[contrarian1234]

So the problem isn't PFAS or Teflon. It's the dumping of intermediary chemicals during manufacturing? This is the part that just comes off as fear mongering

How is the PFOA ending up in food? Is it from contaminated groundwater near the plant? Isn't the solution to not consumer agricultural products from that limited area?

And.. how is it ending up in polar bears?

The video just seems sensationalist. Somme chemical use in a step to make teflon is pretty toxic.. big surprise. But then it's ending up everywhere... somehow? And it's never really explained. But lots of hangwringing

[trymas]

Because it’s “forever chemical”. Factories release it into environment, it never chemically degrades, it gets into drinking, water, into animals and fish. You eat the animals and fish, etc.

Give it couple of decades of these cycles and you get trace amounts of those chemicals everywhere. Even where human may haven’t been.

https://youtu.be/-ht7nOaIkpI

Same as CO2 (and other gasses) affect not only immediate area of the factories and cities, but globally.

[contrarian1234]

You will notice other links in this discussion and suggested in the video - that consumer products are contaminated with these chemicals. As far as I understand these chemicals are supposed to be purely part of the manufacturing process. Is it in products or not..? Or only the non-dangerous long chains are in products? The whole discussion is muddled and unclear - and designed to spark outrage (click and subscribe! and don't forget to check NordVPN)

> Give it couple of decades of these cycles and you get trace amounts of those chemicals everywhere. Even where human may haven’t been

I skeptical this is factory run-off that goes down the rivers, dilutes in the vast gigantic ocean, and then ends up in a polar bear. Maybe that's what's happening.. but they're not dumping gigatons of this stuff and the ocean is infinitely large in volume. You'd have vastly different orders of magnitude for anyone near the river vs at the north pole..

So things aren't adding up. I'm not saying these chemicals aren't a problem. I'm just saying the discussion is disingenuous and just doesn't hold up to basic scrutiny.

[trymas]

> As far as I understand these chemicals are supposed to be purely part of the manufacturing process. Is it in products or not..?

Video clearly states - factories did not care about cleaning it as it was uneconomical. I assume with existing “chemical whack-a-mole” current plant will not care as long as substance is not obviously banned. Secondly, video also states that even if those products are collected - they leach from landfills.

Personally I could bet that trace amounts of chemicals from “manufacturing process” still end up in final product anyways.

> Or only the non-dangerous long chains are in products?

IMHO, we should drop “non-dangerous” as a myth from teflon commercials of the 70s. As also from the video - due to heat you can consume harmful chemicals, even with acute consequences.

PFAS, from my understanding is a group of thousands of chemicals, most of them with no research on harmfulness. Though we know that some of them are directly linked to increasing some cancers or some other illnesses.

> they're not dumping gigatons of this stuff and the ocean is infinitely large in volume.

As per videos - we are talking about ridiculously miniscule amounts. Amounts in terms of couple parts per trillion of PFAS are considered harmful.

There were examples - PFAS is everywhere. Food packaging, hygiene products, tooth floss, fire extinguishers, clothes, kitchen appliances, etc. It’s manufactured all over the globe in multiple factories for seemingly everything.

It gets into the water cycle and trace amounts of PFAS is now found in polar circles and remote mountain tops from rain and snow.

We are exposed to it through water and through the things we use that contains it.

If you look for it in Mariana trench - maybe you won’t find it, but everywhere we do find it and that’s just a fact.

My personal biggest takes are:

- It’s not only c6/c8 that are harmful, there’s GenX and others thar also are and a plethora that haven’t even been tested, and they all are under PFAS umbrella;

- Most of those chemicals accumulate and don’t deteriorate. You get part per quadrillion there, part per trillion there, maybe permille next to a factory or a landfill. Give it 70 years and all animals and humans have >1 ppb of most harmful known PFAS in their blood. When we know that at 30ppb you get double chance of getting kidney cancer (and that’s just one cancer);

- The nature of indestructability is the main problem of cleaning it up. It doesn’t matter if something is “only used in manufacturing process”. It’s already somewhere, in the product, on the packaging, in the water that cleans the factory, in the landfill that collects it;

[contrarian1234]

I think you're engaging in the same hysteria as the video

> It’s already somewhere, in the product, on the packaging, in the water that cleans the factory, in the landfill that collects it

If the chemical is used during manufacturing.. why would it do anywhere outside the factory? Why would it not be infinitely reused? It's just used as part of the way they deposit the harmless teflon

> IMHO, we should drop “non-dangerous” as a myth from teflon commercials of the 70s. As also from the video - due to heat you can consume harmful chemicals, even with acute consequences.

It doesn't say that in the video. They clearly say it's not harmful

> PFAS, from my understanding is a group of thousands of chemicals, most of them with no research on harmfulness

> PFAS is everywhere. Food packaging, hygiene products, tooth floss, fire extinguishers, clothes, kitchen appliances, etc. It’s manufactured all over the globe in multiple factories for seemingly everything.

I think you didn't watch the video. Or maybe you're just hearing what you want to hear. They explain it's from a small handful of factories. It's not explained why it's in floss (if that's even true?). If it's some byproduct, then maybe the solution is not to stop using PFAS, but understanding how to eliminate the contamination from manufacturing byproducts.

They make a clear distinction between substances like teflon and stuff like C8.

> PFAS, from my understanding is a group of thousands of chemicals, most of them with no research on harmfulness

It's clear from the video some are found to be harmful while others are not. Therefore it's absurd to conclude anything about this category. The category doesn't tell you anything about safety. I'm sure an onion has thousands of chemicals "with no research on harmfulness".

The point is the starting point of this conversation is already disingenuous and poorly communicated