Science Plastics & Forever Chemicals

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
38,242

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
18,772
It says "some" - which means some studies are well-designed.

Wonder if the critics are paid by the plastics industry, starting to push back like smoking, food, energy, yadda yadda yadda...
Looking at the critics' bona fides (Helmholtz Centre, Vrije Amsterdam etc.) it doesn't look like it, which doesn't mean the plastics industry won't be all over this. But to be honest I'd be amazed if there wasn't this level of challenge at such a relatively early phase in the science; this will go back and forward for a long time before there's any kind of consensus, which is as it should be.
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
38,242
TBH - I think my reaction is probably more based around the way they're reporting. Newspaper reporting of science is always sensationalised.

On the plus side, I've started ramping up my consumption of New Scientist again whilst trying to negate what I think is becoming an unhealthy level of news site doomscrolling.
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
38,242
Interesting:

Current filtration technology like granular activated carbon, reverse osmosis or ion exchange absorbs Pfas in water, and the chemicals caught in the filter must be stored in hazardous waste facilities, or destroyed

I've a 3-stage filter. Nowhere does it say "dispose of as hazardous waste" - everyone will be chucking these in the normal bin.

Why do we allow them to be sold when we haven't sorted our disposal out. Fly tipping, inappropriate disposal. It has to be centralised and paid for by taxation.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom