4 ms·

Can I have the growth please without chemists putting microplastic beads in my toothpaste.

• ethbr1 3y ago
  No. Would you prefer less growth or fewer microplastics?
  • edgyquant 3y ago
    I would prefer you stop equating the two.
  • okeuro49 3y ago
    Is that the same growth that was contingent on lead in paint and CFCs in the atmosphere?
    • ethbr1 3y ago
      Are you saying lead paint doesn't have economic and material advantages over non-lead paint? Hint: it does. https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/why-use-lead-in-paint/3004319.article https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/why-use-lead-in-paint/30... Or CFCs over replacement fluoropolymers? Replacements which, circling back to the OP, may be decomposing into persistent organic chemicals. https://cen.acs.org/environment/persistent-pollutants/CFC-replacements-source-persistent-organic/98/web/2020/05 https://cen.acs.org/environment/persistent-pollutants/CFC-re... Sometimes you get something for free, but more often you're trading something in exchange for it (at minimum, cost). Maybe it's a valid trade-off, maybe not. But ignoring the consequences on both options is an incomplete comparison.
  • NoMoreNicksLeft 3y ago
    Where "less growth" is a euphemism for "horrific die-backs" ?
  • king_magic 3y ago
    I'm entirely fine with far less growth if corporations start being responsible and understand what long-term effect they might have.