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

Plasticlist Report – Data on plastic chemicals in Bay Area foods

plasticlist.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 212 posts

Re: Plasticlist Report – Data on plastic chemicals in Bay Area foods

#191

Post by ThinkBeat »

I guess at some point will know how dangerous to people it is, and how risky it is compared to things that we really know are really bad, but that we are still eating. (for one reason or another).

If it turns out that it is a serious health threat, then pretty much anyone alive today is f*ked. and given the build up of it, will be for quite a while.

But we also have climate change, AI apocalypse, global thermonuclear war, mcDonalds, and all other things at the same time.

And we wont know if whatever it is replaced with, if will be replaced will turn out any better for humanity in the long term.

Re: Plasticlist Report – Data on plastic chemicals in Bay Area foods

#192

Post by glial »

bitmasher9 wrote: post #186
falafels wrote: post #156

So, how about a startup for baby food / prenatals that shows transparent, third party testing for plastic compounds and heavy metals? I'm serious, would love to do this.

I love this idea. I hope to see this type of testing for everyday food as well. Here are some hurtles you might run across * Can you source low plastic baby food, or low plastic food to process into baby food? Seems like large quantities of the food supply are contaminated. * How can you comparatively advertise your low test results compared to the competition without being the victim of lawsuits? Lawsuits from estab…

For your third question -- there are already lots of products on the market in certain stores (Costco, Whole Foods, co-ops) that have third party testing or claims about purity.

Re: Plasticlist Report – Data on plastic chemicals in Bay Area foods

#193

Post by dalanmiller »

SerCe wrote: post #45

I wish similar testing were available in Australia, I'd pay for a subscription to have access to high-quality independent testing of the common foods that are available in the shops. I wonder if enough people care for this to be a viable business model.

Would be nice to put through all the terrible plastic-wrapped produce you find at Coles and Woolies.

Re: Plasticlist Report – Data on plastic chemicals in Bay Area foods

#194

Post by wahern »

MVissers wrote: post #170
thatcat wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

isnt smoked/charred food associated with colon cancer?

Yes. And the last decades we’ve had a new unknown cause of colon cancer increase in young adults. My money is on plastics, but will be hard to prove.

There's growing evidence, especially in the past few years with better studies, that suggests HPV is a significant driver, if not the most significant driver, of the increase in colorectal cancer among younger adults. I suspect it's been a disfavored explanation because of certain implications--implications which should be irrelevant and not even necessarily true, but I digress. The HPV vaccine should in theory be protective[1] so in the next decade or so it might become more clear even in the absence of additional direct investigation. Likewise, we should expect the incidence of oropharyngeal cancers to decrease, which probably not coincidentally has also risen among younger--20-50yo--adults. Notably, the HPV link is more clearly established.

[1] HPV16 and HPV18 being the variants most often identified in HPV-associated colorectal cancers[2], and which are targeted by HPV vaccines as they're the variants primarily responsible for cervical and anal cancers.

[2] See, e.g., https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1479314/ and https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9610003/

Re: Plasticlist Report – Data on plastic chemicals in Bay Area foods

#195

Post by jorvi »

Aurornis wrote: post #115
jorvi wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ben & Jerry’s Cookie Dough has ~25g sugar per 100g. Boba has ~14g per 100g, depending on the type. Coca Cola has ~11g sugar per 100g. In other words, ice cream has 1.8x more sugar content than boba and 2.3x more sugar content of Coca Cola. If you’re concerned about the tapioca, that’s literally just starch. You know what else contains starch? Potatoes and rice.

> In other words, ice cream has 1.8x more sugar content than boba and 2.3x more sugar content of Coca Cola. Most Boba Tea cups I’ve seen are far bigger than the typical ice cream. You can’t use per-100gm doses this way. You have to look at sugar in the product as ordered. People don’t order and eat their food in neat 100gm increments.

Companies vastly differ in serving amounts and some have multiple serve sizes.

What did you expect me to do, bash out a 5x10 multi-company matrix so you can compare perfectly across servings?

Re: Plasticlist Report – Data on plastic chemicals in Bay Area foods

#196

Post by [deleted] »

rsync wrote: post #135
jrmg wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m usually less worried about microplastics than many (human lifespan is at the longest it’s ever been, and people are healthy at older ages than ever - things can’t be that bad overall), but weed eater string is a pet peeve of mine. We’re just spewing nylon microplastics everywhere, and I can’t understand how it’s not at all controversial!

I've spent some time thinking about this and it's a difficult problem for two reasons: First, while we use metal blades on our ranch it's not easy - you need to educate workers on the extra safety issues involved with the blade and you need to be very careful about fire safety due to sparking. There are only a few months where we use the trimmers at all due to fire risk.[1] Second, operators of trimmers don't like th…

[deleted]

Re: Plasticlist Report – Data on plastic chemicals in Bay Area foods

#197

Post by teruakohatu »

rsync wrote: post #135
jrmg wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m usually less worried about microplastics than many (human lifespan is at the longest it’s ever been, and people are healthy at older ages than ever - things can’t be that bad overall), but weed eater string is a pet peeve of mine. We’re just spewing nylon microplastics everywhere, and I can’t understand how it’s not at all controversial!

I've spent some time thinking about this and it's a difficult problem for two reasons: First, while we use metal blades on our ranch it's not easy - you need to educate workers on the extra safety issues involved with the blade and you need to be very careful about fire safety due to sparking. There are only a few months where we use the trimmers at all due to fire risk.[1] Second, operators of trimmers don't like th…

What is your reason for using them over plastic? Just pollution or do you have a lot of woody shrubs?

Google confirms they are available here in New Zealand but I have only ever seen them in American YouTube videos.

Over here, you can’t just dictate tools. Health & Safety regulations and agencies use highly punitive measures to ensure employers do everything possible to avoid employee injury.

Even if you hurt yourself at home you are required to disclose who your employer is if you are claiming universal accident insurance.

I am sure they keep an eye on if employees of a particular organisation are having the same type of accident “at home”.

I think this is probably why they are uncommon.

Re: Plasticlist Report – Data on plastic chemicals in Bay Area foods

#198

Post by [deleted] »

dukeofdoom wrote: post #76

Did they test Wheat. I'm convinced something is up with the Wheat here. I've not seen Europeans gain anywhere near as much weight from eating bread as people do here. From my experience visiting Paris, croissants, butter and pastries pretty common on the menu. But still people are still pretty skinny in comparison. And like Pasta in Italy is a staple. Yet still, lower BMI there.

[deleted]

Re: Plasticlist Report – Data on plastic chemicals in Bay Area foods

#199

Post by OutOfHere »

MichaelZuo wrote: post #182
refurb wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Varies by country. But my comment was more about government inspections and news about violations, not news about food poisoning outbreaks. In the developing country I was in, plenty of food products are never tested, but once you've visited a factory it's clear it would be shutdown in any developed country.

Yeah I know a guy who’s daughter almost died after eating an ice cream cone bought at a roadside stall in Thailand. Had to go to hospital and get her stomach pumped and everything…

Roadside icecream in Asia is quite hazardous. I would in general eat only very hot cooked food (165F or 74C, inside and outside) while in Asia, thereby ensuring the germs are dead. Stick to boiled or sealed bottled water. Despite the food being hot, it can still sometimes contain bacterial toxins or mycotoxins. Avoid salads while outdoors almost anywhere. Also be careful with the choice of fish to avoid any potentially toxic fish, e.g. reef fish.

Re: Plasticlist Report – Data on plastic chemicals in Bay Area foods

#200

Post by PittleyDunkin »

Tagbert wrote: post #183
rtpg wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this based off the tapioca balls? I haven’t considered the health of the balls, but I could see it as being the same as swallowing a bunch of gum.

They are not “gum”. They are mainly starch. They have no nutritional benefit but a do convert a big load of sugars in your blood.

> They have no nutritional benefit but a do convert a big load of sugars in your blood.

That is, like, the definition of nutritional benefit.

Post reply on HN