reply on: Children Are Getting Sick, Dying in Huge Numbers Due to Chemicals and Plastics \ stacker news ~HealthAndFitness

pull down to refresh

0 sats \ 9 replies \ @Undisciplined 14 Jan \ on: Children Are Getting Sick, Dying in Huge Numbers Due to Chemicals and Plastics HealthAndFitness

From the article

The data the researchers point to, encapsulating the past 50 to 75 years, is alarming. Childhood cancer rates have increased by 35 percent. One in 36 children are now diagnosed with autism. The number of children with asthma has tripled, while obesity has quadrupled. And for boys, the rate of birth defects in the reproductive organs has doubled.

23 sats \ 1 reply \ @Cje95 14 Jan

The one thing I would say is a hard metric to use is autism. Now that we have it on a spectrum and we know so much about it we are able to diagnosis people. Same with ADHD we used to chalk it up to different things.

The improvement in medical tech cuts both ways in that it can inflate numbers that otherwise wouldn’t be as high if we used the diagnostic ways of 100 years ago.

That being said microplastics are a huge huge issue that we won’t know the true result of for decades. Same with PFAS, seed oils, and numerous medications. It’s tough we got stuff we know that works or brings food to the masses but it’s going to have a cost we don’t fully comprehend yet.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 14 Jan

As Thomas Sowell says "There are no solutions. There are only tradeoffs."

I'm sure you're right about increased diagnoses (as in, I know for a fact that's true), but I'm very skeptical that it explains the orders of magnitude increases. The other part is that we aren't just talking about marginal cases. The rise of serious cases that would definitely have been recorded as something is very large.

The bottom line is that we are clearly sicker than we used to be, despite having come up with many cures and treatments for the illnesses that used to plague us.

25 sats \ 6 replies \ @south_korea_ln 14 Jan

Combatting this will require nothing short of a herculean effort, but some of the most consequential changes that the scientists call for can be accomplished with existing institutions, though it will require both government and manufacturers to take more responsibility.

In a libertarian mindset, is there a way to achieve a paradigm shift without government intervention and regulations? Manufacturers don't have financial incentive to do so, no?

EDIT: or is it a matter of personal responsibility? What if I want to make a change for myself, but I simply can't because I will ingest microplastics, even if I try not to? Or have we reached a point of no return and fatalism is the only option? Government intervention won't achieve any meaningful difference?

0 sats \ 5 replies \ @Undisciplined 14 Jan

The short answer is product/professional liability and consumer sovereignty.

The long answer is very long.

24 sats \ 4 replies \ @south_korea_ln 14 Jan

The long answer is very long.

Ok, let's keep it at that for now :)

product/professional liability and consumer sovereignty

I'll look up these keywords, I'm sure other people have already written at length about this.

514 sats \ 3 replies \ @Undisciplined 14 Jan

Basically, we need to be able to sue manufacturers for selling poison without disclosing it and doctors or pharmacists for recommending products without fully disclosing the harms. At present, at least in the US, they can all hide behind FDA approval.

Consumer sovereignty just means that people have to bear responsibility for what they're buying. No one makes you buy products with seed oils, for instance, and companies wouldn't use them if consumers stopped buying.

33 sats \ 2 replies \ @south_korea_ln 14 Jan

Thanks!

I also asked ChatGPT to give me a potential long answer. Here is the link: https://chatgpt.com/share/6785b34a-b208-8003-bbff-4d2e2767a8d2. I am not sure how accurate it is, but it seems to align with what you just wrote above.

So final question, in your opinion and mindset, what is the best way the enforce the laws?

Consumers and manufacturers agree on a specific private court to go for arbitration in case the manufacturer does not fulfill their promises?

Or a minimalistic form of government for essential functions, to enforce property rights and handle cases of fraud or harm?

Asking these questions was triggered by a question posed here: #849181

Thanks!

149 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined 14 Jan

This is so far from where we currently are that I don't pretend to know what it would look like in a free society.

That said, my best guess is that private insurers will assume a large role in society. They would be the institution with the power and incentive to take on these other large economic actors. So, my expectation is that insurers would sue manufacturers for the damages incurred by their clients and that those cases would be resolved through mutually agreed upon arbitrators.

33 sats \ 0 replies \ @south_korea_ln 14 Jan

Got it. Thanks for the answers.