4 ms·
There is no science connecting Goretex -- even direct skin application of Goretex over long periods of time -- with any harm whatsoever. The shrill nature of t
by hcurtiss 3y ago
There is no science connecting Goretex -- even direct skin application of Goretex over long periods of time -- with any harm whatsoever. The shrill nature of the commentary around PFAS (which by some definitions doesn't even include PTFE) is wild to me.
- shiandow 3y agoWhen it comes to CF bonds I'm more concerned with bioaccumulation than direct skin contact. Besides, polonium-210 is also harmless upon direct skin contact, it's not as if skin-contact is the most dangerous form of exposure.
- colordrops 3y agoYou are talking about GoreTex in the first sentence, then PFAS in general in the next, conflating the two. The EPA has absolutely found harm in humans from PFAS using science [1]. I don't know anything about GoreTex, but I do know they changed their formula to get rid of PFAS, at least for marketing reasons if not out of fear of liability as well, considering they are being sued. [1] https://www.epa.gov/pfas/pfas-explained#:~:text=Scientific%20studies%20have%20shown%20that,%2C%20commercial%2C%20and%20industrial%20products https://www.epa.gov/pfas/pfas-explained#:~:text=Scientific%2....
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]