General Discussion

Octafish

(55,745 posts)

84. Move the goal posts much?

Reply to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #83)

Sun Jan 24, 2016, 02:21 PM

Jan 2016

First it was: What connection? So I showed the connection I saw.

Then it was: What you said is true, but this has nothing to do with that. So I explained why people should be aware of plutonium from Fukushima, even though television and the print media ignore the problem, or somebody on DU writes, "Don't worry."

Finally, it's become: You should apologize for showing what you said, because it doesn't have to do with this.

Bottom line: I find it reprehensible I get attacked for pointing out the continuing threat to food safety from Fukushima, because plutonium is a real problem people need to be aware of.

Call me an attention whore for caring. I won't apologize for that, either.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

96 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Clean Eating Delusion [View all] HuckleB Jan 2016 OP

but that doesn't mean that sometimes it is not right. The whole dog treat deaths hollysmom Jan 2016 #1

I'm not sure how that connects with the content of the piece. HuckleB Jan 2016 #2

OK I connect it because hollysmom Jan 2016 #3

You're right that it's not limited to the Internet. HuckleB Jan 2016 #46

Enjoy the plutonium. Octafish Jan 2016 #4

And that has what to do with the content of the OP? HuckleB Jan 2016 #5

People interested in healthy food are unaware of the continuing fall-out from Fukushima. Octafish Jan 2016 #6

What? HuckleB Jan 2016 #7

Don't get mad. It is exactly what the OP is about. Octafish Jan 2016 #13

Oh, goodness. HuckleB Jan 2016 #18

Let's see. Eye roll smilie from HuckleB... Octafish Jan 2016 #20

You are not discussing the OP. HuckleB Jan 2016 #22

Octa this has not one iota to do with Fukushima nadinbrzezinski Jan 2016 #27

This is right up there with crop circles and USAF UFO conspiracies Major Nikon Jan 2016 #65

+1,000,000 ... 000 HuckleB Jan 2016 #66

When ad hominem is all you have, you don't have anything. Octafish Jan 2016 #69

I don't think ad hominem means what you think it means Major Nikon Jan 2016 #70

More of that nonsensical claim? FBaggins Jan 2016 #85

Reactor Number 3 ain't the only thing that's spewing Orrex Jan 2016 #64

You sound like Ann Coulter, Orrex. Octafish Jan 2016 #68

And you sound like a crazy conspiracy zealot, as always Orrex Jan 2016 #72

Attention hungry is all. nt anigbrowl Jan 2016 #48

Is that another type of "clean eating?" HuckleB Jan 2016 #49

Yeah, I've gotten much more selective about my diet with time anigbrowl Jan 2016 #52

Awesome! HuckleB Jan 2016 #55

Maybe so. But instead of pointing out others' shortcomings, I try to enlighten them. Octafish Jan 2016 #71

No, you attempt to derail other people's conversations and make them about you. anigbrowl Jan 2016 #78

You made the allegations. Octafish Jan 2016 #80

Post #4. anigbrowl Jan 2016 #90

Nice message. Most undemocratic. Octafish Jan 2016 #91

Democratic doesn't mean you are entitled to be taken seriously every time you open your mouth anigbrowl Jan 2016 #92

If you're so proud of what you write on DU, start a journal. Octafish Jan 2016 #93

Why bother, my wisdom is an endlessly renewable resource anigbrowl Jan 2016 #95

I got caught up in that but flamingdem Jan 2016 #12

Helen Caldicott warns that the problem will not end. Octafish Jan 2016 #17

. Orrex Jan 2016 #63

I didn't know that was a choice Renew Deal Jan 2016 #94

Quite interesting ... I have had concerns about my officemate, but could not put a name to etherealtruth Jan 2016 #8

It is bizarre. HuckleB Jan 2016 #9

I like how the first two responses are completely off topic. N/t Humanist_Activist Jan 2016 #10

That was just strange. HuckleB Jan 2016 #16

Granted at least one of them is, shall we say, a Creative Thinker, so its difficult to follow... Humanist_Activist Jan 2016 #26

How droll. Octafish Jan 2016 #73

Its not that you are wrong about Fukushima leaking, its that this thread is not about that at all... Humanist_Activist Jan 2016 #74

An eating disorder based on food health. Octafish Jan 2016 #75

Again, off topic, not to mention the article you posted is perhaps the worst example of... Humanist_Activist Jan 2016 #76

Tag team and ad hominem. Octafish Jan 2016 #82

Certainly. In #13, you said "It is exactly what the OP is about", and that is completely wrong muriel_volestrangler Jan 2016 #77

I'll tell you what. Octafish Jan 2016 #81

You did tell us what to post - you said "show where I'm wrong" muriel_volestrangler Jan 2016 #83

Move the goal posts much? Octafish Jan 2016 #84

Wow, I know some people who exhibit these symtoms flamingdem Jan 2016 #11

Thank you for your ongoing concern. nt Zorra Jan 2016 #14

I was reading where some people have gotten leftyladyfrommo Jan 2016 #15

Well, they may not be careful enough, or eating enough. HuckleB Jan 2016 #19

especially if they avoid fruits and veggies because it's not organic JI7 Jan 2016 #35

Indeed. A parent of a friend of my kid, won't let me feed the kid our fruit... HuckleB Jan 2016 #37

The Latte Liberals are increasingly out of touch with things that matter. Odin2005 Jan 2016 #21

Indeed. And there are few Cappuccino Cons in the same boat. HuckleB Jan 2016 #24

It is why as a working class person I feel uncomfortable among "middle class" people. Odin2005 Jan 2016 #28

Interesting thoughts. HuckleB Jan 2016 #32

I judge people who shop at Whole Paycheck harshly. Odin2005 Jan 2016 #39

I don't blame you. HuckleB Jan 2016 #44

Yes! The superiority! EllieBC Jan 2016 #89

+ 10,000 n/t Scout Jan 2016 #96

Pure as they are they like to cheer coffee consumption flamingdem Jan 2016 #67

You are conflating way too many things here. nt laundry_queen Jan 2016 #23

Nope. HuckleB Jan 2016 #25

The OP is correct, it is an eating disorder Warpy Jan 2016 #31

I know it is, my mom has it, thank you. laundry_queen Jan 2016 #47

Oh, I agree and do the same thing Warpy Jan 2016 #50

I live around Berkeley, so the local restaurants are hilarious in how they bend over backwards Prism Jan 2016 #29

I looked for a definition of "clean eating" milestogo Jan 2016 #30

So you Googled to find a definition that suited your purpose in response to the OP? HuckleB Jan 2016 #33

Why don't you provide a definition since this is your OP? milestogo Jan 2016 #40

I believe the link is quite clear about what it's discussing. HuckleB Jan 2016 #42

The whole vomiting because someone else is vomiting thing is because Babel_17 Jan 2016 #34

That's a very different definition of clean eating than the OP is discussing. HuckleB Jan 2016 #41

Except that people refer to it as "eating clean" Babel_17 Jan 2016 #43

That's part of the problem. HuckleB Jan 2016 #45

Just the opposite actually, they eat whole foods, not marketed processed foods Babel_17 Jan 2016 #54

Have you read the full article? HuckleB Jan 2016 #56

Read it, sticking by my points (nt) Babel_17 Jan 2016 #58

Your points don't seem to have much to do with the article. HuckleB Jan 2016 #61

They've probably got a very different definition of 'clean eating' than the one described Marr Jan 2016 #88

And a lot of people go through hell, trying to find out what in their diet is making them ill Babel_17 Jan 2016 #36

It can be that, but those folks can be misled by the very marketing the OP discusses. HuckleB Jan 2016 #38

Well, allow me to be a contrarian here :) Babel_17 Jan 2016 #51

I think you're looking back at history, and ignoring the reality of the OP. HuckleB Jan 2016 #53

OK, but then it's ignoring history Babel_17 Jan 2016 #57

No, it's not. HuckleB Jan 2016 #59

Just read this over at Science Blogs. GoneOffShore Jan 2016 #60

It's scary out there. Perspective seems to be gone. HuckleB Jan 2016 #62

Worthy of being an Onion article. Rex Jan 2016 #79

Check it out. proverbialwisdom Jan 2016 #86

That was interesting. I went into the article thinking they defined 'clean eating' the way Marr Jan 2016 #87