News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Dual Antibacterial Properties of Copper-Coated Nanotextur... by refurb on Monday May 20, 2024 @11:10PM (#40423652)
Teflon - poly(tetrafluoroethylene), is used in medical implants in the human body.

I wouldn't about it.

PFAS? That's different.

Re:Dual Antibacterial Properties of Copper-Coated Nanotextur... by ceejayoz on Tuesday May 21, 2024 @08:24AM (#40427481)
Plutonium is also used in medical implants; it remains toxic. https://osrp.lanl.gov/pacemakers.shtml

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polytetrafluoroethylene

> PTFE is one of the best-known and widely applied PFAS commonly described as persistent organic pollutants or "forever chemicals".

Re:Dual Antibacterial Properties of Copper-Coated Nanotextur... by refurb on Tuesday May 21, 2024 @10:29AM (#40428950)
The plutonium in a pacemaker isn’t constantly bathed in your body fluids.

PTFE is 100% inert unless heated. It’s the reason why it’s used in joints and stents.

Re:Dual Antibacterial Properties of Copper-Coated Nanotextur... by ceejayoz on Tuesday May 21, 2024 @11:12AM (#40429487)
In other words, a material's safety may depend on the context in which it is used. I have concerns that a copper-coated nanotextured steel might, in some scenarios, have human health impacts; I'd rather not learn about it after decades of widespread use like PFAS.
Re:Dual Antibacterial Properties of Copper-Coated Nanotextur... by refurb on Tuesday May 21, 2024 @07:22PM (#40435433)
Don’t hold back progress based on unfounded fears.
Re:Dual Antibacterial Properties of Copper-Coated Nanotextur... by ceejayoz on Wednesday May 22, 2024 @08:39AM (#40440227)
That industry won't properly test for safety and hide evidence as long as possible is not unfounded.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10237242/

> Our review of industry documents shows that companies knew PFAS was “highly toxic when inhaled and moderately toxic when ingested” by 1970, forty years before the public health community. Further, the industry used several strategies that have been shown common to tobacco, pharmaceutical and other industries to influence science and regulation – most notably, suppressing unfavorable research and distorting public discourse.