I got that Goldbeck's book years ago when I first starting eating healthier. My mind was boggled by all the additives in our foods and what they really were. We get so used to seeing things on labels that we don't think twice about what they really are.
It isn't just Johnson & Johnson. There was a study done on some well known organic personal care products last year. These are some companies people might know: Jason, Aubrey Organics, Alba Botanicals, etc. What was found was they were using the term organic loosely. The products had very little organic ingredients in them. In many cases, the companies were using the same synthetic chemical derived ingredients as the major manufacturers. Here's the story that was in the news:
http://www.organicau...s.abfmcbsoibiaa
| Create a Free Account or Sign In to connect and share in green living and alternative energy forum discussions. |
8
Johnson & Johnson will remove some chemicals from its products
Started by FamilyTreeClimber, Aug 17 2012 01:08 PM
32 replies to this topic
#22
Posted 23 August 2012 - 05:47 PM
FamilyTreeClimber, on 21 August 2012 - 05:35 PM, said:
I got that Goldbeck's book years ago when I first starting eating healthier. My mind was boggled by all the additives in our foods and what they really were. We get so used to seeing things on labels that we don't think twice about what they really are.
It isn't just Johnson & Johnson. There was a study done on some well known organic personal care products last year. These are some companies people might know: Jason, Aubrey Organics, Alba Botanicals, etc. What was found was they were using the term organic loosely. The products had very little organic ingredients in them. In many cases, the companies were using the same synthetic chemical derived ingredients as the major manufacturers. Here's the story that was in the news:
http://www.organicau...s.abfmcbsoibiaa
It isn't just Johnson & Johnson. There was a study done on some well known organic personal care products last year. These are some companies people might know: Jason, Aubrey Organics, Alba Botanicals, etc. What was found was they were using the term organic loosely. The products had very little organic ingredients in them. In many cases, the companies were using the same synthetic chemical derived ingredients as the major manufacturers. Here's the story that was in the news:
http://www.organicau...s.abfmcbsoibiaa
Yeah some of the crap that goes into food and other products is quite amazing! I have never been one to buy organic anyway tho. I never trusted organic from the store, just didn't trust how much more it was. I will buy local as long as I can, but I don't go for organic. I don't remember the whole story, but there was an issue with some nasty stuff found in organic baby food a year or two ago too. I tried to make most of my kids' baby food from our food, with a little bit bought from the store.
#23
Posted 23 August 2012 - 07:00 PM
I find this so very interesting that the chemicals have not even been listed on the labels. WT? We sit and use things that we have no idea what they contain. Makes me want to grow my own talc powder. This is not an isolated case by any means. Mushrooms, they treat us like mushrooms. Keep us in the dark and feed us shat. What a world. What happened to truth in advertising? Suppose one is allergic to a chemical not listed on the label? Mercy.
#24
Posted 23 August 2012 - 07:42 PM
artistry, on 23 August 2012 - 07:00 PM, said:
I find this so very interesting that the chemicals have not even been listed on the labels. WT? We sit and use things that we have no idea what they contain. Makes me want to grow my own talc powder. This is not an isolated case by any means. Mushrooms, they treat us like mushrooms. Keep us in the dark and feed us shat. What a world. What happened to truth in advertising? Suppose one is allergic to a chemical not listed on the label? Mercy.
Exactly why I have been doing more natural things for the family, that and to be more aware and loving to our planet. But Johnson and Johnson surprised me being they are the top recommended baby product company!! Makes you wonder.
I stopped using shampoo or conditioner, I switched to complete natural and my hair looks healthy. I refuse to use the shampoo and conditioner on my children's hair too.
#25
Posted 23 August 2012 - 10:43 PM
Unfortunately, this is the way that it has always been. There have always been certain ingredients that companies do not have to declare on labels as shortpoet mentioned in a previous post.
Just think, it has only been in the last 3 or 4 years that manufacturers had to list allergens and cross contaminants on labels. 5-10 years ago you never say "may contain soy" or "processed on same machinery as nut products" and other warnings.
Years ago, one of the potato chip companies came up with a way to make them with less fat. It involved creating a new substance that was derived from dairy. They did not have to put that new substance on labels or note the dairy in it. I remember that some companies were looking into using the substance for baked good items. As someone who is allergic to dairy, the idea scares me that they can have ingredients in food products and not have to tell anyone.
I don't care who the company is. Unless they are up front about their commitment to declaring all the ingredients that are in their products, you have to assume that if they aren't required by law to do it, then they don't.
Just think, it has only been in the last 3 or 4 years that manufacturers had to list allergens and cross contaminants on labels. 5-10 years ago you never say "may contain soy" or "processed on same machinery as nut products" and other warnings.
Years ago, one of the potato chip companies came up with a way to make them with less fat. It involved creating a new substance that was derived from dairy. They did not have to put that new substance on labels or note the dairy in it. I remember that some companies were looking into using the substance for baked good items. As someone who is allergic to dairy, the idea scares me that they can have ingredients in food products and not have to tell anyone.
I don't care who the company is. Unless they are up front about their commitment to declaring all the ingredients that are in their products, you have to assume that if they aren't required by law to do it, then they don't.
#26
Posted 24 August 2012 - 05:55 AM
That to me FamilyTreeClimber, should really be against the law. What happened to protecting the public? That's a general rhetorical statement. You are smart dc, if you do not take care to read and make sensible decisions, you could very well be doing yourself and your children harm. It's really a shame..
#27
Posted 25 August 2012 - 12:08 PM
ACSAPA, on 20 August 2012 - 12:14 PM, said:
I actually think revealing that they're discontinuing the chemicals will hurt their image because that's like telling your wife of 20 years, "I'm breaking up with the girlfriend that you never knew I had all these years."
#28
Posted 25 August 2012 - 12:18 PM
FamilyTreeClimber, on 23 August 2012 - 10:43 PM, said:
5-10 years ago you never say "may contain soy" or "processed on same machinery as nut products" and other warnings.
A lot of products are labeled extensively because of previous lawsuits, but not food products.
(Off topic case in point. Years ago, when I didn't know any better, I used to use a hair dryer. In the
packaging, it said- "Do not use while asleep."
Classic, cya statement.)Maybe that would help. Get more lawyers to work suing the pants off of everyone. Downside though;
higher prices for those same goods and overwhelming an already over burdened court system.
#29
Posted 25 August 2012 - 06:12 PM
I have also heard from some mommy bloggers that they are revamping their website too to provide consumers with more information on the types of chemicals in their products. They are really trying hard to get people to not be afraid of the long lists of chemicals on their products.
#30
Posted 26 August 2012 - 04:14 AM
steph84, on 25 August 2012 - 06:12 PM, said:
I have also heard from some mommy bloggers that they are revamping their website too to provide consumers with more information on the types of chemicals in their products. They are really trying hard to get people to not be afraid of the long lists of chemicals on their products.
No offense, but "I heard" is not facts. Everyone wants facts, not here say. (After all, we're not fox news)
#31
Posted 26 August 2012 - 10:29 AM
Artisty, I believe a lot of this comes from push for deregulation since the 1980s. There is a prevailing attitude that if it makes money, then who cares. Groups like the Chamber of Commerce have taken an attitude that any and all regulations are wrong. They paint the those who bring up dangers of chemicals and additives as extremists, "tree huggers"--you know, like those crazy Californians and Greenpeace folks. Or, they take the other side and say "Everything is bad for you. You can get sick if you take too much iron, so why worry about this other stuff." Neither argument is a logical one.
I think we've all been guinea pigs for companies that use all sorts of additives in their products. The problem is they test something for a year or two and deem it safe. What they never really tell us is what are the ffects if you are exposed to something consistently for 20-30 years?
We also rely too much on industry to do its own testing and then to tell us if something is safe. This is what the EPA, the FDA, food inspections, and other government agencies are supposed to help with. Unfortunately, their effectiveness is under minded by the budget cuts that come regularly.
I think we've all been guinea pigs for companies that use all sorts of additives in their products. The problem is they test something for a year or two and deem it safe. What they never really tell us is what are the ffects if you are exposed to something consistently for 20-30 years?
We also rely too much on industry to do its own testing and then to tell us if something is safe. This is what the EPA, the FDA, food inspections, and other government agencies are supposed to help with. Unfortunately, their effectiveness is under minded by the budget cuts that come regularly.
#32
Posted 26 August 2012 - 05:28 PM
FamilyTreeClimber, you are absolutelly right. They also want to make it worse. By deregulating the deregulators. It's a sad state of affairs.. Perhaps I wish for too much, but I would so love to see more done on behalf of the people, who are the ones helping them to stuff their bank accounts by purchaning their products.
#33
Posted 26 August 2012 - 05:41 PM
The Johnson & Johnson chemical debacle was one of the first things to make me realize that no matter how hard I try, I just can't prevent my son from exposure as much as I'd like. At this point I care more about if I'm able to find out what exactly is in something, not necessarily removing the harmful stuff (though that is a close, close second).
2 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users
