• Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    it will label nine of the thousands of PFAS “forever chemicals” as hazardous.

    I see the industry has had a say.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      There is a point that maybe we need to do things a different way. All complaints aside, EPA regulates chemicals one by one: how do you even handle classes of thousands of chemicals?

      • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        I don’t know how the EPA regulates in particular but you can describe PFAS by their definition which uses the common components that give them the properties they have.

      • HeyJoe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Personally I would consider all of them unsafe until they are identified. Pretty sure that’s how pharmaceutical drugs are handled so I’m not sure why it would be different for chemicals we don’t know about. If the process is to slow then it’s obvious the EPA needs a bigger budget and staff to work on this, instead of when Trump tried to cripple it even more than it already is…