[HN Gopher] High Levels of Banned PFAS Detected in Hershey's Pac...
___________________________________________________________________
High Levels of Banned PFAS Detected in Hershey's Packaging
Author : nicovank
Score : 80 points
Date : 2024-11-11 21:02 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (grizzlyreports.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (grizzlyreports.com)
| jprete wrote:
| The first thing I saw on the page was a phone-screen-filling
| disclaimer that everything they said was opinion. I didn't read
| any further.
| colordrops wrote:
| It's a news/reporting site, they should all have this. So you
| are discounting one of the few honest news sites for being
| honest.
| chiefalchemist wrote:
| If it's opinion then it's op-ed. That's not news. If they
| were truly honest they would not say they are a news site.
| tern wrote:
| They're probably being extra careful to protect themselves
| from defamation lawsuits. I have _more_ trust in the
| information reading this, because I can assume they 're
| willing to say things that put them at risk of being sued
| by powerful organizations.
| dmoy wrote:
| Not just defamation lawsuits, but also the SEC
| Maarten88 wrote:
| It's very worrying that consumer protection against
| poisoning in the US comes from a for-profit company that
| makes money by short selling companies they found to have
| issues and then covering their back this way against
| lawsuits, which any less aggressive reviewer would face.
| kyleee wrote:
| On the other hand it's great to have them investigating
| all these companies and their widespread misdeeds
| Maarten88 wrote:
| The investigating is great, the problem is who is doing
| it and for what reason.
|
| If the misdeed is done by a non-public or poor company
| there is no money to be made so they would never even
| investigate it. And not accepting a payoff that returns
| more than the short position would be ignoring fiduciary
| responsibility, so some investigations could disappear.
| chiefalchemist wrote:
| You can trust the information. That's a personal choice.
| But that doesn't make it journalism-driven news - in the
| textbook definition sense - for everyone else.
|
| As honest goes: "We are an op-ed oriented information
| sharing site. We do not adhere to normal journalistic
| standard."
| ziddoap wrote:
| 1,200 words of legalese, boiling down to "you can't hold us
| liable for anything we say here" is not "being honest".
| nohuck13 wrote:
| It's also an activist short seller. They make money by
| publishing negative research reports on companies they've
| shorted. It's a valuable service.
|
| The disclaimer amounts to "we're not insider trading and we
| really believe this stuff" many different ways. Insider
| trading is illegal so they are scrupulously careful to stay
| away from MNPI (and want you to know that). Really believing
| this stuff is important because if they turn out to be wrong,
| it's sort of ok to be honestly wrong, it's not okay to be
| knowingly wrong and put out the report anyway to manipulate
| the stock.
|
| And so paragraphs and paragraphs of
|
| >"Reports are based on generally available information, field
| research, inferences and deductions"
|
| We're not insider trading
|
| >"Our opinions are held in good faith, and we have based them
| upon publicly available facts and evidence"
|
| We really believe this stuff, also we're really not insider
| trading.
|
| > "We conducted research and analysis based on public
| information in a manner that any person could have done if
| they had been interested in doing so."
|
| Did we mention we're not insider trading?
| kyleee wrote:
| Well perhaps if these companies didn't all have skeletons
| in their closets, they may be able to avoid the bad press,
| lawsuits, stock prices issues, etc. That is probably the
| best way to avoid all this
| nohuck13 wrote:
| Agree, that's why it's a valuable service to make it hard
| to have skeletons.
| nova22033 wrote:
| Hindenburg published a report about Super Micro and their
| information/analysis turned out to be right.
|
| How is this insider trading? Do they have access to
| material non-public information?
| nohuck13 wrote:
| You seem to think I'm arguing that they are insider
| trading. I'm not arguing that!
| tedunangst wrote:
| It's not a news site.
| fortran77 wrote:
| That's why I flagged it.
| dialup_sounds wrote:
| You can't even click the button to not agree to their terms
| because it's not a button.
| fn-mote wrote:
| They commissioned the testing by independent labs. Scroll past
| the disclaimer. The results should be surprising & they are bad
| news.
|
| One interesting remark, although not nearly the most damning item
| in the article:
|
| > Our expert heading this case believes that HSY deliberately
| uses uncommon, harder-to-detect PFAS compounds to avoid detection
| and bans, while the negative health implications of such uncommon
| substances remain similar.
| AceJohnny2 wrote:
| that's literally FUD, though: Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt.
|
| Without proof, you can't conclude anything about _intent_.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| If I kick you in the balls repeatedly, you can't _prove_ I
| wasn 't possessed by a demon and am totally innocent of the
| act.
|
| In the real world, we're allowed to draw reasonable
| conclusions.
| gibolt wrote:
| So, the reasonable interpretation is that people at HSY
| were possessed by demons? Knowledge like that could
| streamline the court system
|
| /s, if unclear
| unsnap_biceps wrote:
| You can be sure Hershey will throw a supplier to the wolves
| if they can point a finger and be reasonably sure there's no
| way to trace the decision back to Hershey.
| Suppafly wrote:
| There is almost certainly no way this is Hershey's fault,
| they don't make packaging, they just buy it from suppliers.
| nielsbot wrote:
| 1) Could they have known? 2) Are they required to test?
| kyleee wrote:
| Unless they are/were aware of the issue and chose to
| ignore it/cover it up
| Lance_ET_Compte wrote:
| Their "intent" is to make as much money as possible for their
| shareholders. Nothing else matters; not today, and not in the
| future.
| _DeadFred_ wrote:
| PSA: Check your bike lube. I was shocked to find out mine was
| basically just PFAS I'm dumping into my garage/the forest trails.
| I have to think bikers care more than average about nature/where
| they ride, and apparently we don't care all that much.
| mtreis86 wrote:
| Try Boeshield instead, it's wax suspended in solvent.
| l1tany11 wrote:
| There are much newer products than boeshield which have a lot
| higher wax content, preform a lot better, and don't have the
| nasty stuff in them like naphtha.
|
| Silca ss drip, ufo drip, flower power wax are all drip on
| lubes that all test better than boeshield (last longer, less
| chain wear, etc).
|
| Boeshield is only 2.5% wax.
| teaearlgraycold wrote:
| Do you know if Rock "N" Roll has PFAS in it? I don't see
| anything mentioned online.
| giraffe_lady wrote:
| I looked into it a couple years ago and can't find anything.
| I believe it does though.
|
| It doesn't have the consistency (or price) of a ceramic and
| it's not an oil or wax. It's _something_ suspended in a
| volatile liquid. If you spill some it evaporates quickly and
| you can inspect the residue which is the actual lubricant. I
| don 't know what else it would be but PTFE or PFAS.
| colordrops wrote:
| Same with some granite countertop sealer I bought in a spray
| bottle. Had to dig online for a while before I could figure out
| what it's made of, which is almost pure PFAS. Crazy considering
| we prepare foods near it.
| kyleee wrote:
| Wild, thanks for sharing. Any brands or other details you
| uncovered? I'd bet that most/all common products for
| countertop sealing may be implicated?
| amluto wrote:
| A bunch of the lubricants that are FDA approved for
| incidental food contact contain PTFE. It's unclear how
| harmful the teeny tiny particles of PTFE are.
| Centigonal wrote:
| FWIW: TriFlow contains PTFE, which is an exceptionally inert
| PFAS. the process of manufacturing it involves some nasty PFAS
| chemicals which are then dumped into the environment, though.
| Theodores wrote:
| I appreciate your concern, however, as a cyclist, I have a good
| idea of how many oils and solvents I use and it is chicken feed
| compared to what car dependent people use. What next, concern
| about the dust coming from the brake blocks on my bicycle and
| the plastic nanoparticles that come from the tyres?
|
| I use WD-40 on occasion and I think the nudge is needed to not
| breathe that stuff. But again, the aerobic benefits of cycling
| outweigh the problems of breathing WD-40 needed to lube the
| cables every winter or so.
|
| But I like the idea of the American driving his two tonne
| monster vehicle to the trail to then be concerned about a speck
| of PFAS dropping off the bike onto the trail.
|
| There is bike shedding with the original article too. I don't
| eat processed foods including candy bars so those wrappers are
| not something that ever get into my house. However, I see the
| toxins as the refined sugars, variously saturated fats and
| other non-food ingredients in this garbage. Worrying about the
| PFAS chemicals in the wrapper is a bit silly when you regard
| the whole product as toxic.
|
| A similar bit of bike shedding goes on with 'pesticides'
| sprayed on crops. People worry about a bit of glycosphate
| sprayed on their lettuce but overlook the fact that most of
| what they eat is definitely not healthy. They worry about the
| 'pesticides' on the lettuce and ignore the burger, 'cheese' and
| bun, none of which are what the body needs.
| amanaplanacanal wrote:
| This report has already triggered new class action lawsuits.
| kyleee wrote:
| But doesn't look to have affected stock price so far
| javiramos wrote:
| Is there a way to flush my body of PFAS?
| code_biologist wrote:
| Blood donation. Menstruating women get some level of this for
| free. Not much otherwise.
|
| https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8994130/
| ceejayoz wrote:
| You pee it out, too, but slowly.
| JasserInicide wrote:
| Giving blood is also a great way to get rid of heavy metals
| like mercury.
| singleshot_ wrote:
| Thousand dollar idea: plasma donation center where they throw
| the plasma away.
|
| (Ten thousand dollar idea: technology that cleans up the area
| where they dump the plasma).
| nielsbot wrote:
| Why not clean the plasma of PFAS and put it back? Like
| dialysis but for biotoxins. (Actually, would the current
| dialysis process do this?)
| andrewSC wrote:
| Wait. Doesn't this mean you're just giving PFAS to the blood
| recipient?
| bonzini wrote:
| He/she has probably lost some PFAS recently, if in need of
| a transfusion.
| blargey wrote:
| Yes, but their blood/plasma PFA concentration won't change
| at all unless your blood has extremely high PFA
| concentrations.
|
| Even if it did, the average blood/plasma recipient is more
| concerned about "not dying of blood loss" than PFAs.
| ridgeguy wrote:
| Not necessarily. I visit our local medical vampire every 3
| months to drain a pint due to high levels of ferritin
| (hemochromatosis issues). I asked what they do with the
| blood. They destroy it by ashing it. The tech said they do
| this with any blood drawn from someone with a known disease
| state. So if phlebotomy becomes a common treatment for PFAS
| loads, I'd guess the draws would be destroyed. I hope.
| blargey wrote:
| That can dilute what's circulating in your bloodstream, but
| not what's already accumulated in your brain, lungs, liver,
| kidneys, and probably some other organs that weren't studied
| yet.
| Suppafly wrote:
| Does it accumulate in organs, or would it go back into the
| bloodstream eventually?
| superxpro12 wrote:
| So those bloodletting docs from the 1700's were really ahead
| of their time then
| FuriouslyAdrift wrote:
| A, B, or C...
|
| A. Stop production world wide. Start decomposing PFAS in the
| environment (there are some chemical methods). You'll probably
| need a new liver. Wait lots of years.
|
| B. Go to space. Don't come back. You'll probably need a new
| liver. Also wait years.
|
| C. Cremation
|
| This is something we are probably going to be dealing with for
| 10s of generations...
| Eumenes wrote:
| I dont think the consumers of cheap candy products care tbh.
| Hershey and similar tiered chocolate all have emulsifiers like
| polyglycerol polyricinoleate and lecithin. If something is sold
| at a gas station, its bad for you.
| bell-cot wrote:
| No level of "clean lab report" healthiness would convince me
| that the mediocre-at-best tastes and feel-kinda-crappy after-
| effects of cheapo chocolates were worth paying for.
| unsnap_biceps wrote:
| What's wrong with lecithin? It's naturally occurring in eggs.
| j45 wrote:
| Maybe the concern about plastic packaging that seemed to deeply
| resonate with few people, and has some merit to be more broadly
| considered.
| cryptica wrote:
| We haven't come so far from the time of the Romans who drank from
| lead pipes. We're just wrestling with different chemicals and
| different physical, environmental and social effects.
| nielsbot wrote:
| In fact we still have lead pipes. Supposedly the water we pipe
| through them is treated to cause the pipes to be inert.
|
| https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/08/politics/lead-pipes-joe-biden...
| dccoolgai wrote:
| Recently, I've found myself trying to avoid any food that touches
| any plastic mostly for this reason. It's so hard to do - even
| aluminum drink cans are coated with plastic on the inside,
| apparently.
| unsnap_biceps wrote:
| The lining is better for you than the aluminum being directly
| in contact with the acidic beverage, but I totally understand
| your concern.
| sevensor wrote:
| PFAS has made me terribly suspicious of lubricants and
| waterproofing agents, and things that have been
| lubricated/waterproofed. "Compostable" paper food containers
| especially. Can it really be ok to eat bread that doesn't spoil
| on a paper plate that doesn't soak through?
| unsnap_biceps wrote:
| I exclusively purchase wax coated paper plates and cups. They
| generally work just great for picnic stuff, but don't work at
| all for hot stuff like soups/coffee/hot chocolate.
|
| They're at least twice as expensive, but I think it's worth it.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-11-11 23:01 UTC)