I advised people I know not to buy non stick pans for a very long time. It's not an easy task though
Nearly half of the tap water in the US is contaminated with ‘forever chemicals,’
51–60 of 181 posts
Re: Nearly half of the tap water in the US is contaminated with ‘forever chemicals,’
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
Like with many things the goal may be bipartisan, but how to get there will not be Republicans will reject any funding methods that add to the national debt, or taxes businesses Democrats will reject any funding methods the come with strings attached to reduce or pull funding from other programs, or that does not excessively and punitively tax business and "the rich" So with such an impasse nothing will get done
> or that does not excessively and punitively tax business and "the rich" Your bias is showing a bit there.
Pointing out historically demonstrable facts isn't bias.
Re: Nearly half of the tap water in the US is contaminated with ‘forever chemicals,’
#53It's high time for a big awareness campaign for things like this: cleaning up our water should be an immediately funded government project. Needs a interactive map with historical data, sort of like https://app.electricitymaps.com/map does for historic grid energy cleanliness. Surely, clean water—something we all need—should be an apolitical bipartisan issue, right? ...right?
> Surely, clean water—something we all need—should be an apolitical bipartisan issue, right? ...right?
Unless there's a way to get very rich from doing it, it won't get done in the contemporary US.
Re: Nearly half of the tap water in the US is contaminated with ‘forever chemicals,’
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ironically there seems to be no shortage of fluoride conspiracy theories or “waters turning the frogs gay” but actual chemicals and toxins … ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
The chemical is atrazine and it tests it did turn frogs from male to female. We can quibble over whether or not dosage matters but I think it should also be uncontroversial that using a chemical that disrupts hormones like that should not be used on food that we consume.
Is there a website that shows the chemicals and their allowed/disallowed uses by country?
Would love to see the differences.
Re: Nearly half of the tap water in the US is contaminated with ‘forever chemicals,’
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone who was a life-long liberal, but worked their ass off to become a 1%er, I 100% believe that the Democrats are using people like me as scapegoats and it makes me furious. I worked and studied when my classmates or coworkers were partying, made good choices, and now I enjoy a nice life because of it. But now all of a sudden, because I make over $400,000 I "don't pay my fair share of taxes", according to Eliz…
So because some people were mean to you, you just changed all your values about gay marriage, climate change, social welfare, etc? Honestly I actually don't like the "tax the rich to make them pay their fair share" narrative either because it implies that taxes are what pays for the social programs, which is reductive at best (at least with current US monetary theory). I don't make more than $400,000/year [1], but I…
I think the start of your reply is the bad faith they’re calling out — as that’s obviously not what they said.
They simply prioritize their well-being and not being vilified over the social causes you view as $very_important; and I’d suggest that since you bring up issues such as minority rights, you examine why you think they should accept being othered and vilified, when clearly you object to that behavior in other contexts.
Why is that particular example of social abuse something they need to “sit down and shut up” about?
Re: Nearly half of the tap water in the US is contaminated with ‘forever chemicals,’
#56[flagged]
Re: Nearly half of the tap water in the US is contaminated with ‘forever chemicals,’
#57Does anyone have a whole home, or under the sink water filter they'd recommend?
I have an APEC systems RO-90 in my parents home and an APEC RO-hi system in my house. They work fantastic and are easy to install. Brings me peace of mind knowing my drinking water is super clean
Re: Nearly half of the tap water in the US is contaminated with ‘forever chemicals,’
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
> or that does not excessively and punitively tax business and "the rich" Your bias is showing a bit there.
As someone who was a life-long liberal, but worked their ass off to become a 1%er, I 100% believe that the Democrats are using people like me as scapegoats and it makes me furious. I worked and studied when my classmates or coworkers were partying, made good choices, and now I enjoy a nice life because of it. But now all of a sudden, because I make over $400,000 I "don't pay my fair share of taxes", according to Eliz…
$400k/yr is not rich in this country. At best it's upper-middle class. In fact it shouldn't even be tied to income. I have some very wealthy friends, i.e. people that just casually have $80 million cash in a checking account not to mention all their other assets. Which I have no problem with.
Elizabeth Warren is not talking about you. Actual rich people are laughing all the way to the bank at people like you for voting for policies for which they will get 99% of the benefit.
Also, "the Democrats" != Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders
Re: Nearly half of the tap water in the US is contaminated with ‘forever chemicals,’
#59I advised people I know not to buy non stick pans for a very long time. It's not an easy task though
How many years of your life would you give up to save you the trouble of cleaning sticky pans every day?
Asking seriously. I don't know how many I'd give, but it's definitely greater than 0.
Re: Nearly half of the tap water in the US is contaminated with ‘forever chemicals,’
#60And not just the tap water. Eating a fish meal out of the Mississippi in Minnesota (by 3M) will give you a month's worth of PFOS if you were just drinking contaminated tap water. It's a real shame because the Mississippi mercury levels were finally down enough to eat fish.
Do you have a source on that? Asking as a Minnesotan
Based on a quick search, they are probably referring to this study[0] which states “One fish serving can be equivalent to drinking water for a month at 48 ppt PFOS”.
The EWG map of PFAS in fish[1] provides some specific measurements on fish in the Mississippi and Minnesota rivers.
[0] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001393512...
[1] https://www.ewg.org/interactive-maps/pfas_in_US_fish/map/