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

101–110 of 118 posts

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

#101

Post by LargoLasskhyfv »

rjf72 wrote: post #84
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…

There's one general point that has to always be considered in these sort of ideas. Resources are not infinite. Of course you realize this, but I think we who come from the software world can fail to appreciate how severely restricting a problem this actually is. There are 325 million people in the US. Let's imagine a very high participation rate and just exclude infants and some outliers, just so see what would happe…

Don't be so pessimistic. Show some innovative thinking! What about "The Internet of Things" (down there)? Imagine something like these japanese super potties with integrated bidet function. Make it smart with all sorts of sensors which ANALyze urine, stool and for good measure add an anal probe. Couple this with something from Apple like iHealth and call it iShit, connect it to some insurer and everyone's a winner! Almost instant feedback from INPUT to OUTPUT, even the ability to prove how badly something on your daily commute has influenced some level of something because of course you have constant gps-coverage of your whereabouts, like everybody else too? Think Big Data! CACC™ = comfortably autoclaim compensation

/me vanishes whinnying into the off... (sorry, for some reason i really couldn't resist)

edit:spelling/wording/trademarking

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

#102

Post by ridgeguy »

amelius wrote: post #68
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…

That's a nice explanation. But what I don't get is: if the chemical is highly inert that means it doesn't react easily with other substances, so how then can it be carcinogenic?

Even if not reactive in the sense of forming chemical bonds with cellular material, interactions through mechanisms like Van der Walls forces could change 3D shapes of enzymes, altering their reactivity. If those enzymes participate in cellular replication, the effect could be carcinogenic.

Poor car analogy: tossing a ball bearing into the open oil fill cap in your car will probably not cause the ball bearing to bond with the lifters, valve springs & stems, etc. But it will probably damage your engine.

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

#103

Post by ip26 »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #18

I was a military wife for a lot of years. I have very serious health problems. Doctors officially blame that on my genes, which can't be changed, so it's a de facto means to throw their hands in the air and call me unfixable. I think environmental factors are a big part of the problem and that those can be addressed. I lived on a military base for 2.75 years where there was one tap in the house labeled "potable water…

The anti vax channels were not silenced. They just don't make money off you anymore.

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

#104

Post by mirimir »

amelius wrote: post #68
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…

That's a nice explanation. But what I don't get is: if the chemical is highly inert that means it doesn't react easily with other substances, so how then can it be carcinogenic?

Here's a simple example, showing how "doesn't react with" doesn't imply "doesn't interact with": CO poisoning. In the normal course of things, hemoglobin in our blood binds O2 in our lungs, and releases it downstream. But if we breath CO, it also binds to hemoglobin. Very tightly. A lot more tightly than O2 does. So eventually, there's too little free hemoglobin for carrying O2. And we die.

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

#105

Post by mirimir »

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…

Yes. It's not just military bases.

But it's worse, because it's not just PFAS. There are probably 10^5-10^6 chemicals in commercial use. Many of them are persistent. Maybe not "forever chemicals", but persistent enough to be problematic. And we're all carrying them in our fat.

Rather like global climate change, it's just too late.

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

#106

Post by whorleater »

mindslight wrote: post #74
orf wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact it is sitting at [dead] has nothing to do with my comment and the length of her time here on HN bears no relevance to this discussion. I fail to see why you can latch onto that fallacy and try to beat me with it as if it is my fault that her comment has been flagged. If it helps you sleep at night I have vouched for her comment as I don't think it should be flagged. If you would take the time to re-read my o…

> the length of her time here on HN bears no relevance to this discussion It's directly germane to my larger point about the results of eschewing personal standing. > lambaste me for the ills you perceive, which is a bit ironic given the content of your message From your earlier comment: > So yes, we can absolutely be happy they are being demonitized The difference is that you are starting to go on the group-offensiv…

>The original comment did tangentially bring up anti-vax

the literal original comment brought up how demonetization of anti-vaccination youtubers is a "first they came for me" slippery slope, what definition of "tangential" are you operating on?

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

#107

Post by mirimir »

ridgeguy wrote: post #102
amelius wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a nice explanation. But what I don't get is: if the chemical is highly inert that means it doesn't react easily with other substances, so how then can it be carcinogenic?

Even if not reactive in the sense of forming chemical bonds with cellular material, interactions through mechanisms like Van der Walls forces could change 3D shapes of enzymes, altering their reactivity. If those enzymes participate in cellular replication, the effect could be carcinogenic. Poor car analogy: tossing a ball bearing into the open oil fill cap in your car will probably not cause the ball bearing to bond…

Yes, there are many ~inert enzyme inhibitors. And receptor agonists and antagonists.

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

#108

Post by rsync »

poizan42 wrote: post #59
DoreenMichele wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 vaccinati…

"the flu shot is only being recommended for weakened and old people and is not generally something that people get."

This is correct and normal. The influenza shot is for specific populations of immune-compromised people. Normal, healthy children and adults do not need the influenza shot.

The influenza shot has nothing to do with the (ridiculous) anti-vaccine "debate". It does not belong in the same conversation as, for instance, the MMR or whooping cough vaccines, etc.

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

#109

Post by dang »

Para2016 wrote: post #95
DoreenMichele wrote: post #18

I was a military wife for a lot of years. I have very serious health problems. Doctors officially blame that on my genes, which can't be changed, so it's a de facto means to throw their hands in the air and call me unfixable. I think environmental factors are a big part of the problem and that those can be addressed. I lived on a military base for 2.75 years where there was one tap in the house labeled "potable water…

[flagged]

Personal attacks are not allowed on HN. We ban accounts that do this. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and post civilly and substantively, or not at all.

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

#110

Post by apta »

hu3 wrote: post #96
forgotmypw3 wrote: post #54

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...

You're not paranoid in the least. My family always went to great lengths to ensure we never had to drink tap water. Always buying and stocking mineral water from respectable brands. In my generation I'm going a bit further and using filters for shower/tap water. And I plan to test the mineral water brands we consume at least once a year.

> And I plan to test the mineral water brands we consume at least once a year.

How do you conduct these tests out of curiosity?

Post reply on HN