Health: physical and mental, individual and public.
Discussions, issues, resources, news, everything.
See the pinned post for a long list of other communities dedicated to health or specific diagnoses. The list is continuously updated.
Nothing here shall be taken as medical or any other kind of professional advice.
Commercial advertising is considered spam and not allowed. If you're not sure, contact mods to ask beforehand.
Linked videos without original description context by OP to initiate healthy, constructive discussions will be removed.
Regular rules of lemmy.world apply. Be civil.
I thought this was known for over a decade now. I remember the number being 11 seconds that people normally hold onto receipts for and so almost everyone is exposed
Summary: The old chemical was BPA and they switched to BPS, after BPA was found toxic, and now theres evidence that BPS is toxic but that is more recent. Suspicions extend back years prior but BPS is only getting added to toxiciry lists recently.
That's what I was thinking! Except last time I heard it a decade ago there wasn't any actual evidence and it was only antivax homeschool weirdos talking about it. I'd love to hear from anyone who read the actual study to see if this is real this time. Not about to trust the same people that ran "a glass of wine a day is good for you" at one point. US news doesn't have actual science communicators and their popsci headlines are universally trash
Edit having now read the guardian article: only proved my point. The only thing they cite is the California prop 65 which is absolutely useless as evidence of possible harm. I'm genuinely asking for the real paper or someone who read it here because nothing from OP is of any use and the guardian doesn't cite their sources (which sucks! because it might be genuinely dangerous and I have no idea! I don't want to poison myself but this very well could be bullshit!)
I found a government article from Minnesota from 2014, with sources from then so I’m not sure it was without evidence back then either.
https://www.pca.state.mn.us/business-with-us/bpa-and-bps-in-thermal-paper
https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/p-p2s10-13.pdf
That study from MN references a bunch of sources including one from 2010. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20623271/
So yeah this is old news, really really old news.
Joy... Thank you for your help
Is anything fkn not toxic nowadays?
We really should be at a stage in our industrial development where chemical manufacturers are regulated to test their new chemicals thoroughly before they are granted license to produce them for the public. Absolutely insane that we keep being live test subjects for plastics and chemical companies.
Yes! The all new Nabisco BPA coated BPS tainted leaded chocolate treats! Totally safe!
Instead of companies having to prove their crap is safe, the public has to prove it's harmful. "Everything's fine bro, our stuff is safe." And 20 years later, as the effects are being found out, "We need to study this more, don't want to jump to conclusions!" It's a bad joke and we are all the punchline.
Don’t forget Stage 3
We can’t be punished because it would be too bad for the economy.
Anyone has any info of receipts from other places?
Thermal print receipts are the problem. I suspect it’s just as toxic if the thermal paper is used anywhere else. Free weak estrogen for all!
As a kid my dad would bring us rolls of fax machine paper that was thermal coated like this. Hope we’re ok we never had baby bottles at least though, so we made up our exposure other ways I guess! (BPA is now commonly banned in baby stuff, but definitely wasn’t in the 1980s).
forbidden hrt?