Forums

ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.

Ban Plastic Bottles?!

Posted Oct 13, '10 at 7:18pm

Joe96

Joe96

2,306 posts

Maybe bottles made out of something else.
I just don't know what else they would, though.

 

Posted Jun 22, '14 at 10:17am

MattEmAngel

MattEmAngel

6,369 posts

Ban plastic bottles? The bottled water industry generates a substantial profit, and, considering how far the U.S. is in debt, we need all the money we can get through taxing industries. Imagine how many people would be out of jobs if we banned them and how much money we would lose! They're a huge part of income, so, regardless of health hazards, we need to keep making them. Plus, it would be nearly impossible, since so many people use them and buy them daily.

Sounds ridiculous, right? Who cares about death and backlash as long as we're making money? Apparently not the government, considering how much they profit off tobacco and alcohol, both of which are far more deadly and cause an insane number of deaths per year. "But Matt, smoking and drinking is restricted, while anyone can buy bottled water." Compare the number of deaths and rates of cancer (or any Heath issues) each one causes per year. Regardless of the age difference, tobacco kills many, MANY more people.

I'm sick of people arguing to ban things from the country due to health issues. You want to decrease the numbers, ban something that kills over ]400,000 people annually in the US alone, as compared to bottled water, which "can cause death in large doses" and has no actual records of death, besides a 12-year-old in Dubai who drank it for 16 months out of the same bottle. Don't bother arguing against the difficulty of doing so or the backlash it would cause. Tobacco is the "elephant in the room," and banning stupid stuff that has at least some health benefits (water is necessary for survival, after all) barely scratches the surface of American health.


last edited Jun 22 2014 10:21 am by MattEmAngel
 

Posted Jun 30, '14 at 5:22am

Kennethhartanto

Kennethhartanto

248 posts

both of you are necroing a very old thread aren't you?

anyway, in my opinion, unless you can literally test out a plastic bottle's contents using laboratory equipments, you cannot say that the said plastic bottle is made from something that will kill you over time like tobacco. because the ones testing it could be either influenced or worked for the water industry.

Also, the girl in Dubai died after drinking the same bottle for 16 months, but this is NOT a planned experiment with all the variables controlled. what if the girl died after ingesting other nonsense which is not from the plastic bottle or could be from other sources beside the plastic bottle? they didn't released the "experiment" or "inquiry" journal that would show without any reasonable doubt that the girl ACTUALLY died from drinking from the same bottle.

------------------------

Now I'm also necroing. Goodness

 

Posted Jun 30, '14 at 2:00pm

EmperorPalpatine

EmperorPalpatine

9,438 posts

both of you are necroing a very old thread aren't you?

Generally it doesn't matter as long as it's brought back with a few decent posts of relevant discussion.

as compared to bottled water, which "can cause death in large doses"

The article said
"Antimony, which is found in PET plastic bottles, in small doses can cause dizziness and depression; in larger doses it can cause nausea, vomiting and death."
Depending on the chemical structure of the plastic, the statement could be as useless as "Hydrogen, which is found in water, is highly flammable."

I seriously doubt the Dubai story. I can't find a reliable source on it, so there are currently a lot of holes. The claim is that the bottle was deadly due to cancer-causing chemicals. Did she even die of cancer? If so, what kind? Are there other potential causes? Even if it's all true and the bottle was the direct cause, it still seems like an "at your own risk" product that isn't harming non-users.

I'm sick of people arguing to ban things from the country due to health issues. You want to decrease the numbers, ban [tobacco]

The argument that other things are worse seems like a red herring. A statistical comparison is fine, but don't claim that "x is worse than y, so we should focus on x and ignore y." That goes beyond the scope of the topic.
 

Posted Jun 30, '14 at 3:01pm

HahiHa

HahiHa

5,261 posts

Knight

Depending on the chemical structure of the plastic, the statement could be as useless as "Hydrogen, which is found in water, is highly flammable."

Plastic microparticles does enter the water in the bottle over time, which is why some say you shouldn't use a plastic bottle too often (or not even twice). Also, heat accelerates the effect, so you shouldn't let it stay in the sun too long, for example. But PET is likely one of the least dangerous plastic types, so the effect might be negligible for "normal" use.

I would be in favour of, not banning plastic bottles, but banning the more dangerous plastic types and being much more severe with what you allow and where you allow it. Food and drinks should come in contact with any plastic as rarely as possible. But you cannot avoid it, so make sure you use the less dangerous plastic type instead.

The bigger problem I see with PET, since it is relatively unproblematic in health issues, is the littering and environmental damage. But also here, banning plastic bottles might not be the solution; enhancing correct disposition of bottles, and trash in general, should be a more practical and realistic approach.
 

Posted Jul 3, '14 at 7:56am

R1a2z3e4

R1a2z3e4

90 posts

i think there is a need of developing another material in the place of plastic which is biodegradable and easily available, but this gonna be tough.

 

Posted Jul 3, '14 at 7:58am

thepyro222

thepyro222

2,187 posts

I heard somewhere (I don't have an article for this so treat as merely a rumor) that some company is developing a bio- degradable plastic made from corn starch and sugar or something like that.

 

Posted Jul 3, '14 at 8:38am

HahiHa

HahiHa

5,261 posts

Knight

I heard somewhere (I don't have an article for this so treat as merely a rumor) that some company is developing a bio- degradable plastic made from corn starch and sugar or something like that.

Yes, something like that already exists and is commercialised, but not very broadely yet.

The problem is that the process of creating said bioplastics is currently not really eco-friendly; to cover the need for plastic, you would need to cultivate huge areas of corn and other plants used in the process, which becomes unavailable for food production; and it seems the degradation is not as fast and efficient as we would hope. Basically, right now it is used as a sales argument and doesn't actually help much yet.
http://www.welt.de/wirtschaft/webwelt/article2566246/Bio-Handys-sind-eine-Belastung-fuer-die-Umwelt.html

But that article is already a few years old, and who knows, maybe we will soon find some alternative that is worth it.
 

Posted Jul 6, '14 at 12:00am

MattEmAngel

MattEmAngel

6,369 posts

The argument that other things are worse seems like a red herring. A statistical comparison is fine, but don't claim that "x is worse than y, so we should focus on x and ignore y." That goes beyond the scope of the topic.


It was more of a rant, technically, but it's still worth considering. In this case, "x" has been killing humans consistently, while "y" has only one recorded death. In relation to the topic, the concept of banning plastic bottles, when much deadlier products are NOT being banned (which cost more money and are just as wide-spread as plastic bottles), is no more than an excuse to ignore the elephants in the room.

So, no. We should not ban plastic bottles. Banning plastic bottles will be expensive, time-consuming, controversial and will leave us with mountains of useless products. If we're going to do that, let's do that to something that is, internationally (since the only recorded death occurred in Dubai) literally 5 million times worse.
 

Posted Jul 7, '14 at 1:38am

Kennethhartanto

Kennethhartanto

248 posts

But that article is already a few years old, and who knows, maybe we will soon find some alternative that is worth it.


oh yeah, i heard that crab chitin could be incorporated in a form of plastic and make it biodegradable. I don't know about the specific detail though, but if it was true, then it would kill 2 birds in one stone, since crab chitin can be obtained from any kind of crab and doesn't necessarily need to be alive, and could be available in massive numbers ( 1 crab shell could be used for around 1-3 kg of plastic, or so i heard )
 
Reply to Ban Plastic Bottles?!

You must be logged in to post a reply!