8 ms·

The deleterious effects of PFAS on the body are well established. It’s the tobacco story all over again, companies that know the harmful effects of their chemic

The deleterious effects of PFAS on the body are well established. It’s the tobacco story all over again, companies that know the harmful effects of their chemicals then willfully flood our waterways with it because it’s profitable. What are you gaining from being dissembling about this entire thing? What about it rubs you the wrong way so much that you’re rationalizing its ills by spreading falsehoods?

fastball 3y ago
It sounds more like fire departments were flooding the waterways with PFAS, not 3M.
- jonasdegendt 3y ago
  You focus on just one of the applications whilst we've been applying PFAS/PFOS to just about every food container and waterproof piece of apparel. Not to mention that 3M attempted to hide[0] the impact on the areas surrounding production sites. They knew. [0] https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2022-3m-pfas-toxic-forever-chemicals-europe/#xj4y7vzkg https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2022-3m-pfas-toxic-foreve...
  - creato 3y ago
    It doesn’t seem that crazy to focus on the application of PFAS that sprays it by the truckload directly into the open environment in liquid form when the other applications you cite are solid materials that seem unlikely to end up contaminating water supplies in any significant way.
littlestymaar 3y ago
> It’s the tobacco story all over again Or asbestos, or leaded gasoline, or leaded paint, or Oxycodone (the “opioid crisis”) and so on. This list is too long to keep track of.
- fransje26 3y ago
  "Fun" fact: general aviation planes still mostly run on leaded gasoline...
  - sokoloff 3y ago
    GA piston-powered airplanes. GA turbines burn Jet-A (kerosene, lead-free). GAMI recently got a lead-free aviation gasoline broadly approved: https://generalaviationnews.com/2022/09/03/gami-unleaded-fuel-approved-for-all-general-aviation-aircraft/ https://generalaviationnews.com/2022/09/03/gami-unleaded-fue...
    - api 3y ago
      There are also piston powered diesels that burn either jet-A or regular automotive diesel, neither of which have lead. They are becoming more common. Leaded avgas is for older gasoline piston aircraft. There’s still many around but overall it’s not that significant and is slowly on its way out. The exhaust is mostly released high in altitude where there is ample time for extreme dilution. The concern is mostly for people who work at small airports, live near them, or work with these aircraft as mechanics etc. I think there’s an unleaded 100 octane formulation in testing that will probably replace leaded gas but the general aviation industry is small and slow moving.
- LoganDark 3y ago
  > Oxycodone (the “opioid crisis”) Oxycodone didn't cause the opioid crisis just because it's an addictive substance.
  - fireflash38 3y ago
    It was sold as non addictive. And pushed despite knowing it was addictive.
    - LoganDark 3y ago
      That does sound like false advertising, yeah... I don't know how much of the opioid crisis is due to reduced access to opioids though. Once someone is forced to buy from the dark web once, they've now learned how to use the dark web. I know people who only became curious about the dark web after I used it a couple times. It just spreads, I guess. The reason they were curious is because after some really invasive dental surgery (with lasers!) they were given a laughably small number of pills, a supply that would only last about 3 days at the recommended schedule, for an operation that the doctors know and warned them would hurt for around a week after. I still believe harm reduction is the answer, but we're still years (possibly decades) away from a legal implementation. And it's not a full solution because you'll still have junkies, but it might become easier to help them once they don't have to totally hide themselves.
concordDance 3y ago
> The deleterious effects of PFAS on the body are well established. Which PFAS? At what concentrations? What's the effect size? QALY loss per person affected? > What are you gaining from being dissembling about this entire thing? What about it rubs you the wrong way so much that you’re rationalizing its ills by spreading falsehoods? These insinuations are horrible and unnecessary. Stop attacking the motives of people who question something, that's very much against the hacker spirit. Many people just like questioning everything, particularly things others seem to care deeply about.
- saiya-jin 3y ago
  [flagged]
- vkou 3y ago
  > Which PFAS? At what concentrations? What's the effect size? QALY loss per person affected? These are great questions, and maybe they should have all gotten conclusive answers before they are introduced to the market. Prove that your crap is safe, before you sell it.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - refurb 3y ago
    You can't prove a negative. Technology progresses and finds new things we didn't know 10 years ago. What you're suggesting is impossible.
    - tankenmate 3y ago
      That's not strictly true; for example new drugs are tested on animals and humans all the time.
      - ironSkillet 3y ago
        Negative effects can manifest themselves over timescales beyond any scientific test.
pulpfictional 3y ago
>well established >falsehoods >nothing to back those statements

fastball 3y ago

It sounds more like fire departments were flooding the waterways with PFAS, not 3M.

jonasdegendt 3y ago
You focus on just one of the applications whilst we've been applying PFAS/PFOS to just about every food container and waterproof piece of apparel. Not to mention that 3M attempted to hide[0] the impact on the areas surrounding production sites. They knew. [0] https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2022-3m-pfas-toxic-forever-chemicals-europe/#xj4y7vzkg https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2022-3m-pfas-toxic-foreve...
- creato 3y ago
  It doesn’t seem that crazy to focus on the application of PFAS that sprays it by the truckload directly into the open environment in liquid form when the other applications you cite are solid materials that seem unlikely to end up contaminating water supplies in any significant way.

littlestymaar 3y ago

> It’s the tobacco story all over again Or asbestos, or leaded gasoline, or leaded paint, or Oxycodone (the “opioid crisis”) and so on. This list is too long to keep track of.

fransje26 3y ago
"Fun" fact: general aviation planes still mostly run on leaded gasoline...
- sokoloff 3y ago
  GA piston-powered airplanes. GA turbines burn Jet-A (kerosene, lead-free). GAMI recently got a lead-free aviation gasoline broadly approved: https://generalaviationnews.com/2022/09/03/gami-unleaded-fuel-approved-for-all-general-aviation-aircraft/ https://generalaviationnews.com/2022/09/03/gami-unleaded-fue...
  - api 3y ago
    There are also piston powered diesels that burn either jet-A or regular automotive diesel, neither of which have lead. They are becoming more common. Leaded avgas is for older gasoline piston aircraft. There’s still many around but overall it’s not that significant and is slowly on its way out. The exhaust is mostly released high in altitude where there is ample time for extreme dilution. The concern is mostly for people who work at small airports, live near them, or work with these aircraft as mechanics etc. I think there’s an unleaded 100 octane formulation in testing that will probably replace leaded gas but the general aviation industry is small and slow moving.
LoganDark 3y ago
> Oxycodone (the “opioid crisis”) Oxycodone didn't cause the opioid crisis just because it's an addictive substance.
- fireflash38 3y ago
  It was sold as non addictive. And pushed despite knowing it was addictive.
  - LoganDark 3y ago
    That does sound like false advertising, yeah... I don't know how much of the opioid crisis is due to reduced access to opioids though. Once someone is forced to buy from the dark web once, they've now learned how to use the dark web. I know people who only became curious about the dark web after I used it a couple times. It just spreads, I guess. The reason they were curious is because after some really invasive dental surgery (with lasers!) they were given a laughably small number of pills, a supply that would only last about 3 days at the recommended schedule, for an operation that the doctors know and warned them would hurt for around a week after. I still believe harm reduction is the answer, but we're still years (possibly decades) away from a legal implementation. And it's not a full solution because you'll still have junkies, but it might become easier to help them once they don't have to totally hide themselves.

concordDance 3y ago

> The deleterious effects of PFAS on the body are well established. Which PFAS? At what concentrations? What's the effect size? QALY loss per person affected? > What are you gaining from being dissembling about this entire thing? What about it rubs you the wrong way so much that you’re rationalizing its ills by spreading falsehoods? These insinuations are horrible and unnecessary. Stop attacking the motives of people who question something, that's very much against the hacker spirit. Many people just like questioning everything, particularly things others seem to care deeply about.

saiya-jin 3y ago
[flagged]
vkou 3y ago
> Which PFAS? At what concentrations? What's the effect size? QALY loss per person affected? These are great questions, and maybe they should have all gotten conclusive answers before they are introduced to the market. Prove that your crap is safe, before you sell it.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- refurb 3y ago
  You can't prove a negative. Technology progresses and finds new things we didn't know 10 years ago. What you're suggesting is impossible.
  - tankenmate 3y ago
    That's not strictly true; for example new drugs are tested on animals and humans all the time.
    - ironSkillet 3y ago
      Negative effects can manifest themselves over timescales beyond any scientific test.

pulpfictional 3y ago

>well established >falsehoods >nothing to back those statements