GLP podcast: EPA wrong about ‘forever chemicals’? Heatwaves and drugs don’t mix; Idealistic activism harms public health

The EPA is facing a new crop of lawsuits brought by plaintiffs who say the agency’s new guidance on “forever chemicals” in drinking water do more harm than good. What does the evidence say about the matter? If you take certain medications, summer heatwaves may put you in harms way. Here’s what you need to know to stay cool and healthy during these sweltering months. A former Greenpeace employee says idealistic activist groups actually undermine their own goals by opposing practical technologies that could help us clean up the planet and protect public health.

Podcast:

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Join hosts Dr. Liza Dunn and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 272 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

• How long is forever? Chemical manufacturers challenge what they believe are unscientific attacks on PFAS — what environmental activists call ‘forever chemicals’

Several industries and municipal water utilities are suing the EPA over its new guidance for PFAS chemicals in drinking water. The agency’s extremely stringent recommendations will impose billions of dollars in additional costs to remove trace levels of PFAS (which can’t cause harm) from America’s drinking water. Let’s take a closer look at the evidence to make sense of the situation.

• Mounting heat waves come with more health dangers for those who take anti-depressants, allergy meds and related drugs

Summer brings with it intense heat waves that can pose a greater risk to people on certain medications. Some drugs used to treat high blood pressure, allergies and depression are diuretics; typically, that’s manageable symptom for most patients, though during hot summer days it can lead to dehydration and electrolyte imbalance, which can be deadly in extreme cases. It’s an important reminder of just how dangerous the weather can be if we’re not careful.

• Viewpoint: Why advocating for idealistic activist goals is ‘not necessarily heroic and may not be benign’

Activists who oppose nuclear power, GMOs and other important technologies are often driven by good intentions. The problem is that idealism often drives advocacy groups to undermine their own stated goals. For instance, nuclear power is an entirely carbon-free energy source, yet it has been ferociously attacked by climate activists who see nuclear as way for us to continue consuming large quantities of energy and a potential threat to public safety.

The end result is that we keep emitting massive amounts of C02 into the atmosphere as we rely almost entirely on fossil fuels to power our society. The activists are aware of these trade-offs, so why do they persist in their idealistic campaigning?

Dr. Liza Dunn is a medical toxicologist and the medical affairs lead at Bayer Crop Science. Follow her on X @DrLizaMD

Cameron J. English is the director of bio-sciences at the American Council on Science and Health. Visit his website and follow him on X @camjenglish