My girlfriend accidentally told the donation center she went to Mexico, and they banned her from donating for four years.

Apparently you'd only go to Mexico to eat brain tacos and share needles with cows. Surely there's a better way to filter out risky blood.

Bloodletting making a comeback? And having actual benefits this time?

I used to donate blood regularly but now that I'm in Japan they require me to be decently fluent in Japanese to "understand" the risks, despite having done it a bunch of times in other countries (and other medical procedures not requiring Japanese knowledge).

I wonder what it would cost in the US to have a pint of blood taken - I can't donate. Guess I could do it myself...

> we pass the PFAS to others

Is there no way to filter them out of withdrawn blood?

Aren’t we just donating the PFAS to potentially sicker patients?

Do blook banks have a way of filtering out PFAS? Or are we giving each other forever chemicals through blood donations?

Reason #136 for why tech-bros need a blood boy to infuse from daily.

Because the EPA called it the "2010/2015 PFOA Stewardship Program" not the "2010/2015 PFAS Stewardship Program" PFAS != PFOA

I feel like most people hadn’t heard about them until a couple of years ago.

2009 is a generation ago. Asking why a new generation why they might not have petitioned 17 years ago seems like asking where a 21 year old was on 9/11.

As for a better reception, the assumption was RFK Jr. would take it more seriously.

> Why didn’t these folks file this petition sometime during the 12 years since then where it likely would’ve gotten a more favorable reception?

Because then The Uniparty would look bad.

Instead, we can prop up the illusion of democracy and point fingers at "the other side" of good cop / bad cop while elites poison everybody more. We wouldn't want people living too far beyond their working years, after all.

Because the majority of Americans are too stupid and too lazy; they won't bother until the threat is literally killing them.

In drinking water, yes. And the EPA coordinated a "voluntary" phase-out of PFAS in packaging, but it is not enforced.

Is there a limit in food, which is what this petition was about?

Another issue is that sewage sludge and "biosolids", unknowingly containing PFAS, is/was being used as farm fertilizer, causing some farms to have to be written off for food production. I would expect many more farms in the future to be found with PFAS soil levels exceeding what is safe to produce food with. The only way to find out is to test.

Maine listened to farmers and confronted the PFAS crisis - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47509448 - February 2026 (0 comments)

Maine Is a Warning for America's PFAS Future - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40007582 - April 2024 (0 comments)

Toxic Chemical Contaminant PFAS Found on Maine Farms - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20142212 - June 2019 (1 comment)

> The practice of spreading sludge as a soil amendment has been a common practice in Maine and across the nation for decades. Land application of sludge material occurred long before there was knowledge that it may contain PFAS or the health implications of PFAS.

EPA Fact Sheet: Draft Sewage Sludge Risk Assessment for PFOA and PFOS: Information for Farmers - https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2025-01/fact-shee... - January 2025

EPA Basic Information about Biosolids: https://19january2021snapshot.epa.gov/biosolids/basic-inform...

The mobility scooter industry donated a gold plated fork lift truck to the president and its back to business as usual.

Must be rendered immobile by all that beef tallow.

It was always a farce that only incredibly stupid people fell for. I mean, even their most "well meaning" gestures were promoting saturated fat, unpasteurized milk and tallow. Those already are just spectacularly ignorant, destructive recommendations going against every bit of science.

Now add that they've basically abolished the EPA (want to power your new data center with a phalanx of smog spewing generators running on bunker oil? Eh, go nuts!) and legalized some highly cancerous pesticides to be used on food crops.

Trump a few days ago pardoned some people who he claims were "fixing their cars": They were actually running a commercial operation removing emissions systems on diesel heavy equipment (a so-called "delete"), and the impact of "rolling coal" is overwhelming and hugely negative, making a single vehicle pollute more than hundreds. But hey, what's the harm in particulate and NOx, besides lung damage, worker health and reduced lifespans?

This vile, corrupt administration hates Americans and wants to see you all die. There is no other possible interpretation. It is simply astonishing that there is some subset of profoundly gullible and/or unintelligent clowns who still support this busted kleptocracy. What a disgrace.

True. The risk is heavily downplayed, since the health effects manifest in decades and can be blamed on lifestyle factors, while the amounts causing health issues are in the order of parts per trillion.

As a not libertarian, it's pretty simple. Look at Patagonia[1] for how the free market addresses this issue. If people care, markets will cater to them.

[1]https://www.patagonia.com/our-footprint/pfas.html

Yes. But of course "healthier" is describing the health of brain worms. On the bright side, this probably indicates that the reactionaries' pushes to lower the intelligence of the population are reaching a point of diminishing returns, as they've now had to turn to parasites to continue the trend.

Turns out it's easier to make conspiracies than effective policy. Who knew?

I think you mean PFOS and not PFAS, the relationship of cancers and health risks is linked to PFOS, but not PFAS in general at this time. PFOS in consumer-facing products were also majority phased out back in 2015.

You can read the FDA letter itself: https://www.regulations.gov/document/FDA-2023-P-4826-0015

Your comment does not give a correct impression of FDA's position here.

Action levels are correctly described by the article and not by whatever FDA quote you provided, which seems to imply the FDA is required to take action to remove products. Surpassing action levels do not require FDA to remove products from the market.

I can not find it in the FDA list. Is there a newer source?