Soapbox Monday: A reconsideration of chemicals

Just how much should we trust chemicals?

In this morning's Greenspace column, I wrote about insect repellents and some of the "natural" alternatives to DEET.

In Sunday's newspaper, garden writer Virginia Smith wrote about how growers of roses -- some of the most persnickety and bug-prone plants in existence -- are foregoing the normal pesticides and other chemicals for more organic methods.

At the end, she wrote about two women walking through a garden and being plagued by gnats. One suggests putting dryer sheets around their necks to ward off the insects. Her companion is appalled. "You don't know what's in there," she says. "You know -- chemicals."

"Never mind," the first woman responds. "We'll get cancer."

Flippant, to be sure. But I saw it as a snapshot of how society is beginning to look at chemicals.

On June 8, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency made public the identities of more than 150 chemicals contained in 104 health and safety studies that had been claimed confidential by industry. "Today's announcement is another in a series of unprecedented actions that EPA is taking to provide the public with greater access to information on the chemicals that are manufactured and used in the United States," the press release said.

You can read more about it by clicking here.

Meanwhile, we want to know what you think. Are you more or less trustful of synthetic chemicals than you used to be? Why or why not?