Chemical Pollution a Threat Comparable To Climate Change, Scientists Warn (theguardian.com) 18
Chemical pollution is "a threat to the thriving of humans and nature of a similar order as climate change" but decades behind global heating in terms of public awareness and action, a report has warned. The Guardian: The industrial economy has created more than 100 million "novel entities," or chemicals not found in nature, with somewhere between 40,000 and 350,000 in commercial use and production, the report says. But the environmental and human health effects of this widespread contamination of the biosphere are not widely appreciated, in spite of a growing body of evidence linking chemical toxicity with effects ranging from ADHD to infertility to cancer.
"I suppose that's the biggest surprise for some people," Harry Macpherson, senior climate associate at Deep Science Ventures (DSV), which carried out the research, told the Guardian. "Maybe people think that when you walk down the street breathing the air; you drink your water, you eat your food; you use your personal care products, your shampoo, cleaning products for your house, the furniture in your house; a lot of people assume that there's really great knowledge and huge due diligence on the chemical safety of these things. But it really isn't the case."
"I suppose that's the biggest surprise for some people," Harry Macpherson, senior climate associate at Deep Science Ventures (DSV), which carried out the research, told the Guardian. "Maybe people think that when you walk down the street breathing the air; you drink your water, you eat your food; you use your personal care products, your shampoo, cleaning products for your house, the furniture in your house; a lot of people assume that there's really great knowledge and huge due diligence on the chemical safety of these things. But it really isn't the case."
Big Pharma would like you to know... (Score:1)
Big Pharma would like you to know that this topic is anti-semantic*
*Ashkenazim aren't Semitic...
A threat comparable to climate change you say? (Score:2)
Re:A threat comparable to climate change you say? (Score:5, Funny)
So that means we're all just going to ignore it right? Maybe call somebody woke if they mention it?
In future related news: The federal government deletes all references to chemistry and chemicals - as well as magic and The Black Arts, as they're just DEI versions of science. Trump threatens Hogwarts with tariffs unless they stop teaching Potions.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
If you mean the toxic hazard potential caused by PFAS, and other such compounds, then yes.
A basic rule of thumb, is that if a thing-- any thing at all, of any kind or nature-- is "USEFUL" or "PROFITABLE", but also has "But it will cause some horrible bad thing to happen if used", it will be used, and used heavily, 100% of the time, until its use is forcibly stopped. (and even then, it will be whined about, A LOT.)
Examples include such noteworthy entries as tetra-ethyl lead, C8/GenX, CFCs in aerosol sprays,
Re: (Score:3)
In a related vein the only form of air pollution we will take seriously is 'chemtrails', the others are just co
Generally recognized as safe (Score:2)
For decades hundreds of chemicals in our food supply have been declared as "Generally recognized as safe." Originally this applied to substances that have been put in foods for hundreds of years or more, and thus probably were safe. But apparently in recent decades all sorts of chemicals have been simply declared by companies as "generally recognized as safe" arbitrarily, particularly chemicals in the health supplements industry. Interesting article on the subject: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/f... [cbsnews.com]. War
Re: (Score:1)
But penicillin doesn't cure what she gave me.
A broken heart... :[
If we want to live... (Score:2)
Please compare to something else! (Score:3)
Comparing it to the threat of climate change, immediately makes this risk a political lightning rod, even if it otherwise wouldn't be.
Fearmongering (Score:2)
What is the purpose of "Deep Science Ventures"? They appear to be a marketing company specializing in greenwashing.
This kind of "research" is great at spreading vague worry and disrupting their target markets. Chemicals are bad, mmkay? They have no real evidence, just the naturalistic fallacy in disguise. But is the solution to force-feed every "novel entity" to rats to see if they get sick, even if you just use it to wipe the floor? Of course not. It's to buy the natural products of the "high-quality, de-r
Comparable? Not hardly. (Score:2)
This has always been my point.
Climate change bullshit is sucking all the air out of the room, while fretting over prognostications with error bars off the chart that threaten to - maybe - make the world richest cultures slightly-less-rich in a century is nothing compared to ACTUAL poisons being dumped around the world today.
We need to first stop shitting where we live. I genuinely DGAF about 2 deg C in a century.
THIS is what AI could be for (Score:1)
Instead of taking over artistic endeavors, feeding a bunch of chemical interactions into an AI and have it output its impact as a percentage-based item of what could happen as an initial analysis would be crazy useful in potentially catching things early. I'm sure I've missed something like that, but I'm surprised that isn't a mainstream thing. Hell, even just modeling interactions in the human body to see how chemicals react would be a big but constrained model.