← Back to archive

BPA-free fallacy?

Historical archive only. New interaction is disabled.

Original Question

Anent p v ~p discussion in previous questions, the link shows one way ~p may mislead even when accurate


How can we characterize the misleading in terms of fallacies?


https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020/02/14/1919563117  "BPA-free" implies the hazard of BPA is missing, but plastics are now being made with BPS

Comments on Question

I thought you had a load of typos, but apparently anent is an archaic word from my neck of the woods. No idea what "p v ~p" means. 

Answers

1

I'd like to think that the producers and advertisers named it such in the belief that it was a safe alternative, though after Dupont's willful recklessness and disregard of the harmful effects of teflon it's fair to distrust these companies. 


Giving the benefit of the doubt, if they did believe it was safe then advertising it in this manner doesn't get negated by subsequent revelations. It does raise the issue about how thorough testing is, versus how they rush it to market to chase the dollar, and how lobbyists working for these countries can cause huge harm to the public.

Book

Want the full book?

Get the complete guide to logical fallacies by Bo Bennett.

Buy the Book

Master Logical Fallacies Online

Take the Virversity course and sharpen your reasoning skills with structured lessons.

View Online Course