Comment by cyberax

Yes, and that's exactly why I said that such articles are misleading. Without listing the detected levels, these articles are entirely useless.

The quoted study found median concentrations of ~1ng/g of dry samples, so far below any reasonably dangerous levels.

I can very easily fear-monger too: "There's detectable URANIUM in every tested sample of mothers' milk!" And this is true, most of this uranium is from natural dust.

> Meanwhile you're making a nonsense claim about the capabilities of the sort of mass spectrometer used for this sort of study (like you know anything about mass spectrometers)

I worked with mass specs.

> while also ignoring the well established evidence these chemicals are causing harmful effects to human health.

In what quantities? And how do they compare with the detected ones?