510
this post was submitted on 18 May 2026
510 points (95.9% liked)
Today I Learned
29821 readers
66 users here now
What did you learn today? Share it with us!
We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.
** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**
Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Partnered Communities
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Just so you're aware, that article you've linked isn't about literally eating dirt. It's about encouraging parents to let their kids play outside so they're more exposed to the natural environment so their bodies don't become hypersensitive to allergens and the like.
Is the term "exposure" tripping you up?
That can mean topical, membranous, oral exposure, as talked about in the article.
No, but I think it is tripping you up.
Exposure means many different thing depending on the context, but if you actually took the time to read the article you linked, it's clearly referring to external exposure - as in playing in dirt, getting covered in dirt, etc.. Which makes sense as we evolved to be outside - our immune systems need exposure to germs to calibrate properly.
But that is very different to advocating for consumption of dirt, which this article isn't doing. Literally the only part of the article that actually references consumption of dirt is this paragraph...
Which is clearly telling parents to not stress out about accidental consumption. This article is at best neutral about the practice, with a side of caution.
Right!
The article I linked was just the top result of many scientific articles and anthropological studies reiterating the same scientific viewpoint that oral exposure to uncontaminated soil(also known as eating dirt) is not dangerous and potentially-leaning-toward-likely healthy.
Sticking your dirty finger in your mouth =/= intentionally eating a handful of clay from a preferred source that is baked and seasoned with salt and vinegar. Incidental ingestion is not the same thing as intentional consumption. Are you gonna tell your kid that they need to lick their dirty hands clean?
Correct.
Coreect again! great work.
I highly recommend you do not tell kids to "lick their dirty hands clean", which ignores my own and the scientific advice in the linked and other articles regarding eating dirt.
it's also gross and weird.
And how can you confirm that when you didn't read far enough into the article you linked to realise it didn't actually say what you're trying to cite it as?
As @BarrelAgedBoredom@lemmy.zip said, a child incidentally ingesting dirt while playing outside is very different from intentional Geophagy. Conflating the two and acting like everyone else is stupid for pointing that out doesn't look good on you.
In any case, if you want to discuss an article that is actually about Geophagy, and gives a fairly balanced and objective look into Geophagy and its potential health benefits and risks, I'll give you one.
Certain types of Clays (not just everyday soil) are believed to be able to provide real medical benefits when consumed, mostly in the realm of relieving GI tract conditions ranging from stomach irritation all the way to parasitic infections.
However, that is not the same as saying that regular Geophagy is healthy. Again, certain types of clays can contain minerals in high quantities of Macro and Micro nutrients that the body cannot naturally produce.
But there is a good reason why the cultures where Geophagy is most prevalent are also cultures where there either is or was a high level of regular food scarcity. The bioavailability of these minerals is generally quite low compared to organic sources, and these mineral rich clays often contain an unsafe level of heavy metals to boot - which can cause many, many issues with chronic consumption.
TLDR: Acute consumption of uncontaminated dirt definitely won't hurt you, and can in some cases may actually carry medical benefits - but chronic Geophagy is not the health kick anybody should be looking for - ranging from sort-of harmless to potentially very harmful over a long enough time period.
Assuming other people haven't read an article because you're having trouble understanding it is kinda funny.
maybe you guys can start a reading group with each other rather than trying to make things up or put words in others' mouths; nobody else is having the comprehension problems you share.
I was trying to give you benefit of doubt that you didn't do enough due diligence when grabbing an article to link - hence I tried to throw an olive branch in the form of an actual article on geophagy to discuss.
But seeing how impolitely persistent you are that this article says something that it plainly does not makes me think that you're actually a victim of the Dunning-Kruger effect and that you simply do not understand that the article title "Should we let kids eat dirt?" Isn't literally what the article is about.
Which is to say that if you're so confident that everybody disagreeing with you is wrong, please give us any quote in
where it even just implies that eating dirt healthy for children?
And as for everybody agreeing with you? You should really check the like:dislike ratio on your comments before saying that, because they tell a very different story. Literally your only comment with a positive ratio was the first one, and I'd be more than willing to bet that was from people who scrolled by it, felt your comment affirmed their belief, then left without actually reading the article.
It's fine if you and other people disagree with doctors, scientists and myself, who scientifically assert that exposure to uncontaminated soil is not dangerous and I could not care less about a "vote ratio".
Your votes are worth nothing, zero. 100 times 0 is 0, my illiterate friend.
I understand you're having trouble understanding the article(and all of the complementary articles that state the exact same thing), but I can read it and understand it. I care as much about your reading disability as I care about your downvote.
Mate, I literally said two entire comments ago that I agree that incidental consumption of uncontaminated soil is not dangerous or harmful.
But let me say this loudly enough for you to hear this time...
ACUTE INCIDENTAL CONSUMPTION OF DIRT IS NOT THE SAME THING AS CHRONIC INTENTIONAL CONSUMPTION OF DIRT.
The former is not dangerous =/= The latter is healthy.
If you can't wrap your head around that then there's no helping you.
And while the votes might not mean much to you, saying that everybody agrees with you whilst the public display of who agrees with you clearly shows you're full of shit is plain disingenuous.
Anyways, I've got better things to do than argue with a brick wall who'd rather call others stupid than actually stand behind their own argument - so I'm gonna leave it here.
Agree with me louder, though.
Now now, stop playing pretend, I didn't say "everyone". Scientists, anthropologists and doctors agree with me that incidental oral exposure to soil(eating dirt) is probably not harmful and potentially-to-likely healthy, not "everyone". You, for instance, seem very anti-science/illiterate about the whole thing.