The #1 cause of household poisoning is dish detergent.
Janet
that have not been properly rinsed of dangerous liquid dish soap (albeit
some are safer than others), so I did some investigation.
"One Million poisonings in Canada each year are due to household cleaner
ingestion. Some are fatal. The #1 cause of household poisoning is dish
detergent. What kinds of chemicals are in those products?"
http://www.rense.com/general19/chemical.htm
and http://simplebiz49201.tripod.com/safeandnontoxic/id1.htmlChemicals in
the House
Following is a Summary of Information from Kay Hizer, Director of "Healthy
Choices", a non-profit organization comprised of doctors, nurses,
environmental scientists and educators committed to teaching the public
about the hazards of chemicals in our homes and how we can avoid or minimize
the risks. In addition to the list of products, several other statistics
were reported:
50% of all illness is due to poor indoor air quality (Source: 1989 State
of Massachusetts Study)
Liquid Dish Soap is the leading cause of poisonings in the home for children
under the age of 6 (over 2.1 million accidental poisonings per year)
(contains formaldehyde and ammonia in most brands)
Of the chemicals found in personal care products:
884 are toxic
146 cause tumors
218 cause reproductive complications
314 cause biological mutation
376 cause skin and eye irritations
(Source: United States House of Representatives report, 1989)
Over the last 20-30 years, as more toxic chemicals have been introduced
in greater amounts, the level of toxins stored in adipose tissues (fat
cells) of our bodies has risen. Bio-accumulation studies have shown that
some toxins store in our bodies for life. Greater and greater amounts are
being stored at younger ages. Diseases that used to occur later in life are
now appearing at younger ages. Diseases that used to be rare are more
frequent.
For Example: There has been a 28% increase in childhood cancer since
the addition of pesticides into household products. (Source: National
Cancer Institute)
In one decade, there has been a 42% increase in asthma (29% for men;
82% for women-the higher rate for women is
believed to be due to women's longer exposure times to household
chemicals) (Source: Center for Disease Control)
Due to the increase in toxic buildup in our bodies, including the toxic
buildup of formaldehyde, dead bodies are not
decomposing as fast as they used to. (Source: National Institutes
of Health)
There is an increased risk for leukemia in children where parents have
used pesticides in the home or garden before the
child's birth (Source: Journal of the National Cancer Institute)
Over 150 chemicals found in the average home have been linked to
allergies, birth defects, cancer and psychological
abnormalities. (Source): Consumer Product Safety Commission
Toothpaste can contain a number of harmful ingredients, such as: ammonia,
benzyl alcohol/sodium benzoate, colors, ethanol, flavors, flouride,
formaldehyde, mineral oil, plastic (PVP), saccharin. Formaldehyde, mineral
oil, PVP, and saccharin are all classified as carcinogens or suspected
carcinogen, as is flouride, which has been banned in many European countries
and is the subject of concern with regard to thyroid problems. In fact, as
of April 1997, toothpaste is required to carry poison control information on
the label as even a small amount can harm or kill a small child.
In most cases, however, you won't find much information on the label. There
are no requirements of manufacturers to actually disclose what is in a
product, and there is no regulation or enforcement. All of it falls under
proprietary trade secret legislation. The issues are as follows:
1. Many of the chemicals used have never been adequately tested for their
negative health effect, and almost none have been tested in combination with
other chemicals.
2. There are few regulatory agencies with any clout. The FDA oversees
personal care products, but can only regulate once they are on the market.
There is no review or approval process beforehand.
3. Safety testing is done by the manufacturer. Material Safety Data Sheets
are written by the manufacturer. Labeling is done by the manufacturer -
think they're going to list anything they don't have to?
4. A product that kills 50% of lab animals through ingestion or inhalation
can still be designated "non-toxic."
5. Only recently has the government come out with guidelines for
"biodegradable," but the majority of the products on the market today have
never been tested.
6. Testing is expensive and takes a lot of time, yet consumers generally
look for the cheapest product available - so how is it cost justified? And
there's the issue of animal testing.
7. Chemical names are often disguised by using innocuous trade names, and
most chemicals can be listed under several different synonyms to make it
even more confusing. For example, butyl cellosolve, an ingredient of such
products as Simple Green or Formula 409, can be listed as: 2-butoxyethanol,
ethylene glycol monobutyl ether, monobutyl glycol ether, or simply as a
glycol ether (glycol ethers are also listed by NIOSH as neurotoxins -
effects the central nervous system). Butyl is associated with blood and bone
marrow damage, and adverse effects on hematopoietic tissues, blood, kidneys
and liver. This information is available through NIOSH or the product
Material Safety Data Sheet.
8. Right-To-Know laws only cover the workforce. If you felt a manufacturer
wasn't being honest and wanted to do something about it, if you're not an
employee, you will be told to file a civil suit for "false advertising."
9. If you were an employee and filed a complaint, the company would be
warned, asked to change, fined if they didn't - and you'd probably be out of
a job, unless you had a really good attorney!
Bruce Sinclair
>I was shocked on this NG to find the irrational support of eating off dishes
>that have not been properly rinsed of dangerous liquid dish soap (albeit
>some are safer than others), so I did some investigation.
>
>"One Million poisonings in Canada each year are due to household cleaner
>ingestion. Some are fatal. The #1 cause of household poisoning is dish
>detergent. What kinds of chemicals are in those products?"
>http://www.rense.com/general19/chemical.htm
If you drink the stuff concentrated it won't do you a lot of good. If
you eat off plates that have the tiniest amount left from being washed
? ... best of luck trying to find any effect :)
Effect of not washing your dishes ? ... rather a lot higher :)
Bruce
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to
think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone´s fault.
If it was Us, what did that make Me ? After all, I´m one of Us. I must be.
I´ve certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No-one ever thinks
of themselves as one of Them. We´re always one of Us. It´s Them that do
the bad things. <=> Terry Pratchett. Jingo.
Brian Harmer
bruce.s...@NOSPAMagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz (Bruce Sinclair) wrote:
>In article <bpc5fm$hvq$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz>, "Janet" <jane...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>I was shocked on this NG to find the irrational support of eating off dishes
>>that have not been properly rinsed of dangerous liquid dish soap (albeit
>>some are safer than others), so I did some investigation.
>>
>>"One Million poisonings in Canada each year are due to household cleaner
>>ingestion. Some are fatal. The #1 cause of household poisoning is dish
>>detergent. What kinds of chemicals are in those products?"
>>http://www.rense.com/general19/chemical.htm
>
>If you drink the stuff concentrated it won't do you a lot of good. If
>you eat off plates that have the tiniest amount left from being washed
>? ... best of luck trying to find any effect :)
>Effect of not washing your dishes ? ... rather a lot higher :)
MSDS information for most of these products indicates no toxicity in
low doses, and no known carcinogenic effects.
Rupert
Bruce Sinclair
Quite ... but I suspect a reaction to someone elses sentence (eg ...
SHOCK .. HORROR ... 50 % of school children below average !) is going
on here ... with very little in the way of filtering available data
(if any) thru the brain :)
Bruice
SomebodyElse
>(eg ...
> SHOCK .. HORROR ... 50 % of school children below average !)
Haha. I like that....very shocking, but necessarily true....
Jim Purdie
"SomebodyElse" <nos...@for.me> wrote in message
news:pan.2003.11.18....@for.me...
It ain't necessarily so! Depends on the distribution. If 80 score 60, and
twenty score 10, the average is 50, and 80% are above it. But I know, the
normal distribution is a symmetrical bell curve.
Jim Purdie
xlo
What I am more interested in is how come over a month ago I went to the
supermarket and bought a cheap pot of "Nivea" face cream, and placed some of
it very neatly in an expensive but empty L'Oreal moisturiser container,
stuck it on the dressing table, said nothing (made no false claims) and my
wife has been using it twice every day since and has never said a word?
And she still looks as beautiful as ever. This was a genuine experiment -
not a lousy trick. The price has nothing to do with it.
Will I see the result in 40 years?
Anyway, Dishwash Detergent:
Water - maybe 80%
Sodium dodecylbenzene sulphonate NaDDBS (anionic surfactant / detergent)
(I think rating for biodegradability depends on whether the C12 chain is
branched or linear - and I can't remember for sure which is which - but
almost all the stuff made now is the biodegradable type which I think is the
linear one)
Sodium Xylene Sulphonate - ("hydrotope" - mainly there to keep the NaDDBS
solution clear)
Salt - as in NaCl (NaDDBS solution thickens when salt is added) - not
needed, but makes the stuff thick, which makes the stuff seem "strong" when
it is probably 80% water, and probably costs less than $0.30 a litre to make
in bulk, even though you pay $3.00 for a 375ml bottle.
Colour (dyestuff)
Fragrance
Nothing else really needed - Aloe Vera, glycerine, or whatever added for
marketing reasons. I suppose you could add extra thickener, but probably
only if you wanted it to have "different" flow characteristics than salt
would do, to make it seem "special".
Dishwash Machine Powder would probably be much "nastier" for a child to
accidentally swallow.
That is mainly:
Sodium Metasilicate (strong alkali to saponify fats/grease - not as nasty as
caustic soda, but still quite nasty - you can sometimes buy this stuff as
"basal salts" for paint stripping or drain cleaning or whatever)
Phosphates (dirt suspension - pretty harmless really, although
environmentalists may not agree - but same stuff as in laundry powder - and
you use a lot less of it in your dishwasher)
Sodium Dichloroisocyanurate granules (releases chlorine when wet - same
stuff as in the "CDB" tablets that people bung in their swimming pools, and
obviously quite poisonous)
Free-Flow agent (sodium alumino silicate usually, as for some reason I don't
know, it may also protect against corrosion of some types of glass from the
caustic Sodium Metasilicate, pretty harmless - this or precipitated silica
widely used in food as free-flow agent - salt, grated cheese etc.)
Blue granules - usually just the phosphate (Sodium Tripolyphosphate)
coloured blue. Bunged in to trick you into thinking it must be doing
something. Not in all products, but common in all sorts of granulated
products like this. including washing powder.
So - look those chemicals up if you want.
Can't imagine "Butyl Cellosolve" or other glycol ethers in dishwash
detergent - more likely in "Spray & Wipe" type products. It has quite a
distinctive odour.
Janet
"Bruce Sinclair" <bruce.s...@NOSPAMagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz> wrote in
message news:DQgub.7888$ws.7...@news02.tsnz.net...
> In article <bpc5fm$hvq$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz>, "Janet" <jane...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> >I was shocked on this NG to find the irrational support of eating off
dishes
> >that have not been properly rinsed of dangerous liquid dish soap (albeit
> >some are safer than others), so I did some investigation.
> >
> >"One Million poisonings in Canada each year are due to household cleaner
> >ingestion. Some are fatal. The #1 cause of household poisoning is dish
> >detergent. What kinds of chemicals are in those products?"
> >http://www.rense.com/general19/chemical.htm
>
> If you drink the stuff concentrated it won't do you a lot of good.
You are correct; it will kill you.
http://simplebiz49201.tripod.com/safeandnontoxic/id1.htmlChemicals
If
> you eat off plates that have the tiniest amount left from being washed
> ? ... best of luck trying to find any effect :)
One can do what most people in the world do...rinse it off. It is not hard,
and it is common sense among most people.
I, for one, would not like to have any toxic residue on my plates.
> Effect of not washing your dishes ? ... rather a lot higher :)
Come on why not rise them?
Janet
"Rupert" <rup...@nospam.ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
news:bpc7ap$jgd$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> steady on brian, don't let science get in the way of a good scare!
> >
> > MSDS information for most of these products indicates no toxicity in
> > low doses, and no known carcinogenic effects.
>
>
Very low doses of uranium is OK as well. Leaving residue of this toxic
substance on dishes because one is too lazy to rinse it off (?) defies
logic:)
Jim Purdie
"Janet" <jane...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bpc5fm$hvq$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> I was shocked on this NG to find the irrational support of eating off
dishes
> that have not been properly rinsed of dangerous liquid dish soap (albeit
> some are safer than others), so I did some investigation.
>
> "One Million poisonings in Canada each year are due to household cleaner
> ingestion. Some are fatal. The #1 cause of household poisoning is dish
> detergent. What kinds of chemicals are in those products?"
> http://www.rense.com/general19/chemical.htm
Janet, I went to that first web site, and in the first few lines I read
"Since WWII more than 80,000 synthetic chemicals have been invented. Most
have been created from petroleum and coal tar for the purposes of chemical
warfare." Frankly, I don't believe it. You are saying that most of the
chemical activity in the world is devoted to producing substances for
chemical warfare. I know that the USA spends more on warfare than the rest
of the world combined, but even they would find it hard to justify that
statement. The whole tone of the piece is similar, and the typography is a
continual shout.
Petroleum and coal tar are cheap sources of organic chemicals, and the
toxicity of the chemicals produced from them has no relationship to the
toxicity of the original materials. Remember that even your source does not
say the chemicals are extracted from coal tar, but are created from coal
tar. I have already told you that most of the chemicals in your body, what
you are made of, could be produced from petroleum, or for that matter from
coal tar. But nothing seems to penetrate except your loony propaganda web
sites.
You are right to be cautious about dangerous chemicals in the environment,
but extreme propaganda defeats your own purpose. I have already been to two
of the sites you have cited. They force me to the conclusion that you are
swallowing whole a great deal of lying propaganda, it would seem because of
an obsession with avoiding chemical danger to yourself.
It doesn't seem very useful to continue the discussion.
Jim Purdie
jerm
>I was shocked on this NG to find the irrational support of eating off dishes
>that have not been properly rinsed of dangerous liquid dish soap (albeit
>some are safer than others), so I did some investigation.
Yeah, and the #1 cause of drownings is caused by water, the same substance
used by dishwashers as a carrier for their detergents, and also for
rinsings.
There are many, many supported instances of people being killed by an excess
of water, or sometimes the lack of it, which shows, you just can't be too
careful.
jasonr
> I was shocked on this NG to find the irrational support of eating off dishes
> that have not been properly rinsed of dangerous liquid dish soap (albeit
> some are safer than others), so I did some investigation.
>
> "One Million poisonings in Canada each year are due to household cleaner
> ingestion. Some are fatal. The #1 cause of household poisoning is dish
> detergent. What kinds of chemicals are in those products?"
It is a huge leap to go from "household cleaner ingestion" to the
miniscule amounts of dishwashing detergent residue left on unrinsed
dishes. Consider this:
1) Young children will eat or drink anything they find.
2) Many people leave the dishwashing detergent in a cupboard under
the sink where it is easily accessible to children.
3) "Poisoning" means someone was taken to the doctor having ingested
a foreign substance they makes them sick. It does not neccesarily
mean there are long term health effects.
Sure, dishwashing detergent is likely to make children sick when drunk
in large quantities in concentrated form. The foaming agent alone
would be enough to upset their digestive system.
Peter Ashby
> Anyway, Dishwash Detergent:
> Water - maybe 80%
> Sodium dodecylbenzene sulphonate NaDDBS (anionic surfactant / detergent)
> (I think rating for biodegradability depends on whether the C12 chain is
> branched or linear - and I can't remember for sure which is which - but
> almost all the stuff made now is the biodegradable type which I think is the
> linear one)
> Sodium Xylene Sulphonate - ("hydrotope" - mainly there to keep the NaDDBS
> solution clear)
> Salt - as in NaCl (NaDDBS solution thickens when salt is added) - not
> needed, but makes the stuff thick, which makes the stuff seem "strong" when
> it is probably 80% water, and probably costs less than $0.30 a litre to make
> in bulk, even though you pay $3.00 for a 375ml bottle.
> Colour (dyestuff)
> Fragrance
>
> Nothing else really needed - Aloe Vera, glycerine, or whatever added for
> marketing reasons. I suppose you could add extra thickener, but probably
> only if you wanted it to have "different" flow characteristics than salt
> would do, to make it seem "special".
they put foaming agents in too since people apparently don't trust it if
they don't get masses of bubbles. All those completely extraneous suds
drive me batty.
Peter
xlo
> Water - maybe 80%
> Sodium dodecylbenzene sulphonate NaDDBS (anionic surfactant / detergent)
> (I think rating for biodegradability depends on whether the C12 chain is
> branched or linear - and I can't remember for sure which is which - but
> almost all the stuff made now is the biodegradable type which I think is
the
> linear one)
> Sodium Xylene Sulphonate - ("hydrotope" - mainly there to keep the NaDDBS
> solution clear)
Oops - forgot the "Foam Booster";
Coco-diethanolamide (Sometimes called Cocamide DEA & other names. Made from
coconut oil or coconut oil fatty acids and diethanolamine. Makes the stuff
foam - so you think it is working)
Ashley
dishes
> that have not been properly rinsed of dangerous liquid dish soap (albeit
> some are safer than others), so I did some investigation.
>
> "One Million poisonings in Canada each year are due to household cleaner
> ingestion.
And, let me guess, they get all that from the residue on glasses, crockery
and cutlery.
Yes, of course. Accidentally swallowing mouthfuls of the stuff couldn't
possibly have anything to do with it.
Read that reference I posted yet?
Ashley
> Very low doses of uranium is OK as well. Leaving residue of this toxic
> substance on dishes because one is too lazy to rinse it off (?) defies
> logic:)
Are you sure your name isn't Janice?
Ashley
"xlo" <tracey_...@free.net.nz> wrote in message
news:3fb9e207$1...@news.compass.net.nz...
> Oops - forgot the "Foam Booster";
> Coco-diethanolamide (Sometimes called Cocamide DEA & other names. Made
from
> coconut oil or coconut oil fatty acids and diethanolamine. Makes the stuff
> foam - so you think it is working)
I'm a great fan of coconut oil - fab stuff for curly hair. Not sure what it
does for skin though ;-)
harry
xlo
The skin around my curly hair is particularly sensitive. I don't think I'll
try it.
Ashley
>
> The skin around my curly hair is particularly sensitive. I don't think
I'll
> try it.
:-)
Coconut oil won't hurt at all. Trust me.
xlo
"Ashley" <ashleyjane@U.N_S.P*A.M&E+D_xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:Upmub.1891$VV6....@news.xtra.co.nz...
it won't attract ants will it?
Ashley
> it won't attract ants will it?
>
I suspect that depends what you're doing with it!
Janet
"harry" <x...@xx.xx> wrote in message
news:u7mub.8039$ws.7...@news02.tsnz.net...
No, Harry, this was an analogy. And IT IS TOXIC. Most people know that it
is incredibly foolish not to rinse the stuff.
I am not sure why it is so important to insist in spite of overwhelming
evidence that dish soap is not toxic and should not be rinsed. It is like
insisting that smoking is harmless.
Again: Ontario Nurse Association FACTS & STATISTICS On TOXINS
"Liquid Dish Soap is the leading cause of poisonings in the
home for children under the age of 6 (over 2.1 million accidental
poisonings per year)."
Date: 2 Apr 2003
http://www.nursing-comments.com/nurse_association/ontario_nurse_association/ontario_nurse_association_msg57075/ontario_nurse_association_msg57075.shtml>
>
Janet
Who is Janice?
Ontario Nurse Association FACTS & STATISTICS On TOXINS
"Liquid Dish Soap is the leading cause of poisonings in the
home for children under the age of 6 (over 2.1 million accidental
A L P
May cause high blood pressure.
;-)
A L P
A L P
When I was a kid we used Rawleighs Coconut Oil soap for hair-washing.
It was excellent and seemed to rinse out cleanly, as well as shampoo did
and not at all like ordinary soap.
A L P
Janet
"jerm" <jer...@munkmo.com.au> wrote in message
news:ekmjrvos48clgckn0...@4ax.com...
No one should take precautions. One precaution that 99% of the world takes
is spending a few minutes to rinse their dishes. I don't get this logic. I'm
sorry.
>
>
>
Janet
"Liquid Dish Soap is the leading cause of poisonings in the
home for children under the age of 6 (over 2.1 million accidental
poisonings per year)."
Date: 2 Apr 2003
http://www.nursing-comments.com/nurse_association/ontario_nurse_association/ontario_nurse_association_msg57075/ontario_nurse_association_msg57075.shtml>
>
news:hrkub.7981$ws.7...@news02.tsnz.net...
Janet
is certainly like the church of the 16th century on planetary movement!
<jasonr (Jason Rumney) @ f2s.com> wrote in message
news:ud6bqj...@jasonrumney.net...
Janet
OK keep the formaldehyde residue on your dishes. I understand, it is simply
toooo hard to rinse it off - even though 99% of the world does. By this
logic you would do the same if one urinated on you plates, since it would
leave just a small residue. (Actually I understand that urine is less
harmful than dish soap.) Which reference?
>
>
Jim Purdie
dishwash detergent. And of course we are already agreed that machines do
rinse the stuff off. I have not heard any evidence that the stuff in
ordinary dishwash liquid would accumulate in the body, so I can't see that
the minute quantities left on dishes will send us to an early grave.
I am basically a "Green" sort of person, but I must say that the hysterical
antics of some environmental activists, unleavened by any slight knowledge
of what they are talking about, rather put me off. There is some danger that
they will also put me off more worthy causes.
Jim Purdie
GarryG
> One precaution that 99% of the world takes is spending a few minutes to rinse
their dishes. I don't get this logic. I'm
> sorry.
Where does the 99% come from? I seriously doubt it.
I have lived with and without dishwashers, mostly (and currently) without.
My wife favours drying by hand with a tea towel.
I favour air drying (she says I am just lazy)
No-one in our family has ever suffered any known ill-effects from detergent
residue.
Your reference to dish detergent being the #1 cause of household poisoning
surely relates to accidentally drinking the stuff, not the residue off dishes.
Garry
Brian Boutel
> "SomebodyElse" <nos...@for.me> wrote in message
> news:pan.2003.11.18....@for.me...
>
>>On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 05:55:53 +0000, Bruce Sinclair wrote:
>>
>>
>>>(eg ...
>>>SHOCK .. HORROR ... 50 % of school children below average !)
>>
>>Haha. I like that....very shocking, but necessarily true....
>
>
> It ain't necessarily so! Depends on the distribution. If 80 score 60, and
> twenty score 10, the average is 50, and 80% are above it. But I know, the
> normal distribution is a symmetrical bell curve.
>
There's more than one kind of "average". The *mean* in your example is
50, but the *median* is by definition the value with half the values
above it and half below it.
--brian
--
Brian Boutel
Wellington New Zealand
Note the NOSPAM
harry
> OK keep the formaldehyde residue on your dishes. I understand, it is
simply
> toooo hard to rinse it off - even though 99% of the world does. By this
> logic you would do the same if one urinated on you plates, since it would
> leave just a small residue. (Actually I understand that urine is less
> harmful than dish soap.) Which reference?
Just chock full of strawman aguments and red herrings
Why would you wash your dishes with a toxic substance ?
Are you mad ?
harry
> Why are you people justifying this crazy practice...using twisted logic.
It
> is certainly like the church of the 16th century on planetary movement!
>
Dishwashing liquid leaves no toxic residue.
If it did, rinsing would only remove a percentage of it.
Peter Ashby
Janet there is something about toxicity you don't seem to have grasped.
EVERYTHING is toxic in the right amount. Oxygen is toxic, water is
toxic, sugar is toxic, almonds are toxic, do you know what gives
radishes their bite? Arsenic that they pick up from the soil. The key to
all this is DOSE. It is really quite simple, swallowing concentrated
detergent is dangerous as in that dosage the ingredients are toxic.
Eating off a plate that has been washed in DILUTE detergent then dried
without rinsing is NOT toxic because the dose is way too insufficient.
We eat natural surfactants (detergents are surfactants) all the time. In
the lab I have used a detergent called Saponin White, it is purified
from a plant root. Your lungs produce surfactant molecules, without them
you would asphyxiate because your lungs would collapse. Doctors give
surfactants to premature babies to get their lungs going while they make
their own, this keeps them alive. But guess what? if they give them too
little, they die, if they give them too much, they die. Have you got it
yet?
Peter
harry
>
> "harry" <x...@xx.xx> wrote in message
> news:u7mub.8039$ws.7...@news02.tsnz.net...
> >
> > "Janet" <jane...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:bpcjl0$vv4$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> > >
> > > "Rupert" <rup...@nospam.ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
> > > news:bpc7ap$jgd$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> > > > steady on brian, don't let science get in the way of a good scare!
> > > > >
> > > > > MSDS information for most of these products indicates no toxicity
in
> > > > > low doses, and no known carcinogenic effects.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Very low doses of uranium is OK as well. Leaving residue of this toxic
> > > substance on dishes because one is too lazy to rinse it off (?) defies
> > > logic:)
> > >
> > >
> > Its not toxic and there is no residue. Or uranium.
>
> No, Harry, this was an analogy. And IT IS TOXIC.
All the analysis I have seen of the most common dishwashing liquids like
Palmolive EXPLICITLY
state that they are made from NON TOXIC INGREDIENTS
Now that we are SHOUTING
A L P
> "harry" <x...@xx.xx> wrote in message
> news:u7mub.8039$ws.7...@news02.tsnz.net...
>
> I am not sure why it is so important to insist in spite of overwhelming
> evidence
Overwhelming *what*???
Bwhaa-ha-ha-ha!
that dish soap is not toxic and should not be rinsed. It is like
> insisting that smoking is harmless.
Nobody is insisting that it *should not* be rinsed. Reasoned
explanations have been given as to why dishes *need not* be rinsed but
as far as I am concerned - and I think this would be the majority
position - if you want to rinse your dishes because of your own
emotional reactions to dishwashing detergent, apparently unmodified by
reason or by sound evidence or by explanations of the properties of said
detergents, go right ahead in the privacy of your own home. You might
however consider the wisdom of continuing to promulgate junk science and
personal phobias as if they were factually based if you want to retain
any credibility, should you at any time wish to raise other matters
within these groups.
A L P
xlo
from? It used to be used in some soaps long ago, but has been replaced by
less harmful biocides.
2) Ghandi used to drink his own urine didn't he? (I suppose that isn't
relevant, as he wasn't a child, wasn't in Canada at the time, and thought
that it was good for his health)
> "Ashley" <ashleyjane@U.N_S.P*A.M&E+D_xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
> news:Etlub.1831$VV6....@news.xtra.co.nz...
> OK keep the formaldehyde residue on your dishes. I understand, it is
Sue Bilstein
> >
> > it won't attract ants will it?
> >
> >
>
> May cause high blood pressure.
>
Bruce Sinclair
>On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 05:55:53 +0000, Bruce Sinclair wrote:
>
>>(eg ...
>> SHOCK .. HORROR ... 50 % of school children below average !)
>
>Haha. I like that....very shocking, but necessarily true....
I think there was a newspaper headline something like that not so long
ago. Sad really :)
Bruce
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to
think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone´s fault.
If it was Us, what did that make Me ? After all, I´m one of Us. I must be.
I´ve certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No-one ever thinks
of themselves as one of Them. We´re always one of Us. It´s Them that do
the bad things. <=> Terry Pratchett. Jingo.
Bruce Sinclair
>"Bruce Sinclair" <bruce.s...@NOSPAMagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz> wrote in
>message news:DQgub.7888$ws.7...@news02.tsnz.net...
>> In article <bpc5fm$hvq$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz>, "Janet" <jane...@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>> >I was shocked on this NG to find the irrational support of eating off
>dishes
>> >that have not been properly rinsed of dangerous liquid dish soap (albeit
>> >some are safer than others), so I did some investigation.
>> >
>> >"One Million poisonings in Canada each year are due to household cleaner
>> >detergent. What kinds of chemicals are in those products?"
>> >http://www.rense.com/general19/chemical.htm
>>
>You are correct; it will kill you.
>http://simplebiz49201.tripod.com/safeandnontoxic/id1.htmlChemicals
no non no ... i never said that. To reasonably say that, I would have
to give an approximate amount to drink for that effect. This would
(almost certainly) be related to body weight ... and strangely enuff,
is more likely to be based on rat data than human (something to do
with sod all people volunteering for this sort of work :) ).
Say rather ... if you drink enuff of the stuff it might kill you :)
>If
>> you eat off plates that have the tiniest amount left from being washed
>> ? ... best of luck trying to find any effect :)
>One can do what most people in the world do...rinse it off. It is not hard,
>and it is common sense among most people.
Why bother ? There is very likely no observable/measurable effect.
Most people that I have seen 'rinse' do so under hot water. Bloody
wasteful I say.
>I, for one, would not like to have any toxic residue on my plates.
>> Effect of not washing your dishes ? ... rather a lot higher :)
>Come on why not rise them?
no point ? ... you are inflating a tiny risk ... as is very often the
case these days. Hope you don't use antibacterial soaps ? Culture of
fear anyone ? :)
Bruce Sinclair
>"Rupert" <rup...@nospam.ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
>news:bpc7ap$jgd$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>> steady on brian, don't let science get in the way of a good scare!
>> >
>> > MSDS information for most of these products indicates no toxicity in
>> > low doses, and no known carcinogenic effects.
>Very low doses of uranium is OK as well.
I'd love to know where your data is coming from ... because
that sure aint right :)
Leaving residue of this toxic
>substance on dishes because one is too lazy to rinse it off (?) defies
>logic:)
Au contraire ... logic weighs risks/benefits. If there is no
perceivable risk, why bother??
Bruce
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to
think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone愀 fault.
If it was Us, what did that make Me ? After all, I惴 one of Us. I must be.
I扉e certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No-one ever thinks
of themselves as one of Them. We愉e always one of Us. It愀 Them that do
Bruce Sinclair
Very well put :)
Bruce
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to
think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone´s fault.
If it was Us, what did that make Me ? After all, I´m one of Us. I must be.
I´ve certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No-one ever thinks
of themselves as one of Them. We´re always one of Us. It´s Them that do
Bruce Sinclair
>Again: Ontario Nurse Association FACTS & STATISTICS On TOXINS
>"Liquid Dish Soap is the leading cause of poisonings in the
>home for children under the age of 6 (over 2.1 million accidental
>poisonings per year)."
and again ... while this may be true (no backup data I notice ... just
repetition) it is not relevant to rinsing dishes. :)
Bruce
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to
think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone愀 fault.
If it was Us, what did that make Me ? After all, I惴 one of Us. I must be.
I扉e certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No-one ever thinks
of themselves as one of Them. We愉e always one of Us. It愀 Them that do
Bruce Sinclair
>"Janet" <jane...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:bpds6j$uu4$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>
>> One precaution that 99% of the world takes is spending a few minutes to rinse
>their dishes. I don't get this logic. I'm
>> sorry.
>
>Where does the 99% come from? I seriously doubt it.
>I have lived with and without dishwashers, mostly (and currently) without.
>My wife favours drying by hand with a tea towel.
>I favour air drying (she says I am just lazy)
You are correct ... it is more hygenic ... and yes, there is data :)
>No-one in our family has ever suffered any known ill-effects from detergent
>residue.
>
>Your reference to dish detergent being the #1 cause of household poisoning
>surely relates to accidentally drinking the stuff, not the residue off dishes.
Which they consistently fail to understand. sigh.
Bruce
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to
think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone´s fault.
If it was Us, what did that make Me ? After all, I´m one of Us. I must be.
I´ve certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No-one ever thinks
of themselves as one of Them. We´re always one of Us. It´s Them that do
Bruce Sinclair
<tpf>
"WE" aren't justifying it ... we merely ask you to justify your
position with logic and/or data. That you have failed to do so despite
repeated requests, says more about the logic of the one (you) than the
many "we". ... doesn't it ? :)
jasonr
> Why are you people justifying this crazy practice...using twisted logic. It
> is certainly like the church of the 16th century on planetary movement!
You're the one that keeps posting links to wacko sites for MLM
"safe products" complete with spam style popups.
Bruce Sinclair
>"Ashley" <ashleyjane@U.N_S.P*A.M&E+D_xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
>news:Etlub.1831$VV6....@news.xtra.co.nz...
>>
>> "Janet" <jane...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:bpc5fm$hvq$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>> > I was shocked on this NG to find the irrational support of eating off
>> dishes
>> > that have not been properly rinsed of dangerous liquid dish soap (albeit
>> > some are safer than others), so I did some investigation.
>> >
>> > "One Million poisonings in Canada each year are due to household cleaner
>> > ingestion.
>>
>> And, let me guess, they get all that from the residue on glasses, crockery
>> and cutlery.
>>
>> Yes, of course. Accidentally swallowing mouthfuls of the stuff couldn't
>> possibly have anything to do with it.
>>
>> Read that reference I posted yet?
>
>OK keep the formaldehyde residue on your dishes.
1) formaldhde is volatile. It will evapourate off quickly.
> I understand, it is simply
>toooo hard to rinse it off - even though 99% of the world does.
This number is certainly wrong. If you have any data to show it isn't,
please present it for critique :)
Bruce Sinclair
Ah ! ... all becomes clear :)
Thanks
jasonr
> Janet there is something about toxicity you don't seem to have grasped.
> EVERYTHING is toxic in the right amount.
Indeed. If you read the report at the link below, they even mention
that one additive that is added to make dishwashing liquid taste
bitter to discourage children from drinking it is considered toxic in
concentrations of 50mg/l or more. It is present in dishwashing
liquids in concentrations of up to 5ppm, and by the time it is diluted
in the sink that becomes 5ppb, or 1/10000 of the dose at which the EU
considers it toxic.
europa.eu.int/comm/environment/ecolabel/pdf/hand_dishwashing_detergents/technicalreport.pdf
jasonr
I'm not sure Ontario Nurse Association would want you attributing
this quote to them. The link you are posting is to a message on a
public message board, and appears to be a reposting of a newsgroup
posting by "Healthy Choices" to biz.marketplace. The actual statistic
has no source to back it up, and is most likely bogus, as it only
appears in the same context on similar pages for "Healthy Choices"
and other brands of MLM products.
jasonr
> > From: "Janet" <jane...@hotmail.com>
> > > "One Million poisonings in Canada each year are due to household cleaner
> > > ingestion. Some are fatal. The #1 cause of household poisoning is dish
> > > detergent. What kinds of chemicals are in those products?"
> > > http://www.rense.com/general19/chemical.htm
Chemical Warfare Agents And Toxic Waste Disguised As Household
Cleaning Products
By Lorie Dwornick
...
Lorie Dwornick is a researcher, educator and activist living in
Winnipeg, MB. She found out first-hand about the corruption in "the
system" through cover-ups, fabrications and deception affecting her
own health.
Jim Purdie
"A L P" <blue...@antinuclear.net.nz> wrote in message
news:3fba...@clear.net.nz...
Hear, hear!
Jim Purdie
Jim Purdie
"Brian Boutel" <boutel...@acm.org> wrote in message
news:q8vub.8079$ws.7...@news02.tsnz.net...
In normal usage, "average" and "mean" are synonymous. Most people have no
idea what a median is. Since it is usually defined as the value held by the
middle item in a distribution (my words), in my case it would be 60, and no
score would be higher, and twenty would be lower. So even if I stretch a
very large point and take "average" as meaning "median", only 20% of
children would be below average. As someone said, there are lies, damned
lies, and statistics. 8^)
Jim Purdie
Jim Purdie
"Bruce Sinclair" <bruce.s...@NOSPAMagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz> wrote in
> In article <bpds6q$uu9$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz>, "Janet" <jane...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> >Again: Ontario Nurse Association FACTS & STATISTICS On TOXINS
> >"Liquid Dish Soap is the leading cause of poisonings in the
> >home for children under the age of 6 (over 2.1 million accidental
> >poisonings per year)."
>
> and again ... while this may be true (no backup data I notice ... just
> repetition) it is not relevant to rinsing dishes. :)
>
> Bruce
Of course, the obvious thing to do would be to not use dish detergent at
all. Then there would be none around for children to drink, or to be left as
a deposit on our dishes. I wonder why Janet allows such horribly dangerous
stuff in the house. It is amazing how some people would sooner mount a
crusade than take an obvious, simple, remedy.
Jim Purdie
Jim Purdie
"Bruce Sinclair" <bruce.s...@NOSPAMagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz> wrote in
> In article <PQuub.2244$VV6....@news.xtra.co.nz>, "GarryG"
<garry-...@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> >"Janet" <jane...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:bpds6j$uu4$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> >
> >> One precaution that 99% of the world takes is spending a few minutes to
rinse
> >their dishes. I don't get this logic. I'm
> >> sorry.
> >
> >Where does the 99% come from? I seriously doubt it.
> >I have lived with and without dishwashers, mostly (and currently)
without.
> >My wife favours drying by hand with a tea towel.
> >I favour air drying (she says I am just lazy)
>
> You are correct ... it is more hygenic ... and yes, there is data :)
>
> >No-one in our family has ever suffered any known ill-effects from
detergent
> >residue.
> >
> >Your reference to dish detergent being the #1 cause of household
poisoning
> >surely relates to accidentally drinking the stuff, not the residue off
dishes.
>
> Which they consistently fail to understand. sigh.
>
> Bruce
>
Not only that, but I am sure that they relate to countries where mechanical
dishwashers are in common use. And we know that dishwashers do rinse off the
residue. They would need to, since detergent for dishwashers is very much
more dangerous than detergent for hand dishwashing.
Jim Purdie
Jim Purdie
"GarryG" <garry-...@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:PQuub.2244$VV6....@news.xtra.co.nz...
>
> "Janet" <jane...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:bpds6j$uu4$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>
> > One precaution that 99% of the world takes is spending a few minutes to
rinse
> their dishes. I don't get this logic. I'm
> > sorry.
>
> Where does the 99% come from? I seriously doubt it.
> I have lived with and without dishwashers, mostly (and currently) without.
> My wife favours drying by hand with a tea towel.
> I favour air drying (she says I am just lazy)
detergent
> residue.
>
> Your reference to dish detergent being the #1 cause of household poisoning
> surely relates to accidentally drinking the stuff, not the residue off
dishes.
>
>
I am sure that far more than 1% of the people in the world have no sink to
wash their dishes in, let alone rinse them if they have used a detergent. I
think Janet needs not only a course in elementary organic chemistry, but
also courses in statistics, and credible salesmanship. She goes from
hyperbole to hyperbole.
Jim Purdie
Keith
bruce.s...@NOSPAMagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz (Bruce Sinclair) wrote:
>In article <PQuub.2244$VV6....@news.xtra.co.nz>, "GarryG" <garry-...@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>>Your reference to dish detergent being the #1 cause of household poisoning
>>surely relates to accidentally drinking the stuff, not the residue off dishes.
>
>Which they consistently fail to understand. sigh.
Not 'they' just 'she'
What's more I suspect that even that stat is misrepresented. If you look
at NZ's National Poison Centre's annual report you will see that
dishwashing detergent is indeed the #1 substance ingested by children
in the household products category (followed closly by "cleaner") .
And the reason it's #1 is simply IMHO because it's the #1 household
substance.
But it is simply the number of *enquiries* to the centre, not the number
of *poisonings*. I suspect the Poison's Centre's normal response to
such enquiries would be "nothing to worry about, just make them drink
lots of water" as per *all* of the MSDS sheets I've looked at for
detergent.
Bruce Sinclair
>"Bruce Sinclair" <bruce.s...@NOSPAMagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz> wrote in
>message news:xbyub.8167$ws.7...@news02.tsnz.net...
>> In article <bpds6q$uu9$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz>, "Janet" <jane...@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>> >Again: Ontario Nurse Association FACTS & STATISTICS On TOXINS
>> >"Liquid Dish Soap is the leading cause of poisonings in the
>> >home for children under the age of 6 (over 2.1 million accidental
>> >poisonings per year)."
>>
>> and again ... while this may be true (no backup data I notice ... just
>> repetition) it is not relevant to rinsing dishes. :)
>all. Then there would be none around for children to drink, or to be left as
>a deposit on our dishes. I wonder why Janet allows such horribly dangerous
>stuff in the house. It is amazing how some people would sooner mount a
>crusade than take an obvious, simple, remedy.
Quite so ... or we could ban kids ! ... dangerous creatures ... always
drinking the dishwash liquid leaving none to clean up with ! Curse
them ! :)
Bruce
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to
think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone´s fault.
If it was Us, what did that make Me ? After all, I´m one of Us. I must be.
I´ve certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No-one ever thinks
of themselves as one of Them. We´re always one of Us. It´s Them that do
Luthien
>
> No, Harry, this was an analogy. And IT IS TOXIC. Most people know that it
> is incredibly foolish not to rinse the stuff.
> I am not sure why it is so important to insist in spite of overwhelming
> insisting that smoking is harmless.
I wonder how many people still use vaseline on their lips etc... It is a
petroleum based product. Does that make it toxic I wonder?
Ashley
>
> "Ashley" <ashleyjane@U.N_S.P*A.M&E+D_xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
> news:Etlub.1831$VV6....@news.xtra.co.nz...
> >
> > > I was shocked on this NG to find the irrational support of eating off
> > dishes
> > > that have not been properly rinsed of dangerous liquid dish soap
(albeit
> > > some are safer than others), so I did some investigation.
> > >
cleaner
> > > ingestion.
> >
crockery
> > and cutlery.
> >
> > Yes, of course. Accidentally swallowing mouthfuls of the stuff couldn't
> > possibly have anything to do with it.
> >
> > Read that reference I posted yet?
>
simply
> toooo hard to rinse it off - even though 99% of the world does. By this
> logic you would do the same if one urinated on you plates, since it would
> leave just a small residue. (Actually I understand that urine is less
> harmful than dish soap.) Which reference?
The one you got the formaldehyde idea from. So, obviously scientific data
can't put your mind at rest. Should we try prayers to Gaia instead?
Ashley
"xlo" <tracey_...@free.net.nz> wrote in message
news:3fbaa9a4$1...@news.compass.net.nz...
> 1) Where did the idea that formaldehyde is added to dishwash liquid come
> from? It used to be used in some soaps long ago, but has been replaced by
> less harmful biocides.
You snipped that really badly - I'm not the irrational obsessive here! The
scientific paper I posted a link to included a risk assessment of poisoning
from ingesting minute traces of detergent left on unrinses utensils. It
listed formaldehyde as among the things that could be found in traces so
minute it wouldn't hurt a rat. Or guinea pig. Let alone a human.
Ashley
>
> Who is Janice?
Someone you'd get on really well with.
Jim Purdie
<jasonr (Jason Rumney) @ f2s.com> wrote in message
news:uhe11i...@jasonrumney.net...
Which all goes to show that there is almost nothing that is so incredible
that nobody will believe it. Rather reminds me of the Nigerian scam.
Jim Purdie
Geoff McCaughan
> Who is Janice?
An idiot.
--
Belief insults the mind. A thing is, or it is not.
Uncle StoatWarbler
> Yes, I suspect that most of the figures for poisonings relate to machine
> dishwash detergent.
... which isn't detergent, it's mostly caustic soda.
Janet
> "Janet" <jane...@hotmail.com> writes:
> >
> > Ontario Nurse Association FACTS & STATISTICS On TOXINS
>
> I'm not sure Ontario Nurse Association would want you attributing
> this quote to them.
I am not sure why people are so vehement on the supposed benign qualities of
dish soap! It seems to have hit a raw nerve.
The quote is from the Ontario Nurse Association. Yes it is a re-post from a
newsgrpoup, which does not necessarily make it suspect.
Here is another study Presented April 28, 2000, by Kay Hizer, Director of
"Healthy Choices,"Healthy Choices is a nonprofit organization comprised of
doctors, nurses, environmental scientists and educators committed to
teaching the public about the hazards of chemicals in our homes and how we
can avoid or minimize the risks.: Liquid
Dish Soap is the leading cause of poisonings in the home (contains
formaldehyde and ammonia in most
brands)
Of the chemicals found in personal care products:
· 884 are toxic
· 146 cause tumors
· 218 cause reproductive complications
· 314 cause biological mutations
· 376 cause skin and eye irritations
(Source: United States House of Representatives report, 1989)
http://www.geocities.com/melawacky7/hazardous-toxi-chemicals-in-your-home.html
Brian Harmer
wrote:
>I am not sure why people are so vehement on the supposed benign qualities of
>dish soap! It seems to have hit a raw nerve.
Not at all. It is your persistence on the malignant qualities that is
drawing fire. You continue to ignore the oft-pointed out response that
the poisoning statistics to which you refer relate to the ingestion of
mouthfuls of the stuff, rather than contact with mere residues.
>The quote is from the Ontario Nurse Association. Yes it is a re-post from a
>newsgrpoup, which does not necessarily make it suspect.
>Here is another study Presented April 28, 2000, by Kay Hizer, Director of
>"Healthy Choices,"Healthy Choices is a nonprofit organization comprised of
>doctors, nurses, environmental scientists and educators committed to
>teaching the public about the hazards of chemicals in our homes and how we
>can avoid or minimize the risks.: Liquid
>Dish Soap is the leading cause of poisonings in the home (snip)
When people drink the stuff!! Don't drink it!
Common salt taken in excess can kill you, I'm told.
In most cases ingestion of soap arises from parents leaving it in low
places where infants can reach it, and worse still, from storing it in
bottles or containers normally used for food or drink.
See if you can find any reference to someone poisoned solely by eating
food contaminated by the soap residue from an unrinsed (but probably
wiped) plate.
Janet
"Brian Harmer" <brian....@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
news:kndorv4ntl8kg58l5...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:35:34 +1300, "Janet" <jane...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> >I am not sure why people are so vehement on the supposed benign qualities
of
> >dish soap! It seems to have hit a raw nerve.
>
> Not at all. It is your persistence on the malignant qualities that is
> drawing fire. You continue to ignore the oft-pointed out response that
> the poisoning statistics to which you refer relate to the ingestion of
> mouthfuls of the stuff, rather than contact with mere residues.
My argument is simply questioning why don't people here just rise the
substance off like the rest of the world. (To the best of my knowledge -
based on correspondence - this argument is shared by most people in the
world, from Europe to Japan to N. America - though apparently not in this
country)
Perhaps leaving a small amount of dish soap, a substance that can be
extremely harmful (in large doses), on paltes and glasses is not harmful,
but so far not one post has provided any evidence or links on this subject.
It is not onerous to rise it off. It is simply common sense - common sense
that is accepted by the rest of the world.
>
> >The quote is from the Ontario Nurse Association. Yes it is a re-post from
a
> >newsgrpoup, which does not necessarily make it suspect.
>
> >Here is another study Presented April 28, 2000, by Kay Hizer, Director of
> >"Healthy Choices,"Healthy Choices is a nonprofit organization comprised
of
> >doctors, nurses, environmental scientists and educators committed to
> >teaching the public about the hazards of chemicals in our homes and how
we
> >can avoid or minimize the risks.: Liquid
>
> >Dish Soap is the leading cause of poisonings in the home (snip)
>
> When people drink the stuff!! Don't drink it!
>
> Common salt taken in excess can kill you, I'm told.
I am still really not sure why people are so upset -except that the anger
must be a medieval-like symptom of "kill the messenger".
Janet
"harry" <x...@xx.xx> wrote in message
>snip> > > > Very low doses of uranium is OK as well. Leaving residue of
this toxic
> > > > substance on dishes because one is too lazy to rinse it off (?)
defies
> > > > logic:)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > Its not toxic and there is no residue. Or uranium.
> >
> > No, Harry, this was an analogy. And IT IS TOXIC.
>
> Palmolive EXPLICITLY
> state that they are made from NON TOXIC INGREDIENTS
> Now that we are SHOUTING
Sorry about the shouting. Perhaps Palmolive is fine.
I am not sure why people are so vehement on the supposed benign qualities of
dish soap! It seems to have hit a raw nerve.
The quote is from the Ontario Nurse Association. Yes it is a re-post from a
newsgrpoup, which does not necessarily make it suspect.
Here is another study Presented April 28, 2000, by Kay Hizer, Director of
"Healthy Choices,"Healthy Choices is a nonprofit organization comprised of
doctors, nurses, environmental scientists and educators committed to
teaching the public about the hazards of chemicals in our homes and how we
can avoid or minimize the risks.: Liquid
Dish Soap is the leading cause of poisonings in the home (contains
Brian Harmer
wrote:
>
>"Brian Harmer" <brian....@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
>news:kndorv4ntl8kg58l5...@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:35:34 +1300, "Janet" <jane...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>My argument is simply questioning why don't people here just rise the
>substance off like the rest of the world. (To the best of my knowledge -
>based on correspondence - this argument is shared by most people in the
>world, from Europe to Japan to N. America - though apparently not in this
>country)
No your argument has not been simply that. You have hammered away at
the deleterious nature of the product, which, if taken in large
quantities, no one denies.
>> When people drink the stuff!! Don't drink it!
>> Common salt taken in excess can kill you, I'm told.
>I am still really not sure why people are so upset -except that the anger
>must be a medieval-like symptom of "kill the messenger".
People are upset because you never address the issue put to you time
after time, that the minuscule quantities if residue are not proven to
be harmful.
>> In most cases ingestion of soap arises from parents leaving it in low
>> places where infants can reach it, and worse still, from storing it in
>> bottles or containers normally used for food or drink.
>>
>> See if you can find any reference to someone poisoned solely by eating
>> food contaminated by the soap residue from an unrinsed (but probably
>> wiped) plate.
I notice, for example, that you did not accept this challenge.
Janet
> On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 17:03:49 +1300, "Janet" <jane...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Brian Harmer" <brian....@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
> >news:kndorv4ntl8kg58l5...@4ax.com...
> >> On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:35:34 +1300, "Janet" <jane...@hotmail.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >My argument is simply questioning why don't people here just rise the
> >substance off like the rest of the world. (To the best of my knowledge -
> >based on correspondence - this argument is shared by most people in the
> >world, from Europe to Japan to N. America - though apparently not in this
> >country)
>
> No your argument has not been simply that. You have hammered away at
> the deleterious nature of the product, which, if taken in large
> quantities, no one denies.
Actually many have tried to deny it on this quite extensive thread (...on
dish soap, who would of known!).
I am "hammering away" at utter disbelief that this practice still exists in
the 21st century among apprently many inhabitants of an otherwise very
rational and enlightened nation.
>
> >I am still really not sure why people are so upset -except that the anger
> >must be a medieval-like symptom of "kill the messenger".
>
> People are upset because you never address the issue put to you time
> after time, that the minuscule quantities if residue are not proven to
> be harmful.
I cannot buy this argument, and indeed, have told friends overseas who are
now convinced that many on this group are suffering from some sort of
collective insanity.
If one washed a plate or glass with urine, formaldehyde, or a known toxic
substances, even largely diluted, most people would might rinse the dishes
before eating off them, or rise the glasses before drinking from them?
Wouldn't you agree? This is common sense.
It may be true that any of these substances have not been proven to cause
harm. Please, if one person can convince me that leaving dish soap on ones
dishes is harmless, please let me know with an URL. none have volunteered so
far among many dozens of posts.
The use of lead based metals where common in the middle ages for drinking
cups. The same arguments were made then. It is now the 21st century and most
people are aware of the risks .
Janet
"harry" <x...@xx.xx> wrote in message
> > Why are you people justifying this crazy practice...using twisted logic.
> It
> > is certainly like the church of the 16th century on planetary movement!
> >
>
> If it did, rinsing would only remove a percentage of it.
Ashley
> It may be true that any of these substances have not been proven to cause
> harm. Please, if one person can convince me that leaving dish soap on ones
> dishes is harmless, please let me know with an URL. none have volunteered
so
> far among many dozens of posts.
>
You're either lying or just plain dumb. I'll be generous and suppose the
latter. So here you go - the url you request *again*. And, given that we're
assuming plain dumb, the bit you want to read is under the heading "risk
assessment" on p56
www.rivm.nl.bibliotheek/rapporten/612810008.pdf
Now shut up about no one posting links, and admit you're just paranoid.
Ashley
> My argument is simply questioning why don't people here just rise the
> substance off like the rest of the world. (To the best of my knowledge -
> based on correspondence - this argument is shared by most people in the
> world, from Europe to Japan to N. America - though apparently not in this
> country)
I lived in the UK for 6 1/2 years. Apart from the last year, I always lived
with native Brits. They have this quaint custom there of putting a large
container in the sink and washing their dishes in that, rather than just
putting the plug in the sink and filling it up.
But none of the people I encountered bothered to rinse their dishes.
So much for the best of your knowledge.
Ashley
> It may be true that any of these substances have not been proven to cause
> harm. Please, if one person can convince me that leaving dish soap on ones
> dishes is harmless, please let me know with an URL. none have volunteered
so
> far among many dozens of posts.
Actually, I'm tending towards liar.
te...@texas.removethisbit.usa.com
<ashleyjane@U.N_S.P*A.M&E+D_xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
>"Janet" <jane...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:bphef6$bqg$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>
>> My argument is simply questioning why don't people here just rise the
>> substance off like the rest of the world. (To the best of my knowledge -
>> based on correspondence - this argument is shared by most people in the
>> world, from Europe to Japan to N. America - though apparently not in this
>> country)
>
>I lived in the UK for 6 1/2 years. Apart from the last year, I always lived
>with native Brits. They have this quaint custom there of putting a large
>container in the sink and washing their dishes in that, rather than just
>putting the plug in the sink and filling it up.
>
LOL.
That is exactly what I do!
I find it easier to use a big plastic basin that is used for washing
dishes and nothing else.
Dishes are washed then put in the rack in the second sink then just
before I go to dry them, I pour a large plastic cup of hot water over
them. If I have washed a basin or pot, fill that with hot water and
put the cutlery in the hot water, dry that then pour the water over
the dishes.
We used to have a dish washer here but previous tenants *** it up so
we turned the space into more cupboard; as for the sink sprayer,
within 6 months of installing a new dual sink w/sprayer, the tenants
had that stuffed so it was never replaced.
Cath
Dave Joll
> In article <uvfphi...@jasonrumney.net>, jasonr (Jason Rumney) @
f2s.com wrote:
> >"Janet" <jane...@hotmail.com> writes:
> >> Why are you people justifying this crazy practice...using twisted
logic. It
> >> is certainly like the church of the 16th century on planetary movement!
> >You're the one that keeps posting links to wacko sites for MLM
> >"safe products" complete with spam style popups.
> Ah ! ... all becomes clear :)
Thanks Jason... I'll know to avoid Janet's drivel in future.
Probably working for spAmway or one of that worthless ilk...
- Dave
--
Lowering the tone of Usenet since 1997...
Please send replies to New Zealand instead of Zanzibar.
Sorry, but the spam is just getting a little too much...
Miche
"Ashley" <ashleyjane@U.N_S.P*A.M&E+D_xtra.co.nz> wrote:
Ah yes, the British "washing-up bowl". I never understood it myself. I
asked a British friend why they did that and he said it was good if you
only wanted to do a few dishes. Thing is he did ALL his dishes that
way, and couldn't tell me why except "that's how I was taught".
Miche
--
If you want to end war and stuff you got to sing loud.
-- Arlo Guthrie, "Alice's Restaurant"
Ashley
"Miche" <mich...@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:micheinnz-D90F1...@news.itconsult.net...
> Ah yes, the British "washing-up bowl". I never understood it myself. I
> asked a British friend why they did that and he said it was good if you
> only wanted to do a few dishes. Thing is he did ALL his dishes that
> way, and couldn't tell me why except "that's how I was taught".
And the funny thing is, after you've lived there about 6 months, you find
yourself doing it as well :-)
Ashley
<te...@texas.removethisbit.usa.com> wrote in message
news:8cporvkaojl3bck5h...@4ax.com...
> Dishes are washed then put in the rack in the second sink then just
> before I go to dry them, I pour a large plastic cup of hot water over
> them.
So, I seriously have to ask here, other than making you feel good, what
exactly do you think that achieves???
(Bearing in mind that I spent 6 years of my life washing dishes in a plastic
bowl in the sink because I reacted very readily to the conditioning that
said "this makes me feel good".)
Janet
I just asked friend from Britain over for dinner. He mentioned that most
Brits he knew rinsed their dishes (...but he did hesitate). Perhaps you are
right. It makes sense that this custom might come from Britain since Nz is
quite a British country. (what I meant by the "Best of my knowledge" means
Italy, Japan and North America, areas which I am more familiar with -and of
course this impression is not scientific.)
>
Janet
Hey, calm down. Sorry but I cannot open this file; can you copy and paste
it, please? Thanks!
>
>
Janet
"Dave Joll" <dave...@es.co.zn> wrote in message
news:bphrt4$p6a$3...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> "Bruce Sinclair" <bruce.s...@NOSPAMagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz> wrote
>
> > In article <uvfphi...@jasonrumney.net>, jasonr (Jason Rumney) @
> f2s.com wrote:
>
> > >"Janet" <jane...@hotmail.com> writes:
>
> > >> Why are you people justifying this crazy practice...using twisted
> logic. It
> > >> is certainly like the church of the 16th century on planetary
movement!
>
> > >You're the one that keeps posting links to wacko sites for MLM
> > >"safe products" complete with spam style popups.
>
> > Ah ! ... all becomes clear :)
>
> Thanks Jason... I'll know to avoid Janet's drivel in future.
Here is another study Presented April 28, 2000, by Kay Hizer, Director of
"Healthy Choices,"Healthy Choices is a nonprofit organization comprised of
doctors, nurses, environmental scientists and educators committed to
teaching the public about the hazards of chemicals in our homes and how we
can avoid or minimize the risks.: Liquid Dish Soap is the leading cause of
poisonings in the home (contains
formaldehyde and ammonia in most
brands)
Of the chemicals found in personal care products:
· 884 are toxic
· 146 cause tumors
· 218 cause reproductive complications
· 314 cause biological mutations
· 376 cause skin and eye irritations
(Source: United States House of Representatives report, 1989)
http://www.geocities.com/melawacky7/hazardous-toxi-chemicals-in-your-home.html
A L P
> I lived in the UK for 6 1/2 years. Apart from the last year, I always lived
> with native Brits. They have this quaint custom there of putting a large
> container in the sink and washing their dishes in that, rather than just
> putting the plug in the sink and filling it up.
I came across this in Auckland, staying with friends-of-a-friend!
Baffled me at the time, I can tell you. (They weren't Brits, could have
had parents who came from Britain and brought the custom with them I
suppose.) Anyone else outt there who has come across this odd practice?
A L P
harry
>
> "harry" <x...@xx.xx> wrote in message
> news:%Hvub.8096$ws.7...@news02.tsnz.net...
> >
> > "Janet" <jane...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:bpds9d$uvn$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> > > Why are you people justifying this crazy practice...using twisted
logic.
> > It
> > > is certainly like the church of the 16th century on planetary
movement!
> > >
> >
> > Dishwashing liquid leaves no toxic residue.
> > If it did, rinsing would only remove a percentage of it.
> It may be true that any of these substances have not been proven to cause
> harm.
Thats what I said.
So why don't you go rinse your dishes or whatever makes you feel good.
Logically, it is just dilution and will still only remove a percentage of
whatever residue that you think remains.
Rinsing in a little bowl would never be sufficient to ensur the removal of
anything that was really poisonous.
Its better to use a dishwasher.
jasonr
> Here is another study Presented April 28, 2000, by Kay Hizer, Director of
> "Healthy Choices,"Healthy Choices is a nonprofit organization comprised of
> doctors, nurses, environmental scientists and educators committed to
> teaching the public about the hazards of chemicals in our homes and how we
> can avoid or minimize the risks.
"Healthy Choices" would seem to be a non-profit organization in the
same league as Greagoir O'Cearullain's "Humanitas Fellowship".
jasonr
> I just asked friend from Britain over for dinner. He mentioned that most
> Brits he knew rinsed their dishes
He is probably saying that because he washes that way, and hesitated
because he can't actually remember observing what other Brits do. I
posted a link to an EU study earlier in this thread, that plainly
stated that the norm in Britain is to towel dry dishes without
rinsing, contrasted with the norm in Italy to rinse and leave on the
bench to dry.
Karen Hayward-King
wrote:
>
>"Ashley" <ashleyjane@U.N_S.P*A.M&E+D_xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
>news:5CYub.3669$VV6....@news.xtra.co.nz...
>> You're either lying or just plain dumb. I'll be generous and suppose the
>> latter. So here you go - the url you request *again*. And, given that
>we're
>> assuming plain dumb, the bit you want to read is under the heading "risk
>> assessment" on p56
>>
>> www.rivm.nl.bibliotheek/rapporten/612810008.pdf
>>
>> Now shut up about no one posting links, and admit you're just paranoid.
>
>Hey, calm down. Sorry but I cannot open this file; can you copy and paste
>it, please? Thanks!
Actually, Ashley posted the above link about 3 days ago...I guess you
missed it or ignored it :-)
There is a / missed out in her reposted link....try...
http://www.rivm.nl/bibliotheek/rapporten/612810008.pdf
BTW...it just worked for me...
--
Karen Hayward-King
"I try to be as philosophical as the old lady
who said that the best thing about the future
is that it only comes one day at a time."
Dean Acheson
Peter Ashby
>
> I am still really not sure why people are so upset -except that the anger
> must be a medieval-like symptom of "kill the messenger".
I have expplained it to you in simple words. But you didn't respond, why
not? perhaps because you would rather play the victim instead of
addressing the issue. And you wonder why people won't take you
seriously?
As for why I don't rinse the dishes, perhaps because in the absence of
good reasons to do so, life is simply too damn short? Life is for living
don't you know? not obsessing so hard about every potential little risk
you forget to actually live.
Peter
Peter Ashby
> Here is another study Presented April 28, 2000, by Kay Hizer, Director of
> "Healthy Choices,"Healthy Choices is a nonprofit organization comprised of
> doctors, nurses, environmental scientists and educators committed to
> teaching the public about the hazards of chemicals in our homes and how we
> can avoid or minimize the risks.: Liquid
>
> Dish Soap is the leading cause of poisonings in the home (contains
> formaldehyde and ammonia in most
> brands)
> Of the chemicals found in personal care products:
> · 884 are toxic
> · 146 cause tumors
> · 218 cause reproductive complications
> · 314 cause biological mutations
> · 376 cause skin and eye irritations
> (Source: United States House of Representatives report, 1989)
> http://www.geocities.com/melawacky7/hazardous-toxi-chemicals-in-your-home.html
So where in this is the DOSE mentioned Janet? Do you know how they test
for carcigenicity? they feed large amounts of something, sometimes
forcibly to animals over a long time and see if some get sick.
How about we do a little experiment Janet, we will feed you nothing but
nice natural, organically grown almonds for six months and see if you
get sick. Maybe the experience will teach you something.
Peter
Peter Ashby
I think this confirms you are dumb, try this link and download the free
reader: http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html
Then follow the instructions that come with it so when you click on the
link it will open in your browser. It is really very simple and now I
have given you the means to see the file you have no excuse for not
reading it.
Peter
Ashley
> Hey, calm down. Sorry but I cannot open this file; can you copy and paste
> it, please? Thanks!
No - it's a very large PDF. Be patient.
Miche
pas...@blueyonder.co.uk (Peter Ashby) wrote:
Waste of good almonds.
Brian Harmer
wrote:
It's OK, Pete has already sucked the chocolate off them.
te...@texas.removethisbit.usa.com
Hot dishes are easier to dry.
Cath
Karen Hayward-King
Actually, I couldn't read that link either....you had accidently
substituted a '.' for a '/'. But I did put the correct link up...
However, you had posted the correct link awhile ago....can't see how
'Janet' missed it :-)
A L P
>
>
> Actually, I couldn't read that link either....you had accidently
> substituted a '.' for a '/'. But I did put the correct link up...
>
> However, you had posted the correct link awhile ago....can't see how
> 'Janet' missed it :-)
>
> --
Has anyone checked the web for reliable stats on the correlation between
compulsive dish-rinsing and loss of mental accuity? So far the sample
is rather small and essentially anecdotal so I hesitate to draw
conclusions.
;-)
A L P