this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2025
591 points (99.5% liked)
History Memes
3255 readers
803 users here now
A place to share history memes!
Rules:
-
No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, assorted bigotry, etc.
-
No fascism, atrocity denial or apologia, etc.
-
Tag NSFW pics as NSFW.
-
Follow all Lemmy.world rules.
Banner courtesy of @setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I often think about what the 2025 equivalent of this is. What are we doing today that we think is helping, but is actually taking us out?
I hate to say it, and I really hope I’m wrong, but sugar substitutes and artificial sweeteners. I myself use them to cut my sugar intake and have resorted to the most naturally occurring option (stevia). I hope there are no long term negative effects once they’ve existed long enough for scientists to study them.
They've studied them for quite a while, and they appear to be pretty safe. Most studies that "show" that they cause cancer were done on rats (a breed of which is notorious for developing cancer) and the amounts given to them were ludicrous, something like drinking multiple cases of diet soda in a day. The only possible issue I've seen so far is that sucralose affects the microbiome, and we don't know enough about the microbiome still to know if it's negative or positive.
IMHO the reduction in calories and sugar greatly outweigh any potential negative impacts if there are any.
Seems like you have not considered the #1 reason to stay away from fake sugar, which is of course that it tastes terrible.
Fair - I know it tastes awful to some people. I personally don't mind it, and I actually prefer it in a few things like sodas.
Using non-caloric sweeteners are a "tweak" that can result in some positive health changes - drop a bit of weight, improve A1C a bit, etc. It's certainly not the only tweak that can used, though (e.g. increasing your daily step count or incorporating more fruits and veggies).
fortunately sugar substitutes are one of the most studied substances in the world
Yeah, and if you’ve been paying attention, all sorts of awful shit has been coming out of them recently, have you been paying attention or are you just spouting off?
yeah on sucralose. which i've actually never seen in anything.
Social media.
"Oh my god, grandpa! You were just on that all day?! And you let kids use it??! Didn't you know it was bad for you?!"
"Y... Yeah. We kinda knew."
"Our grandparents lied to themselves about the harm of smoking as they called cigarettes 'coffin nails', we spent all day on social media telling ourselves it's fine and that its how we keep in touch as we saw our cousins and childhood friends lose their damn minds."
But for real I think the fact that it became difficult to live a social life without social media around the time the dangers became difficult to deny is very reminiscent of what it must have been like for my parents and grandparents as non-smokers in the mid-late 20th century.
Around the late 90's anyone remember Olestra/Olean Chips?
Thankfully warning bells went off for me. Avoided my ass leaking.
I'm scared of something like that happening again.
What was it?
Anal leakage
It had a lipid you can't digest instead of digestible fats and so your body simply passed it through. What that translates to is greasy shits and greasy farts
Toothbrush microplastics
brushing your teeth (with plastic bristles) definitely helps
Who knows? That non-stick stuff that sheds water like the stuff they’re putting on aluminum foil?
Replacing gas powered cars with electric ones because they're "less polluting". Sure, they produce no gaseous emissions, but they make up a lot of that difference with increased tire particulates, road wear, and general pollution from the raw materials required. Don't even get me started on self driving cars.
What we should really be doing is building and enabling as many viable alternatives to driving as possible. Intercity buses and trains, frequent intracity bus service with wide service areas, bike lanes, deconstructing highways going through city centers, etc. Cars have a place in our society, but we've made them the only viable way to get around and it's killing us.
Electric vehicle do wear down current tires more, and they do cause somewhat more wear on the roads ... but these are issues that can be solved by creating better, more durable tires and roads.
And the 'raw materials' do cause damage to the environment, but much less over the lifetime of the vehicle than a gas engine. And, the majority of the materials needed for the batteries can be recycled, so future vehicles will have less environmental impact.
I agree that we need a mix of vehicles and I'm most places the mass public transportation options are very lacking, but overall I think if someone needs a car, they should look for an electric one.
I agree, if you're going to get a car it's great for folks to get electric cars. My point is that they are not even remotely the silver bullet people think they are, and allowing that thinking to persist is killing us. We need viable alternatives to driving, and we need them 30 years ago.
They are so much less polluting though. We know that car emissions are causing excess deaths, asthma, dementia, not to mention the obvious contributions to climate change.
Tyre and brake particles are still an issue, but its far less than if the fuel you're burning is directly dumping toxic particles into the air.
They are indeed less polluting, but not nearly as much as just getting around without driving. A comprehensive network of regional/national trains and local transit combined with safe cycling infrastructure and low through traffic areas are so much less polluting that it makes the difference between gas and electric cars look like a rounding error.
I completely agree, but in a lot of places you need infrastructure changes to reduce car dependency, and swapping out ICE cars for electric is something positive that an individual can do on their own.