Join the discussion
Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.
- Hacker News
- Want to know the real way to reduce forever chemicals? Donate blood !by Melatonic
- There's an excellent film with, and produced by, Mark Ruffalo ("Avengers"). "Dark Waters" about the environmental lawyer who exposed the whole fowl conspiracy by DuPont Chemicals, 3M, and other industrial chemical companies and the knowingly poisoning of the (American) people for decades (and still continuing). Most recommended !by mentalgear
- Just watch the Veritasium documentary, its full of horrible truths and real information and not dramatised.by alt227
- Just look up "firefighting foam military base". I know someone that had major thyroid issues due to this.by hefner1456
- A team of New York University researchers estimated in 2018 that the costs of just two forever chemicals, PFOA and PFOS — in terms of disease burden, disability and health-care expenses — amounted to as much as $62 billion in a single year. This exceeds the current market value of 3M.by rkagerer
- Seems as good a reason as any to nationalize it, have the shareholders forfeit their chips at a steep loss, and ensure its remnant facilities only produce socially positive, safe products.
- Buckle up, the second Trump administration / Lee Zeldin's EPA approved 5 new PFAS / "forever chemicals" for use as pesticides to be sprayed on crops
https://www.cnn.com/2026/07/10/health/pfas-pesticides-indust...
by clumsysmurf - by aftbit
- They should really consider adding an audio version, even if AI generated.
- It seems you and I now have something in common inside our bodies: PFOS. I've finally found a point of connection between us.
Out of curiosity as to why 3M would insert this commonality into me to help us share a sense of solidarity, I looked up some safety-related research papers. I came across a 3M technical paper by Seacat et al. (2002)[1], which claims that under their experimental conditions, no harmful effects were observed up to a certain dose.
Seeing this perfectly illustrates just how much science and technology are dictated by the institutions they are affiliated with.
by jdw64 - > 2002 research
And from the article: at that point 3M execs had known this class of chemicals was toxic for 3 decades.
by fn-mote - So like with climate change the ones responsible knew for decades but preferred the profit.by croes
- I don't understand it though. These chemicals poison their own families right?by 2OEH8eoCRo0
- And tobacco. And leaded gasoline. And...
We really are one fucked up species. But can evolution even produce anything better? Anything that's not so prone to coordination problems?
https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/
by Sharlin - The Veritasium documentary on this is very informative:by alt227
- Crimes on this scale warrant capital punishment.by chaz6
- Capital punishment should be reserved exclusively for, and as the only, punishment for public corruption and abuse of power.by lokar
- At the very least the people responsible need to be treated like the dangerous psychopaths that they are and be imprisoned for the rest of their lives for the safety of the public. These people don't care about anything except getting more wealth and power for themselves and we have the ability to place limits on the kinds of behaviors that will get them what they want. Right now we're just rewarding them no matter how many people they mass poison or murder.by autoexec
- Imagine if we policed white collar crime anywhere near as much as blue collar crimeby culi
- We can’t even execute heinous murderers effectively. What makes you think this would be any better?by next_xibalba
- Easy, Rambo. How about we start with any punishment.by eli
- Yes, but that'll never happen in the USA, the ultra-wealthy are a protected class under conservative, and sometimes democrat, rule.
Same thing goes for the oil industry and CO2 emissions, which we've known about for 5 decades.
by mike_bob - To what end? The severity of capital punishment barely effects civilian crime numbers.
Instead - and i have spent all of 10 seconds thinking this through - what about we just pay people to snitch on a business/employer if its knowingly doing such things. Perhaps in % of the settlement and/or potential fall out costs.
That'd change behavior as well as catch issues soon enough to prevent them.
by athrowaway3z - > They have developmental effects, immune effects. Thyroid, liver, hormonal systems. Some cause cancer, kidney cancer, obesity. They bind to proteins in your blood, and they change how systems in your bodies work.
Is there any evidence that the amounts found in humans using non stick pans, for example, and not those drinking water downstream from an industrial source of “forever chemicals”, have any of these effects?
by adjejmxbdjdn - > Is there any evidence …
This is frustrating.
At some point you have to admit you’re in denial.
Or do some research yourself and at least post evidence that you think requires a higher amount of PFAS than you believe is reasonable.
Imagine making the same argument about lead. Leaded gasoline was suspected environmental toxin since like the 1920’s (!!). The EPA now says there is no safe minimum level of lead in the blood. Am I going to hear the same argument there?
// rant …
Chemical is known to be an endocrine disruptor. Maybe endocrine isn’t that important.
Chemical is known to cause birth defects. Maybe the levels used in the study are higher than observed in nature.
Chemical is proven to spread everywhere in the food chain. Maybe it’s inert. Well maybe at that level of concentration it’s harmless. Well maybe humans will adapt to its presence.
It’s like talking to someone who thinks the Grand Canyon was formed over 40 days and nights of the Great Flood. No matter what argument you present, it’s not good enough. There’s always a loophole. Maybe rocks used to be softer so they would erode faster, blah blah blah.
by fn-mote - First, what happens to plant workers and surrounding communities matters.
Second, yes, the pans are dangerous if you “abuse” them. By getting them to hot, using a mental utensil, or just using it after it has aged too much.
by lokar - It’s not just from industrial sources. Many flame retardants are “forever chemicals” & are often wantonly dumped by fire departments, Air Force bases, etc.by thuuuomas
- Plus DuPont Chemicals dumped forever chemicals like PFOS directly into swimming lakes, rivers, and the ground where it also ended up in communities ground water.by mentalgear