183
Two states become first in US to ban use of PFAS in firefighters’ protective gear
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2024
183 points (98.9% liked)
News
23296 readers
3452 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I am extremely suspect that they were able to remove the bias for cancer from turnout gear. These guys daily job normalizes breathing in of cancer giving dust. They disproportionately smoke because it lessens the effect of having to work in a burned out area.
I hope they have a good non-cancer giving candidate to replace the PFAs. As long as the new garments underperform the old garments they will find ways to get a hold of the old garments.
Smoking generally exacerbates the harmful effects of smoke exposure. The combination of tobacco smoke and smoke from fires can compound respiratory and cardiovascular issues, making firefighters more vulnerable to diseases.
Yes, but that's counter to the point of why they do it.
It's like a desensitizing thing. It doesn't actually make things easier, just tricks your mind into it.
They do it because of stress.
For career fire departments, smoking ciggarettes doesn't seem more pervasive than other places. Many departments haven't allowed smoking while on duty for quite a long time, and we work 24 to 48 hours per shift.
As to the pfas and cancer, you're right about a lot of what we end up breathing in and smoke we get on our skin from firefighting, but you don't actually need that study done to already know that pfa's cause cancer. That's been covered by other studies outside of firefighting equipment to know that pfas are cancer causing. Further, it's been proving that pfas can be absorbed through the skin, and finally, it's been proven that firefighters have had higher levels of pfas in their bloodstream.
So it's not that firefighters have more cancer and they're just claiming it's because of the pfas. It's that they know pfas cause cancer and that our bunker gear is leeching pfas into our body's.
Yeah. The article uses "linked to" to describe that the chemicals may cause cancer. That's weasel worded and needs to be quantitative. The argument that some departments have started using PFAS-free gear and that proves the chemicals aren't needed is specious as well. You need to quantify the deaths and injuries from gear with and without PFAS.
Counting ladies around the lunch table whose husbands have prostate cancer is not good science.
Unless these chemicals are extremely likely to cause cancer, it is probably the least cancerous thing on our gear. It's usually covered in soot and all kinds of nasty shit. We make a huge effort to keep them out of the cab of the truck, wash them everytime they get used, and we don't just hang out in them because of the carcinogens that get on them from use. Also, a firefighter smoking is not as common as it used to be. Far less than most other fields. Our job requires us to be in great cardiovascular condition and the few smokers get chastised for it. The culture has drifted away from being a smoke eater, we take tons of preventative measures to keep the cancer out of our bodies, but we know it's still likely going to happen.