3 ms·
So is there a health concern with having PFAS in contact with your eyes, or is this an environmental issue because they don't degrade? It sounds like there's so
by bhaney 3y ago
So is there a health concern with having PFAS in contact with your eyes, or is this an environmental issue because they don't degrade? It sounds like there's something here meant to get upset about, but I don't know what it's supposed to be.
- gilgoomesh 3y agoThe research is ongoing and unclear. The primary reason people are concerned is that the half-life of PFAS in the human body is between 2 and 9 years – so if you're exposed, you're really exposed. There's been a range of studies that have shown possible links with a number of different diseases which is concerning only because the effects of PFAS had been largely unstudied until the last 15 years. But that this point, there are few clear problems from PFAS. https://www.pfas.gov.au/about-pfas/affects https://www.pfas.gov.au/about-pfas/affects
- KMnO4 3y agoBest to avoid 94% of biodegradable straws as well. https://cen.acs.org/environment/persistent-pollutants/Biodegradabledrinking-straws-contain-PFAS/99/i11 https://cen.acs.org/environment/persistent-pollutants/Biodeg... I hope some research is done on PFAs before it’s too late.
- Gigachad 3y agoThese straws are just awful. They seem instantly de carbonate drinks resulting in only foam coming up the straw. Though they aren't all the same, the McDonald's ones seem to work ok. Banning the plastic ones was fine, but I'd rather no straw over a coated paper one.
- bigbillheck 3y ago> Best to avoid 94% of biodegradable straws as well. Way ahead of you on that one.
- r00fus 3y agoEasy - even my kids when they were under 2 could drink without straws. Of course if you have ice cubes in everything then straws are needed - which is why we avoid ice cubes also.
- nmstoker 3y agoAlthough one might hope that with a fairly clear cut divide between contact wearers and non-wearers, it would be possible to tease some sorts of effect out fairly quickly now that this insight has been reported. Obviously non-wearers could be exposed to other sources but it seems like direct eye contact would be giving you a pretty high dose.
- repeekad 3y agoI don’t think anyone is trying to make anyone upset, it’s just research on how prevalent PFAS are. At a minimum, the hundreds of contact lenses I’ve thrown away in my life will almost never break down fully in a landfill, but I’m sure they’re far from the worst things we’ve put in there…
- pengaru 3y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PFAS#Human_health_concerns_associated_with_PFASs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PFAS#Human_health_concerns_ass...
- enslavedrobot 3y agoMany PFAS compounds are toxic at parts per trillion levels. As a chemist I can tell you that it's a big deal, but there is also no way you can avoid exposure. The fact that 3M is exiting their 1.3 billion fluorinated molecule business of their own accord, should give you a flavour of the shitstorm of litigation that will result when the full implications of PFAS contamination are understood more broadly. https://news.3m.com/2022-12-20-3M-to-Exit-PFAS-Manufacturing-by-the-End-of-2025 https://news.3m.com/2022-12-20-3M-to-Exit-PFAS-Manufacturing...
- mensetmanusman 3y agoIt's also logical to exit the business even if it isn't harmful due to litigation risk and perception. All of that business will be taken up by other manufacturers in APEC and in aggregate the world will be unhealthier due to less regulation.
- enslavedrobot 3y agoThe legal limit for PFAS in drinking water is 0.07 PPB. But that hides the fact that not all PFAS chemicals are created equal. The EPA limit for PFOS and PFOA and GENx varieties are 1000x lower. I pretty much guarantee you and your family have been massively over exposed to a large number of PFAS and PFAS intermediate degradation products well above the EPA limit.