4 ms·
This is a PFAS issue more than a military issue. The people who manufactured PFAS and the regulators who approved the use of PFAS need to be held to account.
by pirate787 4y ago
This is a PFAS issue more than a military issue. The people who manufactured PFAS and the regulators who approved the use of PFAS need to be held to account.
- Tepix 4y agoNot really. The dangers of PFAS have been known for quite a while. Most have stopped using it long ago.
- mlindner 4y ago> Most have stopped using it long ago. This isn't really true.
- bamboozled 4y agoThis is strange logic, if you know something is bad, but you approve it's use anyway, you're in the wrong.
- Bender 4y agoI thought that too. There is a video by John Oliver talking about PFAS and the other hundred or so variants of these compounds. [1] There are other videos talking about how companies can still use these compounds because the EPA only outlawed about 3 of the 130 or so. [1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9W74aeuqsiU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9W74aeuqsiU [video]
- mlindner 4y agoPFAS is not a single chemical. It's an entire family of chemicals and eliminating them destroys a lot of modern society as they're used for literally everything. There's basically no way they're all getting banned. Some of the worst are getting banned, but that's it.
- Eleison23 4y ago
- mensetmanusman 4y agoPFAS have been used for almost a century, just long enough to figure out which ones need to be more regulated. Is certainly a trade off because they have superior safety properties in terms of fire mitigation.