2 ms·
Off topic, but you can think of PFAS as micro plastics at the molecular level. We humans can metabolize/excrete the shorter ones (common in food wrappers, cosm
by bethekind 3y ago
Off topic, but you can think of PFAS as micro plastics at the molecular level.
We humans can metabolize/excrete the shorter ones (common in food wrappers, cosmetics, fire fighting foam) over months to years, but the longer ones (mostly banned in the 2010's IIRC) are usually never metabolized and slowly build up in the body and mess things up. Like cancer rates near DuPont GenX factories or fire fighters having higher rates of testicular cancer.
TLDR: PFASes are bad, NZ is doing a good thing. Not sure if we have replacement chemicals for PFAS yet, but I hope so
- Hugsun 3y agoSometimes, we can't have nice things. PFAS seems to be one of those times. There only seem to be application specific replacements, e.g. ceramic pan coatings and glass mouse skates. The properties of PFAS are in a class of their own. All the known replacements are other PFAS.
- danielheath 3y ago“Molecule is extremely durable” and “molecule does not accumulate in the body” are inherently at odds; the design space in which those properties arise lends itself naturally to insidious poisons.
- aplummer 3y agoWouldn’t that describe things like gold? Harmless if both are true?