Re: high arsenic vs. zero arsenic...??Re: Iodine vs Kelp vs Ionic vs natural extracts

I just happened across this forum....

I have copied a comment I made in Dennis Hardy ND the other day. I don't usually respond on this site at all, but I thought this fits in nicely here:

"Just be careful with any seaweed. I have a friend who is an analytical chemist, who just happened to analyse some seaweed she was eating (obtained from China). the result was a very high Arsenic content. So i would be careful where I obtained it from. Also, there is the environmental impact isue. In Tasmania for instance, vast tracts of natural kelp beds have been completely decimated because of the kelp trade. Kelp is a food source and habitat for many critters, not just humans.

Unfortuately, this is just part of the down side of the natural health industry...not to mention overpopulation issues.
There are always cause and effect issues for many things".

This brings me to one more question, that I've always been afraid of saying, rather I'm afraid of the responses I will get, but here goes. Natural health care also comes at an environmental cost. It's not a matter of good (natural health) vs bad (pharmaceuticals), as life is not that black and white (unless you live in a hollywood film). All these natural products we consume to extend OUR own lives, i.e benefit of one person in a short span of earth time, comes at the expense of many many species in the short term, thus impacting upon future generations. Take my comment on kelp above. Once the natural kelp beds are gone, how many species go down with it? How long, if ever, will they take to recover? Once certain things, such as many fish species, reach a critical population, they cannot recover and the species becomes extinct.

I think I should post this in the debate forum really. Just one more thing, I am not some evil anti-natural health person, quite the opposite. This is just one thing I think about sometimes.

Take care,
Sonja.

Tweet