4 ms·
They commissioned the testing by independent labs. Scroll past the disclaimer. The results should be surprising & they are bad news. One interesting remark, al
by fn-mote 2y ago
They commissioned the testing by independent labs. Scroll past the disclaimer. The results should be surprising & they are bad news.
One interesting remark, although not nearly the most damning item in the article:
> Our expert heading this case believes that HSY deliberately uses uncommon, harder-to-detect PFAS compounds to avoid detection and bans, while the negative health implications of such uncommon substances remain similar.
- AceJohnny2 2y agothat's literally FUD, though: Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt. Without proof, you can't conclude anything about intent.
- ceejayoz 2y agoIf I kick you in the balls repeatedly, you can't prove I wasn't possessed by a demon and am totally innocent of the act. In the real world, we're allowed to draw reasonable conclusions.
- gibolt 2y agoSo, the reasonable interpretation is that people at HSY were possessed by demons? Knowledge like that could streamline the court system /s, if unclear
- unsnap_biceps 2y agoYou can be sure Hershey will throw a supplier to the wolves if they can point a finger and be reasonably sure there's no way to trace the decision back to Hershey.
- Suppafly 2y agoThere is almost certainly no way this is Hershey's fault, they don't make packaging, they just buy it from suppliers.
- Lance_ET_Compte 2y agoTheir "intent" is to make as much money as possible for their shareholders. Nothing else matters; not today, and not in the future.