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

Cancer-Linked Chemicals Manufactured by 3M Are Turning Up in Drinking Water

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 177 posts

Re: Cancer-Linked Chemicals Manufactured by 3M Are Turning Up in Drinking Water

#51

Post by resters »

It's nice to see the local officials concerned and doing something about the problem, but in many municipalities the local officials are part of the problem.

I think that the mayor of every city should be required to eat a fish caught in the most polluted stream that runs through the city, and state governors should be required to eat a fish caught from the most polluted stream in the state.

To wash it down, each should be required to drink a glass of water from the tap of the area of their jurisdiction with the dirtiest tap water.

This should happen weekly so that the toxins create a real health concern for the officials ingesting them.

We live in a world where most officials allow our natural resources and infrastructure to fail with impunity. This has to change. That we don't see local "watchdog" groups staging these sorts of tastings for television illustrates that the corruption spreads beyond the officials and into the media as well.

Re: Cancer-Linked Chemicals Manufactured by 3M Are Turning Up in Drinking Water

#52

Post by amelius »

BitterSweets wrote: post #2

Is there anywhere in the US that you can live without fear or worry of having contaminated water or air?

What kind of equipment would you need to check your drinking water for any kind of contamination? What would it cost?

Just curious.

Re: Cancer-Linked Chemicals Manufactured by 3M Are Turning Up in Drinking Water

#53

Post by ceejayoz »

rayiner wrote: post #22
dmm wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The absence of specific dangers is not the same as safety, but the former is all that water supply testing can provide.

We test for things that are really dangerous (e. coli, arsenic, heavy metals, etc.). If microplastics were dangerous like those things, it would be pretty obvious by now.

> If microplastics were dangerous like those things, it would be pretty obvious by now.

E. coli, arsenic and heavy metals don't really have the same economic and lobbying power the plastic industry does.

Tobacco and climate change give us better models for how easy it is to suppress or cast doubt on pretty solid evidence if there's a profit to be made in doing so.

Re: Cancer-Linked Chemicals Manufactured by 3M Are Turning Up in Drinking Water

#54

Post by mfoy_ »

resters wrote: post #51

It's nice to see the local officials concerned and doing something about the problem, but in many municipalities the local officials are part of the problem. I think that the mayor of every city should be required to eat a fish caught in the most polluted stream that runs through the city, and state governors should be required to eat a fish caught from the most polluted stream in the state. To wash it down, each sho…

Now that is the definition of putting some skin in the game.

Re: Cancer-Linked Chemicals Manufactured by 3M Are Turning Up in Drinking Water

#55

Post by sigstoat »

alexandercrohde wrote: post #18
andreygrehov wrote: post #9

Curious, is there an easy way to test the water quality at home?

I've looked into this myself. Unfortunately it's not practical. Firstly, there are a number of different chemicals you might test for. Secondly, for chemicals that are dangerous at 1ppb only gas-chemotography / mass-spectrometry can detect that, which would cost upward of $500 per test per chemical and be done at a university lab. Might be more practical to only drink filtered or distilled water. Normal water filters…

> Firstly, there are a number of different chemicals you might test for. Secondly, for chemicals that are dangerous at 1ppb only gas-chemotography / mass-spectrometry can detect that, which would cost upward of $500 per test per chemical

i don't think anyone uses GC/MS to find heavy metals. that would tend to be more of an ICP/MS sort of thing.

$500/compound seems pretty steep for GC/MS work, when it can generally see multiple compounds in the same run (that's the whole point of doing the chromatographic separation).

> be done at a university lab.

plenty of non-universities run GC/MSes, and other fancier instrumentation.

you probably need to look into this a little more, i think you probably stumbled across some places that didn't do the sort of work you want on a regular basis, so they were quoting you rather expensive prices to make you go away.

Re: Cancer-Linked Chemicals Manufactured by 3M Are Turning Up in Drinking Water

#57

Post by ams6110 »

ada1981 wrote: post #30
blacksmith_tb wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that blames the victims a bit too much, it's analogous to "people need to stop buying food in single-use plastics" - I would put the onus on the manufacturers to fix their products and their distribution, rather than the end users. What's the alternative to laundering your clothing, realistically?

Don’t buy synthetics is a start. Vote to pass legislation that taxes synthetics and the money is used for mitigation. Company’s make what consumers want.

Which synthetics? Does that include polyester? Rayon?

Re: Cancer-Linked Chemicals Manufactured by 3M Are Turning Up in Drinking Water

#58

Post by darpa_escapee »

amelius wrote: post #52
BitterSweets wrote: post #2

Is there anywhere in the US that you can live without fear or worry of having contaminated water or air?

What kind of equipment would you need to check your drinking water for any kind of contamination? What would it cost? Just curious.

Depends on what you're looking to detect and what kind of facility you have access to.

A few hundred dollars will get you a lab test for common contaminants, but the cost rises exponentially for anything beyond that.

Re: Cancer-Linked Chemicals Manufactured by 3M Are Turning Up in Drinking Water

#59

Post by sjg007 »

amelius wrote: post #52
BitterSweets wrote: post #2

Is there anywhere in the US that you can live without fear or worry of having contaminated water or air?

What kind of equipment would you need to check your drinking water for any kind of contamination? What would it cost? Just curious.

You can probably take a sample and send it off to an analysis lab. Some things have simple tests but you'd probably want the full spectrum.

Re: Cancer-Linked Chemicals Manufactured by 3M Are Turning Up in Drinking Water

#60

Post by darpa_escapee »

ceejayoz wrote: post #43
rayiner wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm from Bangladesh. I think arsenic in water is something to fear. If this stuff was harmful like arsenic, we would know by now. If it turns a 0.1% chance of cancer into a 0.12% chance of cancer, I think it's a waste of time to worry about it.

> If it turns a 0.1% chance of cancer into a 0.12% chance of cancer, I think it's a waste of time to worry about it. That's 60k cases of cancer in the US. Not worth worrying about on a personal level, perhaps, but on a public policy one?

To put this number into perspective, there are roughly ~30k automobile related fatalities in the US each year.

HN tends to glorify self-driving vehicles because they might put a dent into that statistic. I wonder why that concern doesn't apply to drinking water.

Post reply on HN