Fresh new account demanding that people do "deeper research".
The EPA is slow-walking this to avoid taking any action, and the article is completely accurate. It sounds like you got "tricked" by some grifters and imbeciles who are enriching themselves and making everything much stupider and more dangerous.
This is not isolated. Just a few months ago this admin cancelled Biden restrictions on PFAS in drinking water, fully removing four contaminants from having any limits at all, and giving another two years for drinking water to hit massively relaxed rules for two more.
Trying to find ways to apologize for this kind of hits a point of comedy at some point.
I genuinely do not understand what this person believes is happening here. The Guardian is part of some mass-conspiracy to attack the FDA in order to...achieve what? Prevent unnecessary and potentially harmful chemicals from being introduced into the food supply? What sort of mindset must you have to believe this is a bad thing?
No one benefits from PFAS being unregulated in food, other than stockholders, C-suites and the politicians who accept money from lobbyists that represent them.
Some random group files a petition, and the FDA should be sworn to follow whatever it says? That's nonsensical. The FDA is already working on this as per the link I sent. They already agree that PFAS in food would be bad and they are looking into it. Don't you think they should do studies to understand the scope of the problem, or should they just shoot first and ask questions later? The latter would be anti-science.
You guys are legit crazy. I post a comment that you disagree with and somehow you're thinking I'm part of some astroturfing conspiracy? And then my comments get flagged?
@dang you need to do something about how easy it is to flag and silence respectful comments that hive-minded HN readers ideologically disagree with, just because agreeing with it has a dotted line to support Trump. It's truly deranging for people to think that any opinion that agrees with something the government is doing is morally wrong. It's turning HN into a hyper-political echo chamber with no ability of diversity of thought and it's only gotten more intense in the last few years.
No, friend, I was pointing out that this criminal kleptocracy administration of pathetic self-dealing imbeciles is so indefensible that even its biggest supporters -- I mean, imagine still being gullible enough to think these clowns are on your side -- resort to these sorts of anonymous sneak attack comments. Hence the fresh new account to drop a little FUD.
And I mean, in isolation it might work. Sure, they're "studying the data" and making a concrete plan. Only in the face of the enormous environmental damage they're doing -- gestures broadly at everything -- it rings a bit untrue, and the most cynical takes need to get the most weighting. At this point it's clear it's all criminal delay tactics, almost certainly because the right bribes were paid.
Fresh new account demanding that people do "deeper research".
The EPA is slow-walking this to avoid taking any action, and the article is completely accurate. It sounds like you got "tricked" by some grifters and imbeciles who are enriching themselves and making everything much stupider and more dangerous.
This is not isolated. Just a few months ago this admin cancelled Biden restrictions on PFAS in drinking water, fully removing four contaminants from having any limits at all, and giving another two years for drinking water to hit massively relaxed rules for two more.
Trying to find ways to apologize for this kind of hits a point of comedy at some point.
I genuinely do not understand what this person believes is happening here. The Guardian is part of some mass-conspiracy to attack the FDA in order to...achieve what? Prevent unnecessary and potentially harmful chemicals from being introduced into the food supply? What sort of mindset must you have to believe this is a bad thing?
No one benefits from PFAS being unregulated in food, other than stockholders, C-suites and the politicians who accept money from lobbyists that represent them.
Some random group files a petition, and the FDA should be sworn to follow whatever it says? That's nonsensical. The FDA is already working on this as per the link I sent. They already agree that PFAS in food would be bad and they are looking into it. Don't you think they should do studies to understand the scope of the problem, or should they just shoot first and ask questions later? The latter would be anti-science.
You guys are legit crazy. I post a comment that you disagree with and somehow you're thinking I'm part of some astroturfing conspiracy? And then my comments get flagged?
@dang you need to do something about how easy it is to flag and silence respectful comments that hive-minded HN readers ideologically disagree with, just because agreeing with it has a dotted line to support Trump. It's truly deranging for people to think that any opinion that agrees with something the government is doing is morally wrong. It's turning HN into a hyper-political echo chamber with no ability of diversity of thought and it's only gotten more intense in the last few years.
Astroturfing conspiracy? What a weird comment.
No, friend, I was pointing out that this criminal kleptocracy administration of pathetic self-dealing imbeciles is so indefensible that even its biggest supporters -- I mean, imagine still being gullible enough to think these clowns are on your side -- resort to these sorts of anonymous sneak attack comments. Hence the fresh new account to drop a little FUD.
And I mean, in isolation it might work. Sure, they're "studying the data" and making a concrete plan. Only in the face of the enormous environmental damage they're doing -- gestures broadly at everything -- it rings a bit untrue, and the most cynical takes need to get the most weighting. At this point it's clear it's all criminal delay tactics, almost certainly because the right bribes were paid.