I have been doing a tonne of research on product label claims VS quality control findings and random spot testing by local authorities, councils etc, for content I am making elsewhere. I have always been incredibly interested in 'foods that harm and foods that heal'.
When you are tuned in to the realm of proven false claims, misleading categorisation and contamination cases, your eyes spring open wider than the Atlantic ocean.
I subscribe to the ethos that if 'big pharma' have created a medication or treatment, then we clearly have the receptors in our body urgo: there is a natural alternative out there somewhere.
I brush my teeth with Xylitol, which is essentially like brushing them with pure sugar, minus the fluoride with the added bonus that the bad-dudes in the microbiome cannot process it like sugar, so plaque does not form nearly as much and they are starved to the point of extreme beastie culling.
Wow Steven, get to the bloody point you pompous bloody windbag!!!
My point is that the reason is the decades of false claims by Colgate and co and even more sinister, local/national health organisations. You could almost begin to believe that massive multi-national corporations do you not have your best interests at heart, wow I am becoming mistrusting and cynical in my old age, huh?
I remember in the UK when the meaning of terms like 'organic', were ripped to shreds in the national psyche by quite an infamous exposé. I am having difficulty right now sourcing a great quality (cost effective) grass fed butter, the blatant lies or truths only admitted in extremely tiny print are scandalous.
Some companies make lovely sounding claims like 'free range' when what they really mean is the chickens are stacked 4 high, not 6...
My family cannot really afford many of the items I am talking about but we do the best we can, right? When spending a little extra for genuine nutrition, socially responsible farming methods etc one could do without deceptive marketing, obfuscation or pure deceit.
In your particular example, you would kinda assume that the crop was not doused with literal 'toxic waste' like much of the cheap supermarket fresh produce when specifically labelled 'organic'.
Bloody lead and cadmium are a world apart from corporations declaring fish contain 'negligible' trace amounts of mercury also hugely damaging of course, then failing to explain the term bio cumulative!!!
Oops! Sorry to go on for so long, it is not a lack of respect for your time but as I mentioned this is a subject that animates me immensely. I shall look back over your writing here, I cannot believe we haven't crossed paths. I came across your account through a post from the self-proclaimed, almost sainted quite magnificent enigma that is @deirdyweirdy She tagged you which may mean you should consider witness protection, death faking or starting again in the Amazon...
Hope your weekend is going swimmingly 😎🌻
RE: Organic Chocolate Had Higher Levels of Lead and Cadmium in the study, So What Are We Actually Paying For?