Thousands of tons versus a global problem of 360 million tons. If you want to chew gum or not, your choice won't make any difference to the real problem of plastic pollution.
In general municipal garbage is a small fraction of all wastes. In Poland municipal garbage is just 10% of all (the rest is industry), and out of this 10% only 15% could be recycled. So, this effort to sort garbage has negligible effect, yet it is costly and resource consuming, so net effect on environment could be easily negative as compared with, say, incineration with energy recovery.
Going after chewing gums is just stupid from that perspective.
I love chewing gum but I've never thought about what it's made of. The thought that I've been chewing on synthetic rubber the entire time makes me uncomfortable.
I chew (and let my kids chew) Chios gum, which tastes like pleasant tree sap (because it is!) - it’s a little expensive, and much chewier than normal gum, but supposedly has benefits for proper tooth alignment and jaw growth, to help prevent needing expanders and braces. (I got this from the book Breath by James Nestor - not sure how scientific it is).
> chemical analysis shows that gum contains styrene-butadiene (the durable synthetic chemical used to make car tyres), polyethylene (the plastic used to make carrier bags and bottles) and polyvinyl acetate (woodglue)
It's actually dihydrogen monoxide, and it is no laughing matter. People that ingest it regularly end up getting hooked and dying if they stop. Thanks for building awareness.
This is the most-wrong usage of this trope I've ever seen.
You're supposed to say things like that when people panicking about their vaccine contains words they don't know - sure, point out that those same confusing chemistry words also describe the components of their breakfast.
But this is about something that is literally a synthetic rubber manufactured from petroleum oil.
>You're supposed to say things like that when people panicking about their vaccine contains words they don't know - sure, point out that those same confusing chemistry words also describe the components of their breakfast.
Sounds a lot like "you're only supposed to use this rhetorical device against good chemicals, not bad chemicals!"
>But this is about something that is literally a synthetic rubber manufactured from petroleum oil.
This is just the naturalistic fallacy. There's plenty of "synthetic" pharmaceuticals "manufactured from petroleum oil" as well. The fact that something was "manufactured from petroleum oil" shouldn't be the basis for whether something is harmful or not.
Note that my argument isn't that such plastics are perfectly safe, just that implying that chewing gum is like chewing car tires and wood glue is a flawed argument and should be discouraged, even if the argument is directionally correct.
Couldn't agree more. I'm honestly quite shocked that a ridiculous argument like "it's not natural thus it's bad" holds sway here. I'd have expected better.
The point is that including the usage of such plastics add little value except to imply you're eating a tire when chewing gum, which is clearly not the case.
The article addresses this. Calling it "litter" puts the responsibility on the consumer, calling it "pollution" puts it on the corporation that manufactures the plastics.
There's a popular drive through coffee and fast food franchise in my country and the immediate area around is often covered in their empty cups and food wrappers that their customers discard when they get new stuff from the drive through.
Funny thing is that the waste is often found around the store and not nearly as much in other places.
I personally blame the company that produces the garbage with their branding on it and who has a profit motive to not deal with this stuff.
I think the point that OP was making in a facetious sort of way is that it's a fallacy to say 'A is not C because it's B'. It's possible for something to be both B and C.
We didn't tell the youngsters about chewing gums and Mars/Wrigley/Orbit passed on marketing at least on some markets so luckily I haven't seen chewing gums anywhere around in the recent years. It's a better world in some way. E-cigarettes on the other hand....
Just swallow it. Perpetuating the myth that gum is not safe to swallow with this "it's made of PLASTIC and CHEMICALS" fearmongering is just proliferating the actual cause of people spitting their gum everywhere, which is being taught not to swallow it.
Then chew it. I'm just saying that if reducing plastic pollution is a goal, then whether you spit gum out or swallow it doesn't matter. It's polluting either way. The only way to reduce the pollution is to not create it.
It’s a fascination of the city for sure. Growing up my mom would always take my siblings and I photos there when we went to pike place. Pretty sure I have photo evidence of me touching that thing at various stages of life lol
"Thousands of tonnes of plastic pollution 'could be' escaping into the environment every year … from our mouths. "
First: 'could be', let me know when you have some verifiable information.
Second: "Global plastic waste generation has grown more than seven-fold in the past four decades to 360 million metric tons per year. " https://www.statista.com/topics/5401/global-plastic-waste/
Thousands of tons versus a global problem of 360 million tons. If you want to chew gum or not, your choice won't make any difference to the real problem of plastic pollution.
In general municipal garbage is a small fraction of all wastes. In Poland municipal garbage is just 10% of all (the rest is industry), and out of this 10% only 15% could be recycled. So, this effort to sort garbage has negligible effect, yet it is costly and resource consuming, so net effect on environment could be easily negative as compared with, say, incineration with energy recovery.
Going after chewing gums is just stupid from that perspective.
I love chewing gum but I've never thought about what it's made of. The thought that I've been chewing on synthetic rubber the entire time makes me uncomfortable.
I chew (and let my kids chew) Chios gum, which tastes like pleasant tree sap (because it is!) - it’s a little expensive, and much chewier than normal gum, but supposedly has benefits for proper tooth alignment and jaw growth, to help prevent needing expanders and braces. (I got this from the book Breath by James Nestor - not sure how scientific it is).
> chemical analysis shows that gum contains styrene-butadiene (the durable synthetic chemical used to make car tyres), polyethylene (the plastic used to make carrier bags and bottles) and polyvinyl acetate (woodglue)
Your body contains hydrogen monoxide (coolant used in nuclear reactors)
It's actually dihydrogen monoxide, and it is no laughing matter. People that ingest it regularly end up getting hooked and dying if they stop. Thanks for building awareness.
(Your reactors comment made me laugh)
This is the most-wrong usage of this trope I've ever seen.
You're supposed to say things like that when people panicking about their vaccine contains words they don't know - sure, point out that those same confusing chemistry words also describe the components of their breakfast.
But this is about something that is literally a synthetic rubber manufactured from petroleum oil.
Polyethylene is not a natural part of our diet nor is it an intermediary, substrate or output from any biological process, and it is harmful to a number of organs: https://naturalpedia.com/polyethylene-toxicity-side-effects-...
>You're supposed to say things like that when people panicking about their vaccine contains words they don't know - sure, point out that those same confusing chemistry words also describe the components of their breakfast.
Sounds a lot like "you're only supposed to use this rhetorical device against good chemicals, not bad chemicals!"
>But this is about something that is literally a synthetic rubber manufactured from petroleum oil.
This is just the naturalistic fallacy. There's plenty of "synthetic" pharmaceuticals "manufactured from petroleum oil" as well. The fact that something was "manufactured from petroleum oil" shouldn't be the basis for whether something is harmful or not.
>Polyethylene is not a natural part of our diet nor is it an intermediary, substrate or output from any biological process, and it is harmful to a number of organs: https://naturalpedia.com/polyethylene-toxicity-side-effects-...
Note that my argument isn't that such plastics are perfectly safe, just that implying that chewing gum is like chewing car tires and wood glue is a flawed argument and should be discouraged, even if the argument is directionally correct.
Couldn't agree more. I'm honestly quite shocked that a ridiculous argument like "it's not natural thus it's bad" holds sway here. I'd have expected better.
That’s not an artificial plastic though.
The point is that including the usage of such plastics add little value except to imply you're eating a tire when chewing gum, which is clearly not the case.
Which plastics make sense as part of your diet? (none)
vs
Does water make sense in your diet? (yes)
Casein plastic is made from casein (milk).
A square is a rectangle, not a polygon
The article addresses this. Calling it "litter" puts the responsibility on the consumer, calling it "pollution" puts it on the corporation that manufactures the plastics.
Because disgusting people spitting gum on the floor is obviously the corporation’s fault.
That line of thinking doesn't get us towards no gum on the floor, and surely in our collective capacity we can do something about it?
>>> That line of thinking doesn't get us towards no gum on the floor
Sure it does.
We can collectively shame people who spit gum on the floor. We could also enact something like singapore that carries hefty penalities.
No, but the fact that the gum then never degrades is.
but who profits by selling the gum?
There's a popular drive through coffee and fast food franchise in my country and the immediate area around is often covered in their empty cups and food wrappers that their customers discard when they get new stuff from the drive through.
Funny thing is that the waste is often found around the store and not nearly as much in other places.
I personally blame the company that produces the garbage with their branding on it and who has a profit motive to not deal with this stuff.
All squares are rectangles.
Not all rectangles are squares.
All rectangles are polygons.
Not all polygons are rectangles.
Rectangles are polygons
I think the point that OP was making in a facetious sort of way is that it's a fallacy to say 'A is not C because it's B'. It's possible for something to be both B and C.
Ah fair enough, thanks! I definitely didn't catch that.
We didn't tell the youngsters about chewing gums and Mars/Wrigley/Orbit passed on marketing at least on some markets so luckily I haven't seen chewing gums anywhere around in the recent years. It's a better world in some way. E-cigarettes on the other hand....
For those of us that are disgusted at the sight of spit out chewing gum, don't press the link, as the main picture is just that.
Just swallow it. Perpetuating the myth that gum is not safe to swallow with this "it's made of PLASTIC and CHEMICALS" fearmongering is just proliferating the actual cause of people spitting their gum everywhere, which is being taught not to swallow it.
Plastic isn't digestible, so swallowing gum just means the plastic comes out the other end. It won't solve the pollution problem.
Even better, don't chew it in the first place.
But I like the way it tastes.
Then chew it. I'm just saying that if reducing plastic pollution is a goal, then whether you spit gum out or swallow it doesn't matter. It's polluting either way. The only way to reduce the pollution is to not create it.
The gum wall in Seattle is disgusting.
It’s a fascination of the city for sure. Growing up my mom would always take my siblings and I photos there when we went to pike place. Pretty sure I have photo evidence of me touching that thing at various stages of life lol
Do they also have cigarette butt wall?
Wow, TIL.
DNA samples galore!
[dead]