure central London has dropped from a couple of years off to maybe a couple of months over the time I've been around here.

>Is the furniture I sit in every day made with harmful substances?

If I made you a chair out of wood and finished it with pure linseed oil, do you promise not to complain that it needs repainting regularly? If I make you a cushion out of horse hair and canvas, do you promise not to complain that it is uncomfortable and not flame retardant? Will you be ok that you can't wipe off stains like you could with your old one?

The convenience of modern materials is what drives this, as much as the profit motive

i live in Europe and the public discourse around this is always very high and i don't think we have 1/10 of the problems in the article, but maybe I'm lulu

This is probably the most 1st world thing I've read this year.