zlacker

[return to "Drinking diet sodas daily during pregnancy linked to autism in male offspring"]
1. dbingh+55[view] [source] 2023-09-30 15:40:06
>>geox+(OP)
We really need to change the regulations around the introduction of new chemical compounds to our environment on a mass scale.

We keep encountering situations like this where a new chemical compound was introduced, becomes ubiquitous in our diets or environments and only later do we find out "Oops, it has serious health or environmental consequences."

It is worth the cost of slower introduction of new materials to take the time to ensure that those materials are safe. We're still paying the cost of introducing lead into our environment in a myriad of subtle ways. We still don't fully understand what the cost of the introduction of microplastics or PFAS is going to be. And regardless of the whether this particular study holds up under replication it is looking increasingly likely that aspartame is not something we should be consuming.

And what's most frustrating is that the people who profited most from these compounds never pay for the damage they cause to generations.

◧◩
2. sokolo+fa[view] [source] 2023-09-30 16:09:21
>>dbingh+55
Lead was introduced into the environment at least as early as the Roman Empire. It’s why we call plumbers plumbers.

How much slower would we have reasonably gone to avoid lead?

◧◩◪
3. colord+kc[view] [source] 2023-09-30 16:20:15
>>sokolo+fa
That's the past. We can make different choices going forward. Not all new chemicals propel civilization forward. Aspartame for instance. And why do we need to "go fast"? Most of the problems we are trying to use technology to solve right now are precisely because because we've gone "too fast".
◧◩◪◨
4. Random+Yc[view] [source] 2023-09-30 16:23:18
>>colord+kc
The position that we are not going fast enough is also not without merit.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. colord+zk[view] [source] 2023-09-30 17:07:26
>>Random+Yc
There's a wide swath of things we could go fast on. It's not monolithic. Fixing problems, yes. Introducing new conveniences, "better living through chemistry", no.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. Random+Tk[view] [source] 2023-09-30 17:09:52
>>colord+zk
New conveniences are nothing bad.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. colord+Ad1[view] [source] 2023-09-30 23:09:37
>>Random+Tk
Easily shown to be wrong with fossil fuels, microplastics, and countless other "advances" that end up harming individuals and society as a whole. More accurate is that some are bad, and some are not. Certainly not "nothing".
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. Random+3q1[view] [source] 2023-10-01 01:21:13
>>colord+Ad1
Not sure that is true. Claiming the overall use of fossil fuels was net negative for humans needs some strong citations, I'd say. Would it be better if the industrial revolution never happened?
[go to top]