3 ms·

That does not answer the question

• paulryanrogers 3y ago
  Not directly yet one can say it increases workers' risks by 250%. So if the baseline rate is 1% then they're facing a 2.5% risk, and non-workers who may ingest the stuff indirectly likely somewhere between the baseline and elevated rate. Having witnessed Parkinson's in my family, I'd say that's bad enough to warrant a ban. Especially if there are lower risk alternatives.
  • Dylan16807 3y ago
    The baseline rate is a lot lower than 1% though. The lower the absolute rate is, the less it warrants a ban. I'm not sure where I'd draw the line in particular, but also we need to consider how much can be prevented with mild use of safety equipment.
    • paulryanrogers 3y ago
      Fair point. Perhaps OSHA could step in and EPA or FDA could ensure it's not being used in essessive amounts with random sampling.