141–150 of 186 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
a 500 ml Al can weights 13 grams. life knows if we can skim down its weight if we don't have self openers, the price if we develop a better recycling system etc. if plastics have impact on human health, how many $ we can save for using re-usable glass and metal?
Aluminum cans are lined in plastic.
I am fairly convinced that this comment section is among the best demonstrations for "isolated demands for rigor" I have personally ever seen, especially paired with any comment section about an AI-related article When we are trying to predict the implications of unproven technologies on complex worldwide economies, there is talk of "obvious inevitability" When we express concerns that chemicals humanity recently sta…
> I am fairly convinced that this comment section is among the best demonstrations for "isolated demands for rigor" I have personally ever seen, I’ve found HN and other comment sections to lean in the direction of assuming the worst about microplastics, historically. However, I think we’re all getting tired of the constant “sky is falling” tone around these studies that can’t demonstrate harms outside of extremely na…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We have clear evidence that asbestos and lead are very harmful. I don't think we have that evidence for plastic (yet). Also you totally can start buying plastic free clothes here and now. Just more expensive usually.
Sure we do, just look at the piles of clothing waste around the planet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"were wearing wool, wood and leather and somehow even managed to do something like mountaineering" Serious mountaineering is still done with merino wool.
You obviously have no clue about "serious mountaineering" and what you are talking about in general. Even though I do have a couple of merino wool items, they can be replaced with synthetics quite easily (the only real upside of wool is it is very warm and comfortable to sleep in), and no amount of wool will replace the other 95% of my clothing, which is mostly synthetic. Well, except for down, obviously, which is th…
"the only real upside of wool is it is very warm and comfortable to sleep in"
Because that is a big upside to me.
So thanks for confirming my point and congratulations on defeating your strawmen.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"were wearing wool, wood and leather and somehow even managed to do something like mountaineering" Serious mountaineering is still done with merino wool.
Yes, but our outer layers and bags are all synthetic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact that we can't pin down a strong effect on human health outcomes after decades of exposure should be a relief. We do have in vivo studies, but afaict they don't seem to pan out in human health outcomes.
> The fact that we can't pin down a strong effect on human health outcomes after decades of exposure should be a relief What kind of strong effect are you looking for, immediate death? That fact isn't reassuring to me at all. There's a wide variety of increasingly common health conditions that have an unknown etiology -- ADHD, autism, CFS, IBS, mental illness, obesity, etc. The fact there isn't an immediately obvious…
And the number of people named Killian corresponds well with the rise in incidents related to airbags:
https://tylervigen.com/spurious/correlation/2599_popularity-...
You don't just get to pull random things that are going up (assuming that they're going up, which you haven't actually shown) and blame them on something else that is ostensibly going up. That doesn't suggest anything. Ever. [1]
That is pretty sus, after all. Oh look, I just made MSCI's stock go up:
https://tylervigen.com/spurious/correlation/1639_google-sear...
[1] But hey, waitaminute...violent crime is down since the 1970! Did microplastics do that, or does it only work for bad stuff?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Silica is one of the most common substances on earth — the crust is more than half silica by mass. Pretty much all life can, by necessity, tolerate a good deal of silica exposure. You don't really want to breathe a lot of fine silica dust (or, frankly, any size of glass bits), but actively grinding it into dust that gets airborne is just about the only way it'll cause problems, other than cutting yourself.
So glassware is safer than plastics? I'm not going to get bits of glass in my brain just from drinking soda out of bottles?
Smelling something doesn’t automatically make something dangerous, obviously. It does mean the molecules that were previously part of your plastic soup bowl are now knocking around in the open air.
Glass doesn’t do that at common temperatures. It’s basically inert.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I am fairly convinced that this comment section is among the best demonstrations for "isolated demands for rigor" I have personally ever seen, I’ve found HN and other comment sections to lean in the direction of assuming the worst about microplastics, historically. However, I think we’re all getting tired of the constant “sky is falling” tone around these studies that can’t demonstrate harms outside of extremely na…
I think there's an issue of burden of proof at play. If these microplastics were a drug, they would need to go through an expensive and onerous vetting process that consists of both safety testing and efficacy testing for a particular indication for it to be legal to sell someone if and only if a doctor specifically prescribed it for that person. Even if you believe, as I do, that efficacy testing shouldn't stop peop…
Plastics need be banned from clothing and food.
From clothing? Do you have any idea how prevalent it's become? It is hard/impossible to find clothes without traces of plastic.
I dunno, half of my wardrobe is natural and the stuff that isn't is specific outdoor gear that would just be marginally worse at its' job (heavier, a bit less waterproof).
I feel as if people get a bit stuck on things being optimal or whatever. If my boxer shorts and socks are a bit less elastic, ok, cool, whatever, who cares? If this stuff actually is dangerous it doesn't matter how much better it is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The fact that we can't pin down a strong effect on human health outcomes after decades of exposure should be a relief What kind of strong effect are you looking for, immediate death? That fact isn't reassuring to me at all. There's a wide variety of increasingly common health conditions that have an unknown etiology -- ADHD, autism, CFS, IBS, mental illness, obesity, etc. The fact there isn't an immediately obvious…
> There's a wide variety of increasingly common health conditions that have an unknown etiology -- ADHD, autism, CFS, IBS, mental illness, obesity, etc. And the number of people named Killian corresponds well with the rise in incidents related to airbags: https://tylervigen.com/spurious/correlation/2599_popularity-... You don't just get to pull random things that are going up (assuming that they're going up, which yo…
We also have a long history of introducing new compounds into the environment and then many decades later saying oops, turns out those are toxic. BPA and PFAs recently, to name a few.
Where does that leave us? Who knows. I'm not saying microplastics are responsible for any of those diseases. I'm saying we don't really know what the hell is going on, so some alarm and caution seems appropriate. And, call me crazy, I'd say accidentally coating the planet with a new substance isn't a good thing. There is nothing reassuring about this situation.