• NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 days ago

    It’s still pretty bonkers to know something will kill you if you use it, and we just ignore all the science.

    • snooggums@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      10 days ago

      That would be tobacco.

      Asbestos is not dangerous when it is in a solid form and left alone, which is the vast majority of the use cases. It becomes dangerous when it is damaged, since that lets the fibers into the air. That is why in residential areas we leave it alone, but if it needs to be removed then hazmat type safety equipment is required. We leave it alone, which is the normal use, because removing it is the unsafe situation.

      Asbestos should be banned for anything other than extremely well regulated industrial situations that may need it like any other hazardous material.

      • AmidFuror@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        29
        ·
        10 days ago

        These kinds of nuanced scientific assessments don’t do well with the far left in the Fediverse. They’ll take you to be a shill for Big Someone. One day, we’ll live in a world free of chemicals!

    • bluGill@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      10 days ago

      Water will kill you if you don’t use it with care, but everybody older than a baby uses it despite clear science on how deadly it is.

      The relevant question is can we mitigate risk enough.

      • AmidFuror@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        10 days ago

        Risks and benefits. There are very few severe adverse reactions to vaccines. Yet some will die after receiving one. Do we now allow infectious disease to kill and maim instead? No, we weigh the risks.

        If we can get the same benefit with lower risks, like asbestos replacements, we do that. Still better than dying in a fire, though.

        • HubertManne@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          9 days ago

          yeah exactly what I was getting at. While we did not have good alternatives we kept allowing its use with regulation to make it as safe as possible but then as alternatives became available its usage was increasingly curtailed which is why it took so long to ban. Although just in time since I would not be surprised if todays health agencies recommended adding it to breakfast cereals.

    • Worx@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      9 days ago

      I’m full of microplastics but I keep buying food and drink packaged in plastic _(--)/

      Sometimes there’s just no realistic alternative. As nice as it would be to only buy fresh, unpacked food I don’t have the time, money or energy to deal with that

      EDIT: oh no, the Lemmy markup has ruined my shrugging face :(

      • P00ptart@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 days ago

        You know, there’s a certain amount of gold in everyone’s body, some think of ways that could be harvested after we die, they’re thinking way too small. I’m going for the recyclable plastics!