>>618829Wrong. Squiggle. Colgate has sodium laurel sulfate, which irritates soft tissues (like your entire fucking mouth) and gives some people (myself included) canker sores.
>>618830There's no difference between using artificial out versus artificial at home, because the world is a closed system (radiation excluded). Chemicals come from somewhere (a process that makes the toothpaste, tube, packaging, ink, and waste products besides, plus consumes clean water (which then needs to be treated), electricity, land space and construction waste, etc). The chemicals go somewhere (down the sink isn't a magic black hole. It goes somewhere, or if we filter it, there are costs to filter it.) When you pollute at home you may as well be polluting innawoods because it, or sideproducts of it like air and water pollution, inevitably end up innawoods.
You have raw material acquisition, construction of tools for the acquisition, construction of processing plants, construction of brick and mortar stores, trucking parts and fuel to ship it here to there to there, your own gas to get to the store, the trash truck's gas to get it to the landfill, the trash bag, the road wear and tear, all the operations and packaging, shipping it from here to china and back, all the employees of all these stores commuting in and out, computer parts to track all this shit, landfills or recycling centers and their operation costs and land usage, all the manufacture and shipping and buying of all the equipment and vehicles used. Oh, but you don't bother thinking of that, because marginally your tube of toothpaste is a drop in the bucket of pollution. But all the toothpaste of all the people over their whole lives? And just toothpaste, one of 100,000 items the average person owns at any given time?
And you're worried about one glob of spit in the woods. Penny wise, pound foolish as applied to environmentalism.
>what do other than kill self and all relationsBuy as little as possible.
