Gransnet forums

AIBU

Chemicals!

(26 Posts)
Quizzer Sun 02-May-21 10:45:42

As a scientist I really object to the derogatory term ‘Chemicals’ used in advertisements and the press to frighten the reader.
Oh dear! We mustn’t put chemicals on our skin, in our food or have them in our homes. Really?
Our whole bodies are made up of different chemicals, in fact everything in the whole universe is a chemical. Water is a chemical, as is air - well strictly that’s a mixture of chemicals.
Let’s insist that the media get this right and use “harmful” or “potentially harmful” chemicals instead of the incorrect description.

GrannyGravy13 Sun 02-May-21 10:47:21

Agree

poshpaws Sun 02-May-21 10:48:51

Sounds very sensible and indeed useful, to me.

Callistemon Sun 02-May-21 10:59:41

We wouldn't eat anything!

KS2 chemical reactions in cooking:
www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/clips/zjrs34j

NotSpaghetti Sun 02-May-21 11:14:33

You're right of course.
But this is another area where nothing is likely to happen.

We need to educate people.
Fat chance!

Mrst1405 Sat 15-May-21 13:33:34

Really annoys me that things like vinegar, washing soda etc are considered 'natural ' but chemicals are somehow bad!!

GillT57 Sat 15-May-21 13:41:30

I agree, and the assumption that 'additives' are always something to be avoided. I get irritated by the infantilization of language, the use of the word 'jabs' instead of injections for example.

Callistemon Sat 15-May-21 13:47:06

the use of the word 'jabs' instead of injections for example.
It's so much easier to type, though!

GillT57 Sat 15-May-21 14:05:07

I agree that is it easier to write, but do reporters always have to say it? And politicians?

varian Sat 15-May-21 14:43:11

I'm guessing that only a small minority of those who work in the media have a scientific education.

M0nica Sat 15-May-21 15:43:02

Like so many words 'chemicals' has a precise meaning and a popular meaning.

I am not sure there is much you can do about it.

Callistemon Sat 15-May-21 17:08:42

GillT57

I agree that is it easier to write, but do reporters always have to say it? And politicians?

No, it's lazy

varian Sat 15-May-21 17:13:23

The misuse of a word like "chemicals" is part of a certain political lexicon.

Chemicals are bad but natural is good.

It is just one example of the way language is used in an inaccurate simplistic way to promote an agenda.

The right wing popular press are experts at this sort of distortion of the language. It is not just lazy, it is much more sinister. I am sure we can all think of many other examples.

JackyB Sat 15-May-21 17:45:55

What annoys me is when people say someone is "sanguine" when they mean they are calm.

The 4 humours are (with a little help from Wikipedia) :

Sanguine: highly talkative, enthusiastic, active, and extroverted.

Choleric: independent, decisive, goal-oriented, and ambitious.... natural leaders....also violent, vengeful, and short-tempered.

Melancholic: analytical and detail-oriented, deep thinkers, introverted, thoughtful, reserved, and often anxious.

Phlegmatic: relaxed, peaceful, quiet, and easy-going, sympathetic and care about others.

StatenIsland Sat 15-May-21 17:50:54

I don't want to derail but in answer to varian saying we can all think of other examples, I'd offer sugar as something misrepresented and misunderstood.

Out for a coffee in the park, I witnessed a grandfather being given a severe reprimand from his wife for having bought his granddaughters a very small ice popsicle each. "They are not allowed sugar," she screamed at him.

Of course, I don't know the breakdown of ingredients. The lollies may have had a tiny amount of glucose syrup in them.

Doesn't all food, even a humble lettuce leaf turn to glucose when processed by our bodies? Don't cows produce glucose from grass which trickles into our milk? I accept that syrup is a concentrated form but felt the woman's reaction somewhat hysterical as if he'd given them a giant bag of Mars Bars or Haribo.

grumppa Sat 15-May-21 18:29:16

And of course organic chemistry is so much better than inorganic.

growstuff Sat 15-May-21 18:37:05

SatenIslad I'm diabetic and agree with you 100% that many people just don't understand what sugar is. So often, I see people claim they don't eat any sugars, but then cheerfully list how much fruit they eat. The amount of ignorance about nutrition is astonishing - and is worth billions of pounds to industries which exploit people's ignorance.

growstuff Sat 15-May-21 18:37:36

Ooops StatenIsland - sorry about the typo.

growstuff Sat 15-May-21 18:42:07

Snake venom and death cap mushrooms are "natural".

varian Sat 15-May-21 18:57:45

My OH when he was first diagnosed with Type II diabetes, very quickly discovered that carbohydrates had to be avoided or severely limited because carbs turn into sugar.

Is this taught at GCSE chemistry? It should be.

NotSpaghetti Sun 16-May-21 02:05:32

Yes,Varian I think it probably is.

nanna8 Sun 16-May-21 04:00:39

Having been round the sugar cane fields here sugar is far more ‘natural’ than some of the fake substitutes they use.

JackyB Sun 16-May-21 08:47:50

When my youngest was a baby, he had a bit of a snuffle when we were on holiday (Guernsey actually). I went to a pharmacist expecting some competent advice. The assistant gave me some of those salt tablets. When I asked if they were OK for a 9 month old, she said "Oh yes, they're natural".

I thought (although I stupidly did not say) "So are coffee, tobacco, opium and cannabis".

Katie59 Sun 16-May-21 08:59:34

Chemicals are good and chemicals are bad, the same substances can save lives and can kill you, it all depends on the way they are used.

Callistemon Sun 16-May-21 10:50:47

nanna8

Having been round the sugar cane fields here sugar is far more ‘natural’ than some of the fake substitutes they use.

?

Everything in moderation (except for aspartame which should be banned).