Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

GhostlyRuse OP t1_jdcnhaa wrote

Reply to comment by michal_hanu_la in Hershey ‘evaluating’ if it can eliminate lead, cadmium in its chocolate: CFO by GhostlyRuse

That's not a great comfort.

6

sprint6864 t1_jddd8mr wrote

I literally made a comment in the thread about Skittles how idiots like this argue that it's their right to be poisoned, and we shouldn't care about removing harmful chemicals where we can

7

Shizzar_ t1_jdfcbp9 wrote

You think that bad I was a kid still while leaded gas was a thing. How much damage did my generation suffer?

2

Grostleton t1_jdixe09 wrote

So what? Your generation had it worse so ours shouldn't strive for improvement over what we currently have? True boomer logic right there...

1

gtacleveland t1_jdctlc7 wrote

Bruh that's life. There is never zero probability of anything. Therecis always a non-zero probability of contamination of any element.

−8

sprint6864 t1_jddd3jt wrote

Bruh, it's literally a controllable variable. You can force companies to remove harmful chemicals from their products, almost every other nation in the world has

6

jmgloss t1_jdfbs0m wrote

Did you know that there are rat droppings in your food? You'd want 0% of that, if asked. Seems like an easy thing to just say: "no rat droppings in food, please." But there are still rat droppings in food. Why is that?

−2

sprint6864 t1_jdfct55 wrote

Bruh, just eat lead paint and let the rest of civilization actually progress

0

gtacleveland t1_jddezmg wrote

You can mandate what a specific amount, but you cannot ensure that something is 100% free of a certain chemical or defect or contamination. You can only mitigate the problem to an accepted level, whether that is set by a customer or mandated by the government. I would know, I'm an engineer who deals with quality control in a factory every damn day.

−3

manleybones t1_jddia2s wrote

Who cares what you do, you are still wrong about removing lead.

3

gtacleveland t1_jddii8x wrote

How am I wrong then? Go ahead ill wait. Either you do not understand what I am talking about or you dont understand statistics.

−4

manleybones t1_jddipb6 wrote

There shouldn't be lead, or plutonium in chocolate. If it can be 100% free of plutonium, it can be 100% free of lead. That's a good thought experiment for your feeble mind.

0

gtacleveland t1_jddk1iu wrote

No shit Sherlock, of course there shouldn't be any. But it is not physically or statistically possible to be 100% free of it. What do you not understand about this? There is no absolutes. Hell the human body naturally has lead and plutonium and other heavy metals in it. The difference is that there is an acceptable amount that won't harm you.

1

manleybones t1_jddl0p5 wrote

There is no acceptable level of lead, stop playing interference for the shitty job you do for a shitty employer.

1

gtacleveland t1_jddm7hz wrote

I understand that you moron. I'm saying it is not physically possible for any product to have 0% lead content, ie, be 100% lead free.

You yourself are not lead free. You were born with lead in your body. You will die with it in your body, and hopefully it never reaches a concentration that does serious harm to your body.

I don't understand what you don't get.

1

sprint6864 t1_jddfyns wrote

Go enjoy paint chips and leave the rest of society alone. We prefer stopping brain damage, not saying it's something we have no chance to avoid

1

gtacleveland t1_jddh0ev wrote

Are you stupid or do you not understand statistics? You can mandate a company guarantee their products be 99% free of contamination, or 99.9% free, or even as high 99.99999% free. But you can never guarantee something be 100% free of contamination. There is always risk. The best you can do is mandate a product be within safe limits. In the real world you can get functionally close to 0% or 100% but you can never achieve them.

4