Awesome. The guys at Dupont, Chemours (a subsidiary of Dupont), and 3M who put this shit into everything despite their own testing in the 70's showing that it accumulated in humans and caused an increase in cancer must be super proud of themselves. They made their CEO's millionaires, and all they had to do was poison everyone they ever knew, loved or cared about (plus everyone else).

Dupont CEO's

Charles B. McCoy (67-73)

Irving S, Shapiro (73-81)

Edward G. Jefferson (81-86)

Richard E. Heckert (86-89)

Edgar S. Woolard Jr. (89-95)

John A. Krol (95-98)

Charles O. Holliday Jr. (98-08)

Ellen J. Kullman (08-15)

Edward D. Breen (15-20)

Marc Doyle (20)

Edward D. Breen (20-Present)

3M CEO's

Bert S. Cross (66-70)

Harry Heltzer (70-75)

Raymond H. Herzog (75-80)

Lewis W. Lehr (80-86)

Allen F. Jacobson (86-91)

Livio DeSimone (91-01)

James McNerney (01-05)

Robert S. Morrison (05)

George W. Buckley (05-12)

Inge Thulin (12-18)

Michael F. Roman (19- present)

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago

Yeah. More people involved need to be seeing jail.

[–] veganpizza69@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Now include the boards and major shareholders.

[–] LimpRimble@lemmy.ca 11 points 4 months ago

The British Columbia government has filed a class-action lawsuit against manufacturers of so-called "forever chemicals" it says are involved in the widespread contamination of drinking water systems.

Attorney General Niki Sharma says the province is the first Canadian jurisdiction to sue makers of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl, known as PFAS chemicals.

B.C. has filed similar class-action lawsuits in the past, targeting tobacco manufacturers in 1998 and opioid makers in 2018 to recover health-care costs associated with those substances.
B.C. launches lawsuit against makers of 'forever chemicals'

[–] smnwcj@fedia.io 9 points 4 months ago

It probably wont happen in the US, but i really hope enough countries crack down on PFAs to have some reliable sources of safe everyday products

[–] moistclump@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

Great interview with investigative journalist about the work she did on uncovering PFAS https://youtu.be/zjjI7dqVvLQ?feature=shared

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee -4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'm not sure that that matters when it's in our food and water.

[–] AncientFutureNow@lemmy.world 15 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Toilet is actively flooding the basement. No need to turn the water off, the basement is already wet.

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Turning the water to the toilet off won't do much when the whole length of the plumbing is split and spewing water throughout the whole house.

We already know PFAS can be absorbed through the skin, but it's so much worse being absorbed internally. We already know how bad that is for us, so it doesn't matter if it's bad or worse, we should try to get exposure to zero regardless.

[–] AncientFutureNow@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

i never said turn off the water at the toilet. You're just looking to argue.

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I don't really understand the analogy, then. Of course we should stop PFAS pollution at the source, that being the chemicals plants producing it. But we should also be addressing all the contamination in our food and water first of all. That's the biggest and most immediate issue.

[–] asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

We should be stopping it wherever we can. It doesn't need to be one before another. Being conscious about where you can get more of it is helpful.

Water - we distill our water, and you can also use other types of filters which remove it. Absorbing through skin - we know we should be wary about what products use it now, so can do some research and be careful about touching stuff.

This is similar to global warming. The biggest issue is large corporations. That doesn't mean consumers shouldn't stop worrying about littering or driving gas cars until corporations stop.

[–] ShrimpCurler@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 months ago

Fixing a leaky tap isn't going to help much during a flood. I don't know the numbers to be making any kind of judgement call and of course every little bit help. But sometimes a small issue really is so insignificant that fixing it has no noticeable impact in the bigger picture.

Often it can even be a great way for companies to look like their doing something to help and distract from the fact that they're the ones causing the bigger problem.