1) Someone from another forum mentioned how annoyed he was when he overheard a conversation between a beautician and client in a salon when the beautician recommended a specific hair product because it had "no chemicals in it" and this forced him to wonder what qualifies as a chemical to this dumb bitch.
2) Personally, I'm extremely agitated by the whole "organic food" movement, which refers to foods that are grown / raised free of pesticides, growth hormones, and genetic modification. While I understand the appeal of the movement, I object to the use of the word "organic" because it the true definition essentially "any carbon based molecule." By this definition, fossil fuels and I both qualify as organic.
3) Another thing that bothered me was a product that I saw while my mom was watching QVC. I think it was some kind of skin cream or cosmetic thing and the representative proudly proclaimed to a caller that it was "completely safe because we only use all natural ingredients." At this point, my jaw must have dropped half way down to the floor, because there's a fuck-ton of "all natural" products that aren't even remotely safe. To name a few:
arsenic, cyanide, poison ivy, snake venom, Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, other people's blood, urine and shit
4) I'm also annoyed by people who refuse to ingest artificial flavors for health reasons. This is absolute fucking bullshit. Chemically, artificial and natural flavors are completely identical, except for one minor exception. Artificial flavors are pure compounds created in a lab, while natural flavors are extracts of (presumably "all natural") other products and therefore may contain impurities.
5) My final chemistry related aneurysm spawns from a commercial I saw for a weight loss supplement that was probably "specially formulated" in some lab, somewhere. The host was all up in arms over this amazing break through product that facilitated weight-loss, but wouldn't harm your body because there were NO HORMONES OMG! Immediately following this claim, they showed a brief list of some of the ingredients but WTF, there were hormones in it! This was probably one of the worst face-palm moments of my entire life. However, I did not see any androgens on the list, but that's probably what they meant anyway, since it's not like there are other types of hormones after all.
6) This last complaint is unique in the sense that it deals with theory rather than actual physical compounds that can have actual consequences if misused, but it annoys me none-the-less. This is the concept of de-evolution, which of course means that a species is evolving backwards, ie. reverting back to a vestigial form, or re-evolving characterists that a distant ancestor had that its more immediate ancestors lack. The reason why this is wrong is because evolution simply implies gradual change in allelic frequency over time in a population. Nowhere in this definition is there expressed any preference for either the "directionality" or arbitrary human fondness of said allelic shift. Consequently, all changes, regardless of "directionality" or "awesomeness" are part of a natural evolutionary sequence, thus leaving no biological, linguistic, or conceptual niche in which the word de-evolution could possibly be used.
Now, please share your own pseudo-science pet peeves.
2) Personally, I'm extremely agitated by the whole "organic food" movement, which refers to foods that are grown / raised free of pesticides, growth hormones, and genetic modification. While I understand the appeal of the movement, I object to the use of the word "organic" because it the true definition essentially "any carbon based molecule." By this definition, fossil fuels and I both qualify as organic.
3) Another thing that bothered me was a product that I saw while my mom was watching QVC. I think it was some kind of skin cream or cosmetic thing and the representative proudly proclaimed to a caller that it was "completely safe because we only use all natural ingredients." At this point, my jaw must have dropped half way down to the floor, because there's a fuck-ton of "all natural" products that aren't even remotely safe. To name a few:
arsenic, cyanide, poison ivy, snake venom, Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, other people's blood, urine and shit
4) I'm also annoyed by people who refuse to ingest artificial flavors for health reasons. This is absolute fucking bullshit. Chemically, artificial and natural flavors are completely identical, except for one minor exception. Artificial flavors are pure compounds created in a lab, while natural flavors are extracts of (presumably "all natural") other products and therefore may contain impurities.
5) My final chemistry related aneurysm spawns from a commercial I saw for a weight loss supplement that was probably "specially formulated" in some lab, somewhere. The host was all up in arms over this amazing break through product that facilitated weight-loss, but wouldn't harm your body because there were NO HORMONES OMG! Immediately following this claim, they showed a brief list of some of the ingredients but WTF, there were hormones in it! This was probably one of the worst face-palm moments of my entire life. However, I did not see any androgens on the list, but that's probably what they meant anyway, since it's not like there are other types of hormones after all.
6) This last complaint is unique in the sense that it deals with theory rather than actual physical compounds that can have actual consequences if misused, but it annoys me none-the-less. This is the concept of de-evolution, which of course means that a species is evolving backwards, ie. reverting back to a vestigial form, or re-evolving characterists that a distant ancestor had that its more immediate ancestors lack. The reason why this is wrong is because evolution simply implies gradual change in allelic frequency over time in a population. Nowhere in this definition is there expressed any preference for either the "directionality" or arbitrary human fondness of said allelic shift. Consequently, all changes, regardless of "directionality" or "awesomeness" are part of a natural evolutionary sequence, thus leaving no biological, linguistic, or conceptual niche in which the word de-evolution could possibly be used.
Now, please share your own pseudo-science pet peeves.
That's a horribly insufficient analysis of what I said.
