"The 'un-science' of common sense"- Dr. Sears Quote

Dr. Sears was a research staple for me during my second pregnancy. I had my first child ten years prior and had spent hours researching then as well. Only I didn't have the Dr. Sears website to help me realize a lot of instruction on how to parent is apart of "the 'un-science' of common sense" quote and theme of his practice. If you spend 5 minutes scrolling content on his site you will see why I love his approach to parenting and science in general. However, I do not endorse his sponsorship of brands and lack of organic based living information for parents. Even though he is on the right track with this article on organic food.

His 'un-science of common sense' theme can be summarized as such; when something like sleeping with a baby is shamed by an organization because suffocation can happen  it doesn't meet the common sense standard to mothers; why would sleeping with my baby, whom has been inside my body since conception having constant body to body contact, be harmful for them? Dr. Sears answers, its not, its only a message backed by bad science. Over some 10 years of study approximately 600-800 children passed away from co-sleeping with parents, who were not putting the child in a safe sleep environment (i.e. alcohol, drug, prescription drug and hazardous placement of infant in the bed,) so the organization went overboard with messaging to parents to not sleep with their babies and today several pediatricians and studies have shown the benefits of co-sleeping. Like this article on the reduction in SIDS deaths, which death rate grossly outnumbers the off chance you might be the type to accidentally suffocate your child.

What does this philosophy have to do with Erthi and our community? A lot of areas in science don't seem to meet the standards of common sense. For example, how can a genetically modified organism (synthetic ingredients) inserted into my food not have some sort of affect? Or if the laws of physics are true and all energy is only transformed into another form and never gone than how is it possible for nuclear plants to report that they have reduced the SIZE of the nuclear waste they are emitting? Wouldn't this mean that the size of the waste may appear smaller but that the energy has been emitted in other forms along in the process? According to nuclear press websites like Things Worse Than Nuclear Power  nuclear energy is always controlled, recycled and used without ANY negative impacts outweighing the benefits. However, when you go to the Fukushima Update page you will find a "$105 Billion dollar clean up" and all the horrific headlines of impacts across the globe. This raises that 'un-science of common sense flag.'

A lot of food additives, manufacturing processes, agriculture practices, genetic engineering, chemical treatments and the like are all relatively new sciences and practices, starting within the past 30 years. These processes and treatments of waste, food, and materials have not been properly vetted and studied over time before being rushed into mainstream production and diets. We often find out several years later that something is polluting our environment  and our bodies. What issues or scientific findings do you think are apart of the 'un-science of common sense' theme?