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

Asbestosis

diamondgeezer.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 232 posts

Re: Asbestosis

#51

Post by TeMPOraL »

irjustin wrote: post #48
p0w3n3d wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best age for having kids biologically, in terms of health is... Close to 18. I had my first child when I was 27 and I was already very tired in the nights, we agreed with wife that it would have been better to start earlier. Some people have kids when 35-40 and I cannot imagine it at all. I'm too tired right now. Much wiser, but my health would not allow me to stay up nights

Biologically yes... Probably but maturity, stability wise closer to 30-35 seems to be pretty good. At least the going rate amongst my friends

That's an environmental factor, though, specifically a function of our modern life style.

We had our first child at ~30, so we track this trend, too. However, I sometimes think, what if we gave in to the biological trend and[0] had kids at 18-20? If that were the common trend, then... by the time i got 36, my kids would be on their way to starting their own families. I.e. my child-rearing day would've been over, right here, today. As it is, I'm about to turn 37, and am looking forward to some 15 more years of parenting.

No, I really am looking forward to this. But the point is, the life after parenting doesn't sound so appealing anymore, not when it starts at 50 instead of 36.

--

[0] - Subject to the typical rules about age of adulthood, to not overcomplicate this.

Re: Asbestosis

#52

Post by MattRix »

seper8 wrote: post #47
p0w3n3d wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best age for having kids biologically, in terms of health is... Close to 18. I had my first child when I was 27 and I was already very tired in the nights, we agreed with wife that it would have been better to start earlier. Some people have kids when 35-40 and I cannot imagine it at all. I'm too tired right now. Much wiser, but my health would not allow me to stay up nights

Buddy if you're 27 and already describe your life as very tired, there's more going on than pure aging...

I mean yeah, that’s literally what he’s saying: He’s saying he’s very tired because of his children, especially how they keep him up at night.

Re: Asbestosis

#53

Post by jaccola »

KaiserPro wrote: post #5

I know its not fashionable, but things like asbestos is the point of regulation. If you ignore the health effects, asbestos is a fucking brilliant material, strong(if used with a binder) exceptionally fireproof, UV stable and fairly inert. Why _wouldn't_ you use it? To use modern parlance; only melts wouldn't use it, thats who (this message brought to you by your friendly corporate sponsor...) The problem is that it…

Would you buy a product with asbestos in if it wasn't regulated against? (Assuming we removed all similar regulation so the lack of regulation does not its self imply safety.)

Of course you wouldn't.

We have journalists to uncover dangers like this; they are clearly financially incentivised to do so. We have courts to assess damages. We don't need government regulation.

Such a common trope that "the heartless capitalist doesn't care about harming customers so we need the government to save us". Of course the capitalist cares about harming customers, she needs to sell to them (and their competitors product will be much more successful if it is not harmful!).

And, in either case, regulation or free market will only save us if there are viable alternatives. Fossil fuels still kill people, but we don't regulate against it because there is currently no viable alternative.

Re: Asbestosis

#54

Post by CheeseFromLidl »

anovikov wrote: post #26
CheeseFromLidl wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its carcinogenic “modus operandi” is also completely different to anything else. Asbestos is chemically inert, so how does is cause cancer? The tiny crystalline needles puncture cells, sometimes during cell division, and strands of dna will get tangled up and result in messed up genetics.

It's not at all uncommon. Virtually everything that has tiny sharp pieces in it, will work like that. Graphene for instance.

You’re correct. Iirc the blueish smoke from car tires share a similar property.

Re: Asbestosis

#55

Post by p0w3n3d »

seper8 wrote: post #47
p0w3n3d wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best age for having kids biologically, in terms of health is... Close to 18. I had my first child when I was 27 and I was already very tired in the nights, we agreed with wife that it would have been better to start earlier. Some people have kids when 35-40 and I cannot imagine it at all. I'm too tired right now. Much wiser, but my health would not allow me to stay up nights

Buddy if you're 27 and already describe your life as very tired, there's more going on than pure aging...

no I'm almost twice that. I'm saying that if I had children in 40s it would be impossible for me.

Re: Asbestosis

#56

Post by wincy »

One thing I think most Western people don't realize, especially with how terrified we are of asbestos, is that it is still used and being mined today!

Russia still extensively uses Abestos, the name literally comes from the Russian town of Asbest which is known for exporting, you guessed it, asbestos, to countries like China, India, and Brazil. Of course being Russian they also say it's a Western lie that Asbestos causes lung issues. (I shouldn't have to say this but I'm noting this, and not advocating it's true, asbestos is serious business and I wouldn't want to live in a building with it, it's just interesting that BRICS nations still use it).

Re: Asbestosis

#58

Post by jojobas »

Etheryte wrote: post #15
aidos wrote: post #8

It comes up a lot on the diyuk subreddit so they have pinned mega thread about it. I like it to give a little balance to the conversation. https://www.reddit.com/r/DIYUK/comments/133jq4r/the_is_this_...

I don't really think asbestos is something that needs balance to the conversation. It's like radioactive material, you will most likely not even know that you've had too much exposure until your health is already permanently affected. The illness may manifest a considerable time later so you might not even know what it was. It's very easy to unknowingly be exposed when e.g. renovating a house or other similar arrange…

Unlike radiation, there's no safe asbestos exposure, if you're really unlucky a single strand can screw you up. On the other hand, of all people having worked at asbestos facilities with early 20th century approach to PPE only 20% developed mesothelioma and 10% died from it.

Thinking before swinging your drill will get most people safe enough not to worry about it.

Re: Asbestosis

#59

Post by meindnoch »

wincy wrote: post #56

One thing I think most Western people don't realize, especially with how terrified we are of asbestos, is that it is still used and being mined today! Russia still extensively uses Abestos, the name literally comes from the Russian town of Asbest which is known for exporting, you guessed it, asbestos, to countries like China, India, and Brazil. Of course being Russian they also say it's a Western lie that Asbestos ca…

As they say, the main export of Russia is suffering. Both figuratively and literally. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cy3piCUPIkc

Re: Asbestosis

#60

Post by ndsipa_pomu »

Atomic_Torrfisk wrote: post #45
Etheryte wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really think asbestos is something that needs balance to the conversation. It's like radioactive material, you will most likely not even know that you've had too much exposure until your health is already permanently affected. The illness may manifest a considerable time later so you might not even know what it was. It's very easy to unknowingly be exposed when e.g. renovating a house or other similar arrange…

It absolutely does need balance. Many, if not most older pre 1980 houses in (Norway where I live) have some form of Asbestos in some form, e.g. Eternit, window putty, jointing putty, AIB around fireplaces, or textured paint. Usually these materials are fine if left in place, and it is tricky to avoid these materials when looking for housing since older homes make up a large fraction of our housing stock, especially i…

The problem with not taking a "zero tolerance" approach is that the problem isn't going to go away. As you say, the asbestos including materials are often best left untouched rather than being removed by a DIYer which may well release the fibres into the air. However, that's just kicking the can down the road as at some point the house will need renovating or rebuilding and that's when the asbestos fibres will be released.

As always, it ends up cheaper to just chuck dangerous materials into the wider environment rather than dealing with them in a responsible manner. It's a shame that we can't retroactively penalise the builders that used so much asbestos.

Post reply on HN