What we tend to loose sight of is that every cell in our body is continually repairing and rebuilding itself (and it’s our choice whether it’s at a slower or faster rate). It will always rebuild itself in the direction of optimal health if provided with the ‘right stuff’. It will even attempt to repair and rebuild itself when given poor raw materials, in which case it will build a weaker cell with reduced viability regarding functionality, and leads to health degeneration.
Now the discussion as to whether giving the body anything as long as it will appear to tolerate it at least temporarily despite side effects, is or is not technically aiding toxicity is a bit of an optical illusion, if you will. It depends on whether you see optimal health as the goal, doesn’t it? If our vision of old age is a 20 year or longer process of degeneration, than it doesn’t matter if you feed it weaker genetically modified foods, synthetics, and chemicals of every description. From this perspective, as long as something’s not a registered poison, it isn’t considered ‘toxic’. On the other hand if your goal is to regenerate the body towards peak viability and functionality until it’s your time to expire (suddenly like animals do in nature, not slowly and painfully), then it makes sense that you would view anything that doesn’t contribute to that, as toxic.
Early in life I chose to trust my intuitive instinct about what was a good fit for my body. Who would have thought that ‘perspective’ would determine the very essence of ‘quality of life’ that goes beyond ‘standard of living’?