Back in my youth, when the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was created, there were genuine concerns about high levels of pollution being dumped into the air and water or buried underground. Reducing pollution is a reasonable and welcome goal.

However, as the water and air got cleaner and better ways of disposing of waste were developed, the bureaucracy continued growing. As the sources of news we receive have evolved, our media is desperate for relevance, clicks, and revenue.

Hence, we are exposed to more scare-reporting and liberty-crushing policies that target materials produced to make life better, easier, and ultimately healthier for humans with few changes . . . all in the name of Science™.

I suspect hot air is being let out of the carbon dioxide scare balloon that has been floated around since former Vice President Al Gore pushed “global warming.” Glaciers that were predicted to be gone by 2020 are still here, and a myriad of other claims about the future because of global warming have proved unfounded, untrue, and quite delusional. As a result, people are becoming more skeptical of such claims.

So now eco-activist bureaucrats and the fear-mongering media have to locate a new target. Their focus is now on PFAS chemicals.

PFAS stands for per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances. The are basically molecules containing carbon, hydrogen, and fluorine in such a way that makes them super-stable and not readily impacted by heat, light, and other environmental conditions. This makes this class of compounds essential in products that most of us enjoy.

Fluoropolymer coatings can be in a variety of products. These include clothing, furniture, adhesives, food packaging, heat-resistant non-stick cooking surfaces, and the insulation of electrical wire.

What appears to be happening is that “environmental scientists” are exposing animals to high levels of these compounds in their experiments, then projecting those findings to trace levels in the environment to which humans can be exposed.

Human health effects from exposure to low environmental levels of PFAS are uncertain.

Studies of laboratory animals given large amounts of PFAS indicate that some PFAS may affect growth and development. In addition, these animal studies indicate PFAS may affect reproduction, thyroid function, the immune system, and injure the liver.

With all of this in mind, it is not surprising that Biden’s EPA is now hitting up the nation’s water supply with new rules related to PFAS chemicals. Eco-activists aim to entirely eliminate theses substances from use.

It is clear that the bureaucrats care little about the costs and hardships they will create because of the ginned-up projects from animal data and their own moral righteousness.

Critics argue the EPA didn’t go far enough because there are more than 15,000 PFAS chemicals, and this standard only regulates six.

“I think that we need to begin addressing PFAS as a whole class of chemicals,” Birnbaum said. “And we need to ask the question, do we really need them?”

The EPA estimates that of the 66,000 public water utility systems impacted by the standard, 6% to 10% may need to act to comply with the regulations. Operators will have three years to test for PFAS pollution, then an additional two years to identify, purchase and install necessary technology to treat contaminated water.

Erik D. Olson, senior strategic director of health at the Natural Resources Defense Council, tells CBS News that the EPA estimates it will cost about $1.5 billion “to treat all this water and to protect people’s health. The benefits, in our view, far outweigh those costs.”

The media is going right along with the assertions, presenting articles that link PFAS to food. I will simply note that the measurements are being given at the limits of detection achievable only because of substantial advancements in analytical technology.

Those who like to indulge in sushi buffets or treat themselves to a lobster dinner should beware – they could be at a higher risk of exposure to toxic ‘forever chemicals.’

While the chemicals are more commonly linked to factories, plastic and even tap water – a new study has warned seafood is also a major source of the cancer-causing toxins.

Dartmouth College researchers tested several types of seafood bought from various sites in New Hampshire for 26 types of PFAS.

Sampling showed that ‘bottom feeders’ like shrimp and lobster contained the highest levels.

Megan Romano, co-author of the Dartmouth study, urged people to consider the risks and benefits when eating seafood in future.

When the media is trying to scare you about something present in the environment in “parts per trillion” levels, please use this image for your serenity and perspective. pic.twitter.com/3z6BGQ1DVu

— Leslie Eastman ☥ (@Mutnodjmet) April 12, 2024

I would also like to point out we are exposed to a wide-array of chemicals that cause cancer or other adverse health effects whenever we eat. Plants wage chemical warfare on us daily.

Broccoli, apples, onions, oranges, strawberries, lemons and mushrooms all contain acetaldehyde, a natural by-product of oxidation and a known human carcinogen. If you close your eyes you can practically taste it.

Nitrates – which can be converted by the human body into carcinogenic nitrosamine compounds – are present in such seemingly inoffensive foods as celery, lettuce, kale and rhubarb. Nitrites, halfway to being nitrosamines already, are found in cured meats. There are carcinogens specific to tap water, basil, beer and mustard. Cancer-causing PCBs are found in varying levels in all foods. It is generally accepted that there is no such thing as a diet free from carcinogens, so there’s no point in worrying about it, although it is unclear how the second part follows from the first.

Humans are designed to endure hardship. Sadly, most of this hardship comes from those who are supposed to be looking out for our best interests.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.