Most Popular Tea Bags Contain ILLEGAL Amounts of Deadly Pesticides

Yawn.

I understand CI.
However, can you prove that the most popular Tea Bags don't contain illegal amounts of pesticides or that the article is incorrect? I'd imagine that they would be open to a huge lawsuit by the companies named in their article, if it was false and at the very least have to issue a retraction.

By that logic, can you prove that God does not exist?

I can prove that by not citing sources and giving any scientifically verifiable evidence, what they state is no better than an opinion. I am a scientist. I expect facts. I want to know what volume of a poison is harmful, and what level was found in the tea. Without that information, the story is a waste of time to read.

Think of it as a submission by a student towards his Masters or Doctorate degree. Would YOU give the story a passing grade?

Everyone says Manmade Global Warming is true because a consensus of scientists say it is. Where are the facts and the consensus in the story that you posted?

Ever sue someone with no money? They can say and do anything they want without fear or fact.

So you didn't like the post?
So sorry.

Goalposts moved.. check
Troll accusations... check
Uncited literature... check
Appeal to.authority.. check

Woo BINGO!!!!!

For crying out loud, people! Alana was just sharing a link!

Stop the crucifying and let's move on life is too short!

So you didn't like the post?
So sorry.

Another pithy retort in a long line of them which only indicates that forum discussion is way outside your realm of understanding and that anybody who questions your cut and pastes can expect zero answers and zero discussion on any subject.

Not even popcorn-worthy even if I were a popcorn eater which I'm not. No doubt that popcorn is chock full of nasties hazardous to my health anyway ...

CATS CAUSE CANCER!!!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2019170/Can-cat-cancer-Parasite-bellies-linked-brain-tumours.html

For crying out loud, people! Alana was just sharing a link!

Stop the crucifying and let's move on life is too short!

And the information in the link was simply challenged and questioned. No crucifying, no "crying out loud" - simple questions asking for simple answers which weren't forthcoming and were "answered" with inconsequential and irrelevant quips.

CATS CAUSE CANCER!!!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2019170/Can-cat-cancer-Parasite-bellies-linked-brain-tumours.html

OH NO! I must now get rid of my three along with the fourth who showed up a couple of weeks ago and JUST got checked out, neutered, etc. Heavens to Betsy! No WONDER I can't figure out the logic behind these cut and paste articles - I have a monstrous brain tumor wreaking havoc on my cognitive reasoning. Yikes!

OK perhaps crucifying is not the best term for what is taking place in this thread, but for sure there is some just plain old tart meanness going on..........

So you didn't like the post?
So sorry.

Another pithy retort in a long line of them which only indicates that forum discussion is way outside your realm of understanding and that anybody who questions your cut and pastes can expect zero answers and zero discussion on any subject.

Not even popcorn-worthy even if I were a popcorn eater which I'm not. No doubt that popcorn is chock full of nasties hazardous to my health anyway ...

More yawns.

Thanks islandjoan.
It does get tiresome to be constantly trolled.
Hence the yawn which will probably continue to be my response to the troller since it's a waste of energy to do, elsewise

If only I could yawn at the nonsensical drivel I see posted here as fact.

OK perhaps crucifying is not the best term for what is taking place in this thread, but for sure there is some just plain old tart meanness going on..........

Not at all, unless you have some deep-set pre-conceived theory dominating your logical thought. Read the thread. Questioning someone's opinion isn't "mean" by any stretch. Questions have been raised but have remained unanswered, only responded to with meaningless quips, a few personal attacks and unsuccessful attempts to avoid answering questions by divergence.

More yawns.

Thanks islandjoan.
It does get tiresome to be constantly trolled.
Hence the yawn which will probably continue to be my response to the troller since it's a waste of energy to do, elsewise

I'm sorry for your paranoia. Yawn away as that's a good escape for those unable/unwilling to answer quite logical questions.

YAAAAAAWN

*-) yawn, yawn.

Alana, eliminating pesticides, which is in the platform of the Green Party, would by conservative estimates reduce crop yields by 30-50%. Can you explain how we will provide food for 7 billion mouths then? Also, what are your concerns about gene silencing, RNAi, and new biotechnology tools?

Nope. Don't have any.
Yawn.

You asked me questions about RNAi, which I answered, yet you won't do the same? Wow. I just complimented you the other day for being an adult and you are being a totally petulant spoiled brat of a child now. Yawn away. I will continue to provide facts to your propaganda

You asked me questions about RNAi, which I answered, yet you won't do the same? Wow. I just complimented you the other day for being an adult and you are being a totally petulant spoiled brat of a child now. Yawn away. I will continue to provide facts to your propaganda

My bet is that your young boy could come up with better and more adult responses. 😀

Continue your nastiness without me Old Troll.
Done here.
YAWN!

Maybe the forum moderator could just delete this entire thread since it is based on discredited science study and is also based on a Canadian standard not an accepted American study. In fact, when you look at the POISONS on the list most of them are not carcinogenic anyway and the quantities are well below the levels to poison anyone.

Maybe the forum moderator could just delete this entire thread since it is based on discredited science study and is also based on a Canadian standard not an accepted American study. In fact, when you look at the POISONS on the list most of them are not carcinogenic anyway and the quantities are well below the levels to poison anyone.

That doesn't fit Alana's narrative though. Well at least her first one before she moved the goalposts. This is her modus operandi. She brings nothing to the table but fairy tales, conjecture, and pseudoscience, but wants us to feel bad 700 posts later about Shamu. Yawn

To answer 2 of the questions posted early on this thread:

"a person would have to consume approximately 75 cups of tea per day over their entire lifetime to elicit an adverse health effect"

Source: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/pesticide-traces-in-some-tea-exceed-allowable-limits-1.2564624

Maximum Residue Levels (MRLs) of Pesticides for tea: see page 6 of 10 in this PDF released by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations from 2015

http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4481e.pdf

Hope this helps those who had questions 🙂

So the article was exactly as most thought. Irrational fear mongering. I'm so tired of the anti science woo movement in this country. The University of Google is churning out doctorates