Several researchers are urgently calling for phthalates to be entirely removed from all consumer products due to safety concerns

Researchers from the Grossman School of Medicine at New York University are calling for urgent regulatory action limiting the use of chemicals called phthalates in the production of plastics. The research strikingly estimates up to 100,000 premature deaths in the United States every year could be attributed to phthalate exposure.

Phthalates are chemicals often added to plastics to make them softer and more flexible. They have been used in manufacturing for more than half a century and can be found in thousands of different consumer products.

Read more about how smart we are:
https://newatlas.com/health-wellbeing/exposure-phthalates-chemical-deaths-health-safety/

PermeateFree said:

research strikingly estimates up to 100,000 premature deaths in the United States every year could be attributed to phthalate

did they save any lives

SCIENCE said:

PermeateFree said:

research strikingly estimates up to 100,000 premature deaths in the United States every year could be attributed to phthalate

did they save any lives

Silly boy

PermeateFree said:

SCIENCE said:

PermeateFree said:

research strikingly estimates up to 100,000 premature deaths in the United States every year could be attributed to phthalate

did they save any lives

Silly boy

So You Mean To Tell Us That Plastics Have Done Nothing To Save Lives In The Time We’ve Had Them

SCIENCE said:

PermeateFree said:

SCIENCE said:

did they save any lives

Silly boy

So You Mean To Tell Us That Plastics Have Done Nothing To Save Lives In The Time We’ve Had Them

Speaking out of context again? Silly boy!

PermeateFree said:

SCIENCE said:

PermeateFree said:

Silly boy

So You Mean To Tell Us That Plastics Have Done Nothing To Save Lives In The Time We’ve Had Them

Speaking out of context again? Silly boy!

Apart from repeated decontextualised yob ylliS comments, do you have anything to substantiate that plastics andor plasticisers have ended more lives than they have saved, or out.

SCIENCE said:

PermeateFree said:

SCIENCE said:

So You Mean To Tell Us That Plastics Have Done Nothing To Save Lives In The Time We’ve Had Them

Speaking out of context again? Silly boy!

Apart from repeated decontextualised yob ylliS comments, do you have anything to substantiate that plastics andor plasticisers have ended more lives than they have saved, or out.

Are you trying NOT to be a silly boy?

Perhaps industrialised/advanced societies can’t be built without a number of carcinogenic products in daily use, not all can easily be replaced or perhaps at all.
Risk needs to be minimised however some humans seem to not care as the benign version is more expensive, too hard (but not really)
Some things from the onset though would have been known to be dangerous so its a case of just not giving a shit

Cymek said:

Perhaps industrialised/advanced societies can’t be built without a number of carcinogenic products in daily use, not all can easily be replaced or perhaps at all.
Risk needs to be minimised however some humans seem to not care as the benign version is more expensive, too hard (but not really)
Some things from the onset though would have been known to be dangerous so its a case of just not giving a shit

Apparently there are substitute chemicals and owing to the worldwide nature of these products, why not a mandatory international effort. We did it to combat the hole in the ozone layer.

PermeateFree said:

Cymek said:

Perhaps industrialised/advanced societies can’t be built without a number of carcinogenic products in daily use, not all can easily be replaced or perhaps at all.
Risk needs to be minimised however some humans seem to not care as the benign version is more expensive, too hard (but not really)
Some things from the onset though would have been known to be dangerous so its a case of just not giving a shit

Apparently there are substitute chemicals and owing to the worldwide nature of these products, why not a mandatory international effort. We did it to combat the hole in the ozone layer.

That’s how it should work

Cymek said:

PermeateFree said:

Cymek said:

Perhaps industrialised/advanced societies can’t be built without a number of carcinogenic products in daily use, not all can easily be replaced or perhaps at all.
Risk needs to be minimised however some humans seem to not care as the benign version is more expensive, too hard (but not really)
Some things from the onset though would have been known to be dangerous so its a case of just not giving a shit

Apparently there are substitute chemicals and owing to the worldwide nature of these products, why not a mandatory international effort. We did it to combat the hole in the ozone layer.

That’s how it should work

Except that we have nutjobs everywhere willing to get violent about having everything their way.