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

U.S. drinking water widely contaminated with 'forever chemicals': report

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 413 posts

Re: U.S. drinking water widely contaminated with 'forever chemicals': report

#301

Post by reportingsjr »

XMPPwocky wrote: post #288
bobthechef wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymer_fume_fever https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polytetrafluoroethylene#Safety

Those articles describe PTFE as "stable and non-toxic at lower temperatures", starting to degrade into concerning and toxic byproducts at 500F/260C. As a rule, I try not to let my rain jacket reach 260C, but your local weather may differ?

PTFE coated pans definitely reach above 500F from time to time.

People who own birds are suggested to not use PTFE coated pans. Birds are much more sensitive to the offgased chemicals and there are numerous instances of people accidentally killing pet birds from these fumes, so it definitely happens.

Re: U.S. drinking water widely contaminated with 'forever chemicals': report

#302

Post by salawat »

rayiner wrote: post #244
shmerl wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't they be made illegal to use?

Because we have no idea whether the benefit from doing so would outweigh the loss of non-stick and stain-free products?

Funny how that didn't seem to be a problem moving to Teflon and such. Kinda sounds like a post-facto rationalization for maintaining the status quo.

Prior to it's synthesis there are centuries of use of stick pans without much issue.

Re: U.S. drinking water widely contaminated with 'forever chemicals': report

#303

Post by [deleted] »

XMPPwocky wrote: post #286
mark-r wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consider what happens to your immune system when it detects a foreign particle that it can't get rid of because there's no way to interact with it.

What happens? I'm not an immunologist, and "common sense" certainly doesn't seem like the way to think about the behavior of something as complex as the human immune system.

[deleted]

Re: U.S. drinking water widely contaminated with 'forever chemicals': report

#304

Post by harryh »

salawat wrote: post #302
rayiner wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because we have no idea whether the benefit from doing so would outweigh the loss of non-stick and stain-free products?

Funny how that didn't seem to be a problem moving to Teflon and such. Kinda sounds like a post-facto rationalization for maintaining the status quo. Prior to it's synthesis there are centuries of use of stick pans without much issue.

We live in a free society.

The burden for passing laws outlawing particular products is supposed to be higher than the burden to bring those products to market in the first place.

Re: U.S. drinking water widely contaminated with 'forever chemicals': report

#305

Post by istorical »

buckminster wrote: post #285
shmerl wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think oil concerns are much less problematic since you can decide what oil to use (or use no oil altogether) than ones that come from the chemicals you can't control because they are already in the water or your frying pan. You can simply cook, not fry if you worry about oil. On the other hand you can't avoid poisoned water unless you filter it. So it's a false argument here.

You can choose to use non-non-stick frying pans.

But if the coating from non-stick pans makes its way down the drain (or down the toilet) and back into the water system of the planet then you really can't.

Re: U.S. drinking water widely contaminated with 'forever chemicals': report

#306

Post by gpm »

logfromblammo wrote: post #204
stamps wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of RO systems come with a sediment filter, carbon filter, and UV as part of the package. Seems about as close as you can get to completely clean water.

Electrolyze water in one vessel. Combust the gases in another vessel, and condense the water vapor. Hilariously inefficient use of energy, but I think the only contaminants you are likely to encounter would be... nitrous oxide (N2O)?

I'd be less worried about the contaminants in the water, and more worried about the contaminants in the air.

As I understand it electrolysis of water converts chloride salts (table salt) to chlorine gas (poisonous), fluoride salts (rarer) to fluoride gas (really poisonous), etc.

Re: U.S. drinking water widely contaminated with 'forever chemicals': report

#307

Post by XMPPwocky »

reportingsjr wrote: post #301
XMPPwocky wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those articles describe PTFE as "stable and non-toxic at lower temperatures", starting to degrade into concerning and toxic byproducts at 500F/260C. As a rule, I try not to let my rain jacket reach 260C, but your local weather may differ?

PTFE coated pans definitely reach above 500F from time to time. People who own birds are suggested to not use PTFE coated pans. Birds are much more sensitive to the offgased chemicals and there are numerous instances of people accidentally killing pet birds from these fumes, so it definitely happens.

Yeah- there are definitely problems with it on pans, but the context of the thread was for PTFE as a water repellent in clothing.

As far as I know, the concerns for uses where high heat isn't an issue are related to manufacturing byproducts- which can make their way into the final product, but also if the manufacturer doesn't dispose of them correctly, they can wind up in the environment.

It's almost a bit like Agent Orange (though probably not nearly as bad, at least not in the medium-term?)- the intended product isn't the problem, but the manufacturing process makes it really easy to let nasty stuff slip in.

But I don't know that much about this, so please correct me if I'm wrong! Not a chemist, I just read a lot.

Re: U.S. drinking water widely contaminated with 'forever chemicals': report

#308

Post by darawk »

kerkeslager wrote: post #235
darawk wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Many people aren't voting at all Choosing not to vote is a vote. > because they're excluded based on felony convictions, inability to meet paperwork requirements for voter IDs, etc. Felony disenfranchisement hardly contradicts my point. And anyway, voter suppression and felony disenfranchisement are at all time lows historically, so my point stands just fine. > Gerrymandering is extremely effective. The electoral c…

> > Many people aren't voting at all > Choosing not to vote is a vote. Ugh, seriously, you didn't even bother to copy/paste the entire sentence? This is not how an intelligent conversation happens. Please don't do this. > Sure. My point isn't that our democracy is perfectly implemented. My point is that its current incarnation is its most democratic yet. Until Obama, candidates were basically selected by the fiat of…

> Ugh, seriously, you didn't even bother to copy/paste the entire sentence? This is not how an intelligent conversation happens. Please don't do this.

I broke the sentence apart by points, and responded to each separately.

> Okay. I'm not sure I agree with your point, but if that's your point, who cares? It's a point without implication: even if things really are better than they ever have been, we still shouldn't stop trying to improve things. "Better than ever before" is still not "good enough".

My point is that if you think "what we need is more democracy" you're going to be very disappointed in the results.

Re: U.S. drinking water widely contaminated with 'forever chemicals': report

#309

Post by [deleted] »

Supermancho wrote: post #299
XMPPwocky wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happens? I'm not an immunologist, and "common sense" certainly doesn't seem like the way to think about the behavior of something as complex as the human immune system.

The human immune system doesn't need to "interact" with a physical particle. White cells envelope (standard attack) a foreign particle, then dies around them, and the resulting envelope is expelled. Your body is mostly fluid. Internal fluids don't really need complex chemical interactions but the dead white blood cell acts as an effective envelope for transport, by design. eg mucus in your nose when you're sick.

[deleted]

Re: U.S. drinking water widely contaminated with 'forever chemicals': report

#310

Post by NeedMoreTea »

troyvit wrote: post #225
nate_meurer wrote: post #214

Meanwhile, these same PFAS chemicals are sprayed liberally onto the surface of clothing that we all wear, and increasingly furniture as well, and this may account for far more human PFAS consumption than drinking water. PFAS chemicals are widely used for waterproofing fabrics. The industry term is DWR -- Durable Water Repellent. The chemicals are sprayed onto the surface and simply left there to rub off on your hands…

Wow I had no idea. Here's a link that talks about makers of outdoor gear and their relationship with DWR. http://www.detox-outdoor.org/ It doesn't look like there is a lot of choice. Maybe I'll just stay wet :)

The whole breathable/gore-tex thing is overrated as they all rely on liberal use of DWR chemicals that tend to be waterproof only for a while. So regular retreatment, which never seems to be as good, or acceptance of wetness is needed. :)

I'm surprised to see Patagonia in the worst of that site's categories, considering their stance on sustainability.

Post reply on HN