PFAS and Power Lines Cause Cancer?

  • Thread starter Thread starter russ_watters
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cancer Power lines
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the potential health risks associated with PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) and their comparison to historical claims about power lines causing cancer. Participants explore the implications of PFAS in clothing and other products, the mechanisms of exposure, and the broader context of environmental health concerns.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express skepticism about the claims linking PFAS in clothing to cancer, suggesting that the evidence is weak and lacks clear mechanisms of exposure.
  • There is a reference to historical claims about power lines causing cancer, with some participants drawing parallels to current fears surrounding PFAS.
  • A specific study by Dr. Graham Peaslee is mentioned, indicating that PFAS can be released from treated textiles at significant levels, but the implications for human health remain unclear.
  • Concerns are raised about the persistence of PFAS in the environment, with mentions of their detection in remote locations like Antarctica, suggesting widespread contamination.
  • Some participants argue that while fearmongering exists, it does not negate the real scientific concerns regarding harmful substances in the environment.
  • There are discussions about the regulatory landscape in Europe regarding PFAS and other substances of very high concern (SVHC), with references to ongoing webinars and regulatory efforts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the health implications of PFAS or the validity of comparisons to past claims about power lines. Multiple competing views remain regarding the interpretation of the evidence and the nature of the risks involved.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in the current understanding of PFAS exposure mechanisms and the complexity of the regulatory environment surrounding these substances. There is also mention of the need for further research to clarify the health impacts of PFAS.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to environmental scientists, public health professionals, regulatory bodies, and individuals concerned about chemical safety and environmental health issues.

Biology news on Phys.org
  • #32
  • #33
pinball1970 said:
Which part? @Bystander
"Everything" causes cancer/"Oh!My!Gawd!It's!Dip!"**/Global Warming/the latest fad/.... Seventy-some years, chem. degree/geo-chem minor, have somewhat jaded me. **Jessica Rabbit, WFRR.
 
  • #34
pinball1970 said:
You not think that is disrespectful?

Do I post like a sensationalist idiot? If not DON'T reply to me like that.
Not you, the study.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: pinball1970
  • #35
The FDA has announced that there will be no more food wrappers/containers that use PFAS as a grease barrier in the US. These include coated paper products such as fast food wrappers, boxes, and bags.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Laroxe
  • #36
gleem said:
The FDA has announced that there will be no more food wrappers/containers that use PFAS as a grease barrier
I had some arguments with some street food brands for not serving takeaways to my long lasting plastic boxes, only to their fancy disposable almost-paper almost-unusable whatever... o0)

(Here, it was quite common for these kind of restaurants to accept customer-brought containers - but that changed when it became a business to sell 2 cent trash/plastic for half euro each...)
 
  • #37
We have several PFAS threads going here, I wasn't sure which one to place this link. Here is a Veritasium piece on youtube. I think the content is better than the click-baity title. Warning - this one is nearly an hour long. And it has quite a few advertisements.