@[email protected] to [email protected] • 7 months agoExcellentlemmy.caimagemessage-square42fedilinkarrow-up1382arrow-down146
arrow-up1336arrow-down1imageExcellentlemmy.ca@[email protected] to [email protected] • 7 months agomessage-square42fedilink
minus-square@AProfessionallinkEnglish0•edit-27 months agoUnless you have a source that lists exact quantities Mcdonalds uses and at what quantity it’s toxic calling anything “toxic” is meaningless.
minus-square@disguy_ovahealink-1•7 months agoMy digestive, cardiac, and nervous systems don’t seem to care about the law very much. Lol
minus-square@disguy_ovahealink0•7 months agoAre you citing a toxicological review? Your comment read to me like a case argument.
minus-square@AProfessionallinkEnglish2•7 months agoYou know exactly what I said. “X has toxic chemicals” How much chemicals? Because toxicity is a result of a dosage.
minus-square@disguy_ovahealink0•7 months agoThat’s a good question. You should consider substantiating your dismissal of concern with a verified toxicology report. Until then, my initial claim of being “laden with chemical treatments” stands as accurate, as supported by a credible source.
Unless you have a source that lists exact quantities Mcdonalds uses and at what quantity it’s toxic calling anything “toxic” is meaningless.
My digestive, cardiac, and nervous systems don’t seem to care about the law very much. Lol
Toxicologists study human health not law…
Are you citing a toxicological review? Your comment read to me like a case argument.
You know exactly what I said.
“X has toxic chemicals”
How much chemicals? Because toxicity is a result of a dosage.
That’s a good question. You should consider substantiating your dismissal of concern with a verified toxicology report. Until then, my initial claim of being “laden with chemical treatments” stands as accurate, as supported by a credible source.