Chemical Pollution a Threat Comparable To Climate Change, Scientists Warn (theguardian.com)
(Wednesday August 06, 2025 @05:21PM (msmash)
from the issued-in-public-interest dept.)
- Reference: 0178595694
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/25/08/06/2016214/chemical-pollution-a-threat-comparable-to-climate-change-scientists-warn
- Source link: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/aug/06/chemical-pollution-threat-comparable-climate-change-scientists-warn-novel-entities
Chemical pollution is "a threat to the thriving of humans and nature of a similar order as climate change" but [1]decades behind global heating in terms of public awareness and action , a report has warned. The Guardian:
> The industrial economy has created more than 100 million "novel entities," or chemicals not found in nature, with somewhere between 40,000 and 350,000 in commercial use and production, the report says. But the environmental and human health effects of this widespread contamination of the biosphere are not widely appreciated, in spite of a growing body of evidence linking chemical toxicity with effects ranging from ADHD to infertility to cancer.
>
> "I suppose that's the biggest surprise for some people," Harry Macpherson, senior climate associate at Deep Science Ventures (DSV), which carried out the research, told the Guardian. "Maybe people think that when you walk down the street breathing the air; you drink your water, you eat your food; you use your personal care products, your shampoo, cleaning products for your house, the furniture in your house; a lot of people assume that there's really great knowledge and huge due diligence on the chemical safety of these things. But it really isn't the case."
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/aug/06/chemical-pollution-threat-comparable-climate-change-scientists-warn-novel-entities
> The industrial economy has created more than 100 million "novel entities," or chemicals not found in nature, with somewhere between 40,000 and 350,000 in commercial use and production, the report says. But the environmental and human health effects of this widespread contamination of the biosphere are not widely appreciated, in spite of a growing body of evidence linking chemical toxicity with effects ranging from ADHD to infertility to cancer.
>
> "I suppose that's the biggest surprise for some people," Harry Macpherson, senior climate associate at Deep Science Ventures (DSV), which carried out the research, told the Guardian. "Maybe people think that when you walk down the street breathing the air; you drink your water, you eat your food; you use your personal care products, your shampoo, cleaning products for your house, the furniture in your house; a lot of people assume that there's really great knowledge and huge due diligence on the chemical safety of these things. But it really isn't the case."
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/aug/06/chemical-pollution-threat-comparable-climate-change-scientists-warn-novel-entities
Generally recognized as safe (Score:2)
by caseih ( 160668 )
For decades hundreds of chemicals in our food supply have been declared as "Generally recognized as safe." Originally this applied to substances that have been put in foods for hundreds of years or more, and thus probably were safe. But apparently in recent decades all sorts of chemicals have been simply declared by companies as "generally recognized as safe" arbitrarily, particularly chemicals in the health supplements industry. Interesting article on the subject: [1]https://www.cbsnews.com/news/f... [cbsnews.com]. War
[1] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/fda-chemicals-food-supply/
A threat comparable to climate change you say? (Score:2)
So that means we're all just going to ignore it right? Maybe call somebody woke if they mention it?
Re: (Score:3)
> So that means we're all just going to ignore it right? Maybe call somebody woke if they mention it?
In future related news: The federal government deletes all references to chemistry and chemicals - as well as magic and The Black Arts, as they're just DEI versions of science. Trump threatens Hogwarts with tariffs unless they stop teaching Potions.
Re: (Score:2)
If you mean the toxic hazard potential caused by PFAS, and other such compounds, then yes.
A basic rule of thumb, is that if a thing-- any thing at all, of any kind or nature-- is "USEFUL" or "PROFITABLE", but also has "But it will cause some horrible bad thing to happen if used", it will be used, and used heavily, 100% of the time, until its use is forcibly stopped. (and even then, it will be whined about, A LOT.)
Examples include such noteworthy entries as tetra-ethyl lead, C8/GenX, CFCs in aerosol sprays,