A new study has looked at the links between microplastics and diseases like Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s in an attempt to understand what we can do to possibly prevent such damage.
You’re missing the point. If asbestos didn’t do any harm, we wouldn’t have had to ban it.
It’s possible that microplastics do not actually do any harm. You must consider this possibility to maintain a sharp and sound mind capable of critical analysis and a healthy scepticism and scrutiny.
Jumping to conclusions that anything unnatural must be harmful like asbestos because some substances like asbestos have harmed us in the past is anti-intellectualism.
The real issue right now is that we do not know if any humans without microplastics in them, making it impossible to gather evidence from a control group population to actually be able to attribute any observed things to microplastics.
We used Asbestos for decades as we couldn’t quantify or prove the risks. Thousands got cancer and died because we waited for more evidence. Even when we had doubts.
The Precautionary Principle exists… “The precautionary principle (or precautionary approach) is a broad epistemological, philosophical and legal approach to innovations with potential for causing harm when extensive scientific knowledge on the matter is lacking. It emphasizes caution, pausing and review before leaping into new innovations that may prove disastrous.”.
Your let’s wait for proof is straight out the playbook of corporate lobbyists. A delay and profit strategy. If anything is unscientific. It’s your, we have no conclusive proof so let’s keep flying to the sun and see what happens. I value health over profit though. I guess that might be where we differ.
Yeah. Asbestos was fine and legal for a while and it worked out alright. Right?
You’re missing the point. If asbestos didn’t do any harm, we wouldn’t have had to ban it.
It’s possible that microplastics do not actually do any harm. You must consider this possibility to maintain a sharp and sound mind capable of critical analysis and a healthy scepticism and scrutiny.
Jumping to conclusions that anything unnatural must be harmful like asbestos because some substances like asbestos have harmed us in the past is anti-intellectualism.
The real issue right now is that we do not know if any humans without microplastics in them, making it impossible to gather evidence from a control group population to actually be able to attribute any observed things to microplastics.
It is you that missed the point.
We used Asbestos for decades as we couldn’t quantify or prove the risks. Thousands got cancer and died because we waited for more evidence. Even when we had doubts.
The Precautionary Principle exists… “The precautionary principle (or precautionary approach) is a broad epistemological, philosophical and legal approach to innovations with potential for causing harm when extensive scientific knowledge on the matter is lacking. It emphasizes caution, pausing and review before leaping into new innovations that may prove disastrous.”.
Your let’s wait for proof is straight out the playbook of corporate lobbyists. A delay and profit strategy. If anything is unscientific. It’s your, we have no conclusive proof so let’s keep flying to the sun and see what happens. I value health over profit though. I guess that might be where we differ.