None of this conversation has been about occupational exposure. Check up the thread it's about levels in drinking water
Every child in Australia is likely drinking similar levels of PFAS this is actually explicitly recognized in the 2018 consultation panel so...sure? I guess?
-
-
As for the asbestos argument: do an epidemiology course and get back to me. A single ecological study that concludes "need more research to establish a casual link" does not a fulsome argument makepic.twitter.com/z2XQkhW7Hd
-
We’ll come and visit the 1 firefighter recruit course from Fiskville where 9 out of 14 recruits all had children with severe birth defects, then ask them about your lack of concern. Back to your next groundbreaking, money making thesis.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Bullshit, 70ppt is the current Australian Drinking water guideline. And as an epidemiologist I’d expect more from you, instead I get “likely drinking similar levels.” I’ve actually had the Melbourne drinking independently tested and every sample showed below 70ppt
-
Eh, I'm being glib. Somewhat like certain asbestos cracks
Let's agree to disagree on whether "double the reference range" is a health emergency, because clearly we aren't reading the same evidence - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.