Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Toxic ‘Forever Chemicals’ in Drinking Water Leave Military Families Reeling

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 118 posts

Re: Toxic ‘Forever Chemicals’ in Drinking Water Leave Military Families Reeling

#51

Post by refurb »

skh wrote: post #9
Trisell wrote: post #2

Once again we see that government doesn’t have regard for doing the best for its citizens. It’s only regard is doing what is best to keep itself alive.

How do you eplain all the instances of when government has shown regard for doing the best for its citizens? Do you apply the same logic you used here for government on corporations? Instead of focusing on the fact that it was a government agency in this instance let’s focus on the fact that without proper oversight bad things can happen. This is true for corporations, individuals, government agencies, non-profit age…

People like to blame capitalism for creating incentives for bad behavior when in fact the problem is just humans in general. Faced with certain incentives they will make decisions that hurt people even if there is no financial incentive.

Re: Toxic ‘Forever Chemicals’ in Drinking Water Leave Military Families Reeling

#52

Post by yumraj »

JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #7
dade_ wrote: post #3

I'll stick to my distilled water. I still don't understand why they aren't more popular. Here they add a chemical to our tap water that bonds to lead so that there will be less (hopefully no) lead from the lead water pipes/solder/fittings. No thank you.

You can get an undercounter reverse osmosis system for not much more than $100 that would save you a lot of trouble and expense. If you want to get really crazy hook up a deionizing filter after it to get <10 ppm water.

I just searched for RO systems and found it interesting that their storage tank is made of plastic.

I wonder if drinking water stored in that plastic tank is healthier than using one of the on-faucet systems like Pur.

Re: Toxic ‘Forever Chemicals’ in Drinking Water Leave Military Families Reeling

#53

Post by StreamBright »

renholder wrote: post #48

> But the military has said it continued to use firefighting foams containing the compounds because companies have continued to produce them and the E.P.A. doesn’t regulate them. Isn't the point of capitalism that if 'x' company isn't doing 'y', you can take your dollars to company 'zed' and drive the market to the desired result[s]? They make it sound like no one in the history of ever has produced a firefighting fo…

Governments are not subject to capitalism this is exactly the reason we need smaller governments so the damage they can do to society is also smaller.

Re: Toxic ‘Forever Chemicals’ in Drinking Water Leave Military Families Reeling

#54

Post by forgotmypw3 »

People often seem to think I am being unreasonably paranoid for saying that you have to look out for yourself and your family when it comes to exposure to dangerous chemicals, and not just trust the Environmental Pimping Agency (or your local equivalent) to do it for you...

Re: Toxic ‘Forever Chemicals’ in Drinking Water Leave Military Families Reeling

#55

Post by CptFribble »

apo wrote: post #40

Blood testing has emerged as a sticking point. Specifically, a growing movement of veterans and others, united in advocacy groups with names like Fountain Valley Clean Water Coalition and Need Our Water, are asking the military test their blood for the chemicals, hoping to bring results to their doctors or use them in lawsuits. Strange that the article is being so cagey about why this might be the case. Every human b…

Another very interesting long-form article on the C8 thing:

https://highline.huffingtonpost.com/articles/en/welcome-to-b...

Re: Toxic ‘Forever Chemicals’ in Drinking Water Leave Military Families Reeling

#56

Post by dredmorbius »

agumonkey wrote: post #39
caseymarquis wrote: post #10

I wonder if there's a way to democratize inexpensive health testing and see these trends faster? Imagine a world where you're testing your blood/sweat/saliva/vitals daily and semi-anonymously sending the results to be analysed using statistical methods. A doctor can give you a one time use current diagnoses voucher to add into the system for serious diseases. The whole thing is voluntary. There's definitely some dyst…

I so wish states were massive scale testing device machines/manufacturer. ps: a lot of systemic issues are due to lack of information and trust. To exemplify, there was a story about people electricity consumption. Those with a counter in the basement used a lot more than those with the counter near the front door.

Counter? Electricity meter?

Re: Toxic ‘Forever Chemicals’ in Drinking Water Leave Military Families Reeling

#57

Post by thatcat »

yumraj wrote: post #52
JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can get an undercounter reverse osmosis system for not much more than $100 that would save you a lot of trouble and expense. If you want to get really crazy hook up a deionizing filter after it to get <10 ppm water.

I just searched for RO systems and found it interesting that their storage tank is made of plastic. I wonder if drinking water stored in that plastic tank is healthier than using one of the on-faucet systems like Pur.

RO water has to stored in plastic be because it is acidic. Most people don't realize that after you RO filter your water you need to add alkalinity back to it. Also if you get the ppm too low, it will leach nutrients from your body when you drink it. It's not healthy to RO/ deionize water then just drink it without adding some CaCO3 to bring the ppm and pH back to a reasonable level. Some multistage filters do this to some extent, but it really needs to be tested to confirm the levels are acceptable and that the filter system is working as expected. The brief interaction with a polypropylene liner is not a problem at all at room temperature though.

Re: Toxic ‘Forever Chemicals’ in Drinking Water Leave Military Families Reeling

#58

Post by CptFribble »

renholder wrote: post #48

> But the military has said it continued to use firefighting foams containing the compounds because companies have continued to produce them and the E.P.A. doesn’t regulate them. Isn't the point of capitalism that if 'x' company isn't doing 'y', you can take your dollars to company 'zed' and drive the market to the desired result[s]? They make it sound like no one in the history of ever has produced a firefighting fo…

I think this is the big weakness in our current implementation of capitalism/market economy. It's supposed to depend on perfect information about producers and products, but how can the average person know what's in a firefighting foam, and how it will affect them?

Even if you take the government aspect out of it - consider if your bought this foam for your own use. How would anyone know what it would do to them and their family, in time to make an educated decision to avoid poisoning themselves? Are we supposed to all get a degree in chemistry, build a lab in the basement, and analyze every product we bring into our homes?

If no one knows it's poison, or if the only ones who know are the producers, or if the purchaser is separated from whoever gets poisoned (i.e. govt purchasing personnel -> people drinking the water at the bases), then there's no incentive for anyone to make an alternate foam, especially if the most effective/cheapest version is the poisonous one.

A less effective or more expensive foam would be a hard sell when the people buying are not the people getting poisoned.

Without a requirement to verify that a compound is safe for long-term exposure before being sold, this is going to keep happening, no matter who is buying or selling. Unfortunately, you can't say regulation in the USA without getting shouted down as "anti-capitalist" or worse, "socialist."

Re: Toxic ‘Forever Chemicals’ in Drinking Water Leave Military Families Reeling

#59

Post by poizan42 »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #34
jorgesborges wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's a relationship but it's tenuously stated. Anti-vax is in part due to an erosion of trust in our experts and institutions. This case is a prime example. You have people that have been poisoned for decades by their government. It's no surprise to me that a person who can't trust the safety of her own drinking water is reluctant to receive government-sponsored injections.

It's no surprise to me that a person who can't trust the safety of her own drinking water is reluctant to receive government-sponsored injections. I'm not an antivaxxer. I've had my vaccines, though I no longer get annual flu shots and lots of people are very quick to demonize me as an antivaxxer over that detail. it's tenuously stated. I've tried to improve the clarity of that one paragraph in my above remark.

> though I no longer get annual flu shots and lots of people are very quick to demonize me as an antivaxxer over that detail.

I assume you are american? Here on the other side of the pond (I'm in Denmark) the flu shot is only being recommended for weakened and old people and is not generally something that people get.

Translated from https://www.ssi.dk/vaccinationer/influenzavaccination/sporgs...:

> Why is vaccination not recommended for everyone?

> Vaccination against influenza is given for the prevention of serious influenza disease or complications. In younger, healthy adults, vaccination will also prevent disease caused by the specific influenza strains in the vaccine. However, influenza does not pose a serious threat to the health of younger healthy people.

Post reply on HN