I like this, but wish the responsible thing was all that was part of the equation.
The "safe" aspect is pie in the sky. No government body would provide this, though I do think the illusion of safety would be and for overwhelming majority would be enough. But will never ever be enough for regulators of the anti-variety. Where is the industry (of any sort) that is providing actual safety, that no rationale person could scrutinize, ad nauseam?
Yep. And the other thing is the categories of carcinogens (in the flow chart):
Group 1 - known carcinogen
Group2A - probably carcinogen
Group2B - possible carcinogen
And all the assumptions that go into figuring 2A and 2B. (and even dosage of group 1) And, as I've pointed this out in other posts - there are certain classifications - where something is only an
agent or a possible agent - formaldehyde is one of those. And then the whole 'no-threshold' theory where no matter how negligibly low the dosage is, some still want them banned or labeled, yet the carcinogens in tomatoes especially but also the levels allowed in city water are higher than some products that 'must be banned'.