Threw out OTC products, tweaking diet

[Dust]

Let's remember what 'all natural means'. It means you stink, and you die before you're 40. That's what humans did before our all-so-evil products.

 

Pretty ignorant statement. I think you’re getting things like medical treatment and healthy living confused. Chemicals aren’t good for you. Not everything that is natural is good for you. Lets not start thinking certain chemicals actually help you live longer.

[sweetjasmine]

Chemicals aren’t good for you.

 

Okay, but what is a chemical? Water is a chemical, so how do you distinguish between good and bad chemicals?

 

I think if not using certain store-bought products makes your hair and skin look and feel better, then go for it. But it doesn't make sense to throw the baby out with the bathwater and label everything with a long scientific name as harmful.

[Dust]

Okay, but what is a chemical? Water is a chemical, so how do you distinguish between good and bad chemicals?

 

I think if not using certain store-bought products makes your hair and skin look and feel better, then go for it. But it doesn't make sense to throw the baby out with the bathwater and label everything with a long scientific name as harmful.

 

Some stuff is pretty obvious like you’d probably spit bleach out of your mouth if you tried to drink it, and if you did drink it you’d get very sick and hopefully throw it up instead of dying. (and bleach is actually one of the safer cleaning chemicals)

 

People in this thread have been trying stuff out for themselves so they know first hand if it works or not unless they are imagining things which of course means you should try it out and see for yourself.

 

Them Smart alec comes in and starts talking about 40 year life spans like aluminum and other synthetic added chemicals are the reason. No modern medicine is the reason. All the chemicals in our food and products are actually harming our quality of life. If we could have modern medicine minus modern pollution and chemicals meant only for profit we’d all be healthier.

[sweetjasmine]

Some stuff is pretty obvious like you’d probably spit bleach out of your mouth if you tried to drink it, and if you did drink it you’d get very sick and hopefully throw it up instead of dying. (and bleach is actually one of the safer cleaning chemicals)

 

Sure, but we're not talking about ingesting things. In the context of chemical compounds found in hygiene products meant for human use, how do you determine what's harmful and what's okay? Which of the compounds in the organic shampoo posted in this thread are harmful?

 

People in this thread have been trying stuff out for themselves so they know first hand if it works or not unless they are imagining things which of course means you should try it out and see for yourself.

 

I don't think people are imagining things, and like I said, if someone tries something, and it works, good. I just take issue with "chemicals = bad, natural = good" because it's not a black and white issue.

 

And just as an example, one particular store-bought facial cleanser works wonders for me. When I tried baking soda on a recommendation from a friend who swears by it, it irritated and inflamed my skin. When I put it on my face, it felt like my skin was burning and it turned the patch of skin I put it on red. So in that particular instance, I'll take the store-bought, manufactured cleanser over the pure baking soda. Sodium bicarbonate is as much of a chemical as the salicyclic acid in an ordinary store cleanser.

[snug.bunny]

Baking soda is a chemical.

 

Just so we are all straight as to what a chemical is:

 

Any substance used in or resulting from a reaction involving changes to atoms or molecules.

 

[Dust]

Sure, but we're not talking about ingesting things. In the context of chemical compounds found in hygiene products meant for human use, how do you determine what's harmful and what's okay? Which of the compounds in the organic shampoo posted in this thread are harmful?

 

I don't think people are imagining things, and like I said, if someone tries something, and it works, good. I just take issue with "chemicals = bad, natural = good" because it's not a black and white issue.

 

And just as an example, one particular store-bought facial cleanser works wonders for me. When I tried baking soda on a recommendation from a friend who swears by it, it irritated and inflamed my skin.

 

There are a lot of naturally occurring chemicals that can be bad. The thing is now there is an entire slew of unnatural man made compounds which (made profit) which are very bad for you.

 

I actually came to this thread trying to learn myself. Baking Soda , salt and everything else is a chemical. Salt can kill you and so can baking soda. The thing is baking soda is safe when used properly. It works great as the main ingredient in my natural deodorant and a teaspoon goes a long way when I’m making chocolate chip cookies. I wouldn’t brush my teeth with it as it is supposedly abrasive and maybe that’s what happened with your skin? The stuff has a warning that it can cause certain people massive irritation so its not a surprise if you did get irritated. You learned something, its not like you were experimenting with cyanide capsules. (just take peoples word on that one)

 

So yeah question things, but don’t be like mr. smart alec and start talking about how peoples life span used to be 40 years before they put chemicals in all our products that shouldn’t have chemicals in them.

[josie54]

I'm going to come off harsh here, so I'll apologize first. I really don't mean to upset anyone, nor declare anyone foolish for TRYING something. I'm all for trying things. You're not wrong to think differently than me. The following just comes from my skeptical nature and my opinion:

 

Let's remember what 'all natural means'. It means you stink, and you die before you're 40. That's what humans did before our all-so-evil products.

 

...

 

Sorry, I know I'm being a jerk . But I'm a jerk out of love!

 

I definitely feel the love! But I do (respectfully) want to point out that I think you missed the point. I took from this thread that manufacturers are trying to sell us on the idea that we need all of these "Look better through synthetics" products with a slew of substances (let's not call them chemicals, to avoid the confusion) that we KNOW aren't exactly wonderful for us to absorb through our skin--formaldehydes, petroleum, byproducts from manufacturing that have been shown to also be primary ingredients in a number of pesticides. So, this isn't about chemicals...it's about many manufacturers using substances that make their jobs easier, and their products lather and smell nice and all that, but that aren't exactly the kinds of things that we'd want to put on our bodies if we looked at each component individually.

 

Now, let's talk money. We spend millions and millions of dollars (pounds, euros, etc.) on these products because they're supposed to make us look, smell, feel, be better in some way. We're surrounded by marketing messages that tell us we NEED those things. Now, intellectually, we all know that we can ignore the advertising, but there is also definitely a herd mentality: "Well, if he/she is using that, well maybe I should too." What we may find is that we DON'T need a lot of that stuff. That cheap alternatives--and in some cases, no alternatives--do just as good a job.

 

Finally, let's talk effects. Rates of cancer, alzheimers, parkinson's, and autism have all increased over the last 30 years, and no one knows why. Sure, we have better detection methods, but most say that detection doesn't completely account for the spikes. There's really a good chance that the increase in those rates of disease have risen proportionately with the increase in our pursuit of perfect skin and hair, and nonstick pans, as well as the use of pesticides, hormones, etc., in the food chain.

 

Can there be an over-reaction? Certainly. But let's not take the experimentation described in this thread as an over-reaction. It's actually an interesting exercise that really surprised me.

 

I didn't use soap for nearly a week (again I still showered! I just used water). And I polled my fiance and my family to see if they sensed (or smelled) anything amiss about me. I asked them to get really close and take a good inhale.

 

All I surveyed (about five people!) agreed....I didn't "stink" at all from showering with water only, even after I did so after a good workout or work outside in the heat. So, for me personally, I have discovered that commercial soaps and creams are unnecessary, which could save me money in the future. And, yes, that will give me a bit more control over and knowledge about the kinds of things I put on my skin. I know I don't have much control over what I absorb in my day-to-day life, but at least I can control that one small part.

 

So I think you misunderstood what we were talking about when we were talking about "natural" products. It's not about putting any old "natural" thing on and guzzling the arsenic and hemlock. It's about using substances we KNOW to be healthy and safe (honey, olive oil, etc.) rather than substances that we can only hope MIGHT be, but that we can't be sure about (sodium laurel sulfate, petrolatum, etc.). I'm not sure it's wise to use these substances without questioning their potential long-term effects on us as individuals and as a society.

 

Just my opinion.

[Lecturer]

I don't want to argue, cuz I already looked like a jerk with 1 post.. I don't really want to go further lol.

 

That said, I do want to point out that you're AGREEING with me, but don't seem to realize it. I was trying to be the voice of moderation in my post (with a healthy dose of realism and skepticism).

 

I'm saying:

 

1) Yes, many products are unnecessary and some are probably bad for you.

2) Cutting out soap and food groups is going too far.

 

That's all I was really trying to say.

 

Dust, my comment about the natural course of human life[span] was to describe a paradigm. If one is to adopt some of this 'natural living' logic, and they are content to follow it to its conclusion, then this is the end that I speak of. For literary sake I also included that, in the all-natural environment, humans stink - that was the directly relevant point pertaining to the discussion. The lifespan comment was my drawn tangent. I think most people can see that I was not being literal with the connection that OTC face cleansers keep us alive. I let the reader think about what I wrote for a moment and fill in the gaps.

 

Anyway, I'm just trying to give my advice, acknowledging that it is contradictory to the overarching theme and direction of this thread. That is why I apologized for coming off as a dick .

 

At parties I also go by the name Buzz Killington.

[denise_xo]

Hi TigressA,

 

Just wanted to say that I went to Lush today, and they have lots of alternatives for deodorants. This is their US web site:

 

http://www.lushusa.com/shop

[denise_xo]

I just take issue with "chemicals = bad, natural = good" because it's not a black and white issue.

 

I totally agree with this. You need to go beyond that dichotomy, which is a false one.

[denise_xo]

I came across this today and thought of you, since you said you were looking for alternatives to deodorant. This has a deodorant recipe based on baking soda:

 

http://www.bakingsodabook.co.uk/Make_a_baking_soda_based_deodorant.shtml