3 ms·
As a doctor, I find it hard to understand why or how a substance that is generally unreactive could cause health problems in the human body. Generally, the less
by ghufran_syed 2y ago
As a doctor, I find it hard to understand why or how a substance that is generally unreactive could cause health problems in the human body. Generally, the less reactive a substance, the less it causes health problems e.g. helium (sure, if you breathe a “hypoxic mixture” of 100% helium, you die, but thats from lack of oxygen, not the helium itself).
Any biochemists out there who can tell me if I’m missing some important context?
- ragingroosevelt 2y agoIsn't the mechanism by which a bunch of carcinogens work by also non-reactive? Like asbestos is carcinogenic due to size and shape, not chemical composition, right?
- Jimmc414 2y agoI'm not a biochemist, but that unreactive property likely contributes to persistence and bioaccumulation, and like with microplastics, silica, and asbestos, trigger an immune response, cause release of inflammatory cytokines or fibrosis. PFAS can in fact bind to specific proteins in the blood, like albumin as well and other proteins in the liver and kidneys. PFAS molecules have structural similarities to natural hormones, particularly thyroid and allows it to bind to hormone receptors creating agonistic or antagonistic effects.
- NPC82 2y agoIn the EPA review they go over some of the chemistry involved through the research that has been done. For example with serum albumin binding, the predominant mechanism is van der waals forces and hydrogen bonding. https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-05/appendix-final-human-health-toxicity-assessment-pfoa.pdf https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-05/appendix-...
- mharig 2y agoBut it is possible to use e.g. Argon as an anesthetic. See e.g. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3996095/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3996095/