Comment by 1970-01-01
3 days ago
I suppose it boils down to freedom of expression. Analog is a type of red plastic does nothing to humans, but can cause cancer if rats eat it. Do we ban it? What if we're actually trying to kill rats in our area?
3 days ago
I suppose it boils down to freedom of expression. Analog is a type of red plastic does nothing to humans, but can cause cancer if rats eat it. Do we ban it? What if we're actually trying to kill rats in our area?
Humans do not eat plastic, this argument doesn't make sense.
I think it's more about overextending risk assessments
Yes, of course. Humans do not directly eat plastic. At least nobody I know chews on plastic plates or cups.
But that does not mean that humans don't eat any plastic. Tiny pieces of plastic gets transferred to the food by contact with plastic containers. Some processes like microwave ovens, radically increase the amount transferred as well. Previously it was thought that these microplastics would just be eliminated from the body through typical waste functions, but evidence is increasingly mounting that The microplastics actually stay in the body long term and destroy cells they come in contact with. Given we have found nontrivial levels of microplastics in all of our vital organs (including testicals!), that's a scary proposition.
A crude analogy might be germs. Humans don't eat germs directly either, but by nature of their size and invisibility to us, we end up consuming plenty of them.
Don't forget about drinking it. Plastic water bottles are insanely profitable. And nobody really knows how many people daily a hot coffee that came from a Keurig pod and went into a styrofoam cup.
Humans constantly consume microplastic. This is a bad faith argument.
Just because an argument is wrong (and in this case gp is very wrong), does not mean it is in bad faith. Arguing in bad faith requires intent. I see no evidence of intent in gp's message. Ironically, if it didn't then one could say that dismissing arguments as bad faith (without evidence) of such is itself a form of bad faith, meaning your dismissal would be in bad faith. However, I see no evidence that you intended to argue in bad faith.
3 replies →