I think in the case of PFAS it’s very reasonable. There’s no real harm done in avoiding them except possibly making less money and having to figure out other ways to do certain things - which cannot even be compared to the the potential danger they pose to the whole ecosphere
Well if we have evidence of that sure, but in the case of PTFE for example (which is a PFAS) we don’t have that, so banning it seems just as nonsensical. Yos be banning it because it might be harmful.
I think in the case of PFAS it’s very reasonable. There’s no real harm done in avoiding them except possibly making less money and having to figure out other ways to do certain things - which cannot even be compared to the the potential danger they pose to the whole ecosphere
That kind of thinking applies to any chemical though, surely
Only if they are persistent organic pollutants as well
Well if we have evidence of that sure, but in the case of PTFE for example (which is a PFAS) we don’t have that, so banning it seems just as nonsensical. Yos be banning it because it might be harmful.