 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Alternative / September 2005How to Get Sick: Wear Synthetic Fabrics
The ideal clothing for the human body is created from natural fibers. Wool and cotton "breathe" and can manage human perspiration while preserving a balanced body temperature, whether you're in a hot or cold climate. Synthetic fibers often come from petroleum-based resins and other unnatural sources. Unfortunately, conventionally grown cotton is often contaminated with pesticides and chemical dyes, so choose your clothing carefully, and do your homework before you visit the department store. >The ideal clothing for the human body is created from natural fibers. >Wool and cotton "breathe" and can manage human perspiration while [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >clothing carefully, and do your homework before you visit the >department store. But cotton of any type is a bad idea if it gets wet; it doesn't retain warmth when wet. Whereas the evil, satanic, artificial polypropylene will "wick" moisture away from the skin. Mindlessly insisting on "natural" is not a good way to go through life. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If you can't say something nice, then sit next to me." -- Alice Roosevelt Longworth > The ideal clothing for the human body is created from natural fibers. > Wool and cotton "breathe" and can manage human perspiration while > preserving a balanced body temperature, whether you're in a hot or cold > climate. Synthetic fibers often come from petroleum-based resins and > other unnatural sources. Petroleum is unnantural? > Unfortunately, conventionally grown cotton is > often contaminated with pesticides and chemical dyes, so choose your > clothing carefully, and do your homework before you visit the > department store. >> The ideal clothing for the human body is created from natural fibers. >> Wool and cotton "breathe" and can manage human perspiration while [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Petroleum is unnantural? Last I heard, it's organic! ;o) Rich > Petroleum is unnantural? not unnatural just carcinogenic. > > >>Petroleum is unnantural? > > > not unnatural just carcinogenic. Clothing made from all natural, organic, petroleum products is carcinogenic? > Clothing made from all natural, organic, petroleum products is carcinogenic? no...of all the substances out there that are known carcinogens, virtually all are petrochemical in origin. >>Clothing made from all natural, organic, petroleum products is carcinogenic? > > no...of all the substances out there that are known carcinogens, > virtually all are petrochemical in origin. Synthetic fabrics are made from petrochemicals and are not carcinogenic. It seems that the method of delivery is important. > >>Clothing made from all natural, organic, petroleum products is carcinogenic? > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Synthetic fabrics are made from petrochemicals and are not carcinogenic. > It seems that the method of delivery is important. true enough...but since petro chems seem to usually be at the scene of the crime, concerning carcinogenicity, I prefer not to wear the stuff right next to my body... >>>>Clothing made from all natural, organic, petroleum products is carcinogenic? >>> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > the crime, concerning carcinogenicity, I prefer not to wear the stuff > right next to my body... However, your original post mentioned nothing about carcinogencity. What other illnesses does wearing non-natural fibers cause? > However, your original post mentioned nothing about carcinogencity. What > other illnesses does wearing non-natural fibers cause? Since petro chems are virtually always among the usual suspects in any lineup of suspected carcinogens simple wisdom would say that it is probably best not to wear the stuff right next to the skin. For those of you who prefer to wait for the "evidence" keep on wearing those leisure suits... >>However, your original post mentioned nothing about carcinogencity. What >>other illnesses does wearing non-natural fibers cause? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > For those of you who prefer to wait for the "evidence" keep on wearing > those leisure suits... Leisure suits? Tim, you need a fashion consultant. > Leisure suits? > > Tim, you need a fashion consultant. Come on Mark, focus now, I was talk to you and your polyester-wearing cohorts. > > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Come on Mark, focus now, I was talk to you and your polyester-wearing > cohorts. Not me. All suits are 100% wool...shirts 100% cottton,, etct... However, that is because I can afford them. > Not me. All suits are 100% wool...shirts 100% cottton,, etct... > > However, that is because I can afford them. Why don't you wear poly blend undershirts? >>Not me. All suits are 100% wool...shirts 100% cottton,, etct... >> >>However, that is because I can afford them. > > Why don't you wear poly blend undershirts? Tim..there are single women reading this group.... I wear all cotton because it feels better and keeps me cooler in the summer. > > For those of you who prefer to wait for the "evidence" keep on wearing > > those leisure suits... > > Leisure suits? > > Tim, you need a fashion consultant. Come on Mark, focus now, I was referring to you and your polyester wearing cohorts. "Tim Campbell" <timcall@sbcglobal.net> >> Clothing made from all natural, organic, petroleum products is >> carcinogenic? > > no...of all the substances out there that are known carcinogens, > virtually all are petrochemical in origin. Cite? moo > > no...of all the substances out there that are known carcinogens, > > virtually all are petrochemical in origin. > > Cite? Look into it Wesley...demonstrate that it's not the case... "Tim Campbell" <timcall@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message >> > no...of all the substances out there that are known carcinogens, >> > virtually all are petrochemical in origin. >> >> Cite? > > Look into it Wesley...demonstrate that it's not the case... See Tim, this is what makes you such an annoying prick. You make a surprising claim. "virtually all known carcinogens are petrochemical in origin" When you are asked where this information can be found, you tell readers to find it themselves. What sort of impression do you think that leaves your readers with? moo > > > no...of all the substances out there that are known carcinogens, > > > virtually all are petrochemical in origin. > > > > Cite? > > Look into it Wesley...demonstrate that it's not the case... "Prove a negative proposition"? Weak, Tim, very weak. Mark, MD > > Clothing made from all natural, organic, petroleum products is carcinogenic? > > no...of all the substances out there that are known carcinogens, > virtually all are petrochemical in origin. Asbestos? Various radioisotopes? Gamma rays? I'm not arguing that some petrochemicals aren't carcinogenic, but making sweeping statements in order to support your point is opening yourself up for scorn. Mark, MD > I'm not arguing that some petrochemicals aren't carcinogenic, but > making sweeping statements in order to support your point is opening > yourself up for scorn. I simply expressed a common sense opinion. Those who question my opinion are certainly free to research the matter further if they chose; how they handle their emotions in the process is their business. Are you questioning the fundamental assertion that petro chems are disproportionately represented among substances that are known carcinogens or even those that are on the GRAS list? >> I'm not arguing that some petrochemicals aren't carcinogenic, but >> making sweeping statements in order to support your point is opening [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > disproportionately represented among substances that are known > carcinogens or even those that are on the GRAS list? You are. You said that virtually all carcinogens are petrochemicals. moo > > Are you questioning the fundamental assertion that petro chems are > > disproportionately represented among substances that are known > > carcinogens or even those that are on the GRAS list? > > You are. You said that virtually all carcinogens are petrochemicals. Come on Wesley, try to make sense here. I was asking Mark if he questions this assertion. >> Clothing made from all natural, organic, petroleum products is carcinogenic? > >no...of all the substances out there that are known carcinogens, >virtually all are petrochemical in origin. Yeah, like tobacco and radon, just to cite a couple of examples. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If you can't say something nice, then sit next to me." -- Alice Roosevelt Longworth > Yeah, like tobacco and radon, just to cite a couple of examples. certainly pet chems are not the only carcinogens... >> Yeah, like tobacco and radon, just to cite a couple of examples. > >certainly pet chems are not the only carcinogens... Yes, and you simply announce that it's common sense that the majority are petrochemicals. Well, I've never noticed you to be a bastion of common sense, or even sense, so I don't plan to take your word for it, and you're not planning to back up your claim. So you can be ignored, as usual. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If you can't say something nice, then sit next to me." -- Alice Roosevelt Longworth > Yes, and you simply announce that it's common sense that the majority > are petrochemicals. No. I said that it was common sense that it is less than wise to wear petrochemical based clothing. "Tim Campbell" <timcall@sbcglobal.net> >> Yes, and you simply announce that it's common sense that the majority >> are petrochemicals. > > No. I said that it was common sense that it is less than wise to wear > petrochemical based clothing. No. You said that virtually all carcinogens are petrochemicals. Am I misquoting or misinterpreting you? Anyway, can you back up your claim with anything but requests for other people to do your research? moo >> Yes, and you simply announce that it's common sense that the majority >> are petrochemicals. > >No. I said that it was common sense that it is less than wise to wear >petrochemical based clothing. As Rich points out, no you didn't. But even if you had, it's not "common sense" to avoid such things. It's silly. I avoid polyester because I don't like the way it looks, but nylon makes a fine windbreaker. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If you can't say something nice, then sit next to me." -- Alice Roosevelt Longworth > The ideal clothing for the human body is created from natural fibers. > Wool and cotton "breathe" and can manage human perspiration while [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > clothing carefully, and do your homework before you visit the > department store. How about rayon, also known as viscose? http://www.plastiquarian.com/viscose.htm |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.