A blast from the past!
This week, I attended a Chemical Watch news & events by Enhesa conference, discussing how to get safe and sustainable products on the market. I was invited to represent the strong concerns many people have about the use of hazardous chemicals in consumer products. Not least scientists, who now say that the amount of man-made chemicals in circulation has gone beyond what our planet can handle.
This is the perspective I come with. But not everyone agrees with me, especially the companies producing these chemicals. And to be honest, that’s fine and totally in order. It’s to be expected. That’s why we are discussing these issues, and compared to 20 years ago, we actually find common ground many times nowadays.
That’s why I was so surprised to meet a BASF representative at the conference who used the speaking time on stage on decade-old industry arguments:
* Too much coffee can kill you, too.
* People die of fatty food, not PFAS.
* Being single and a bachelor is a risk; you eat less healthy and die younger compared to people in relationships (complete with an undertone that it’s the lack of sexual relationships that’s the problem).
* The presentation used pictures of sharks (dangerous!) and a scorching sun (cancer!). Much worse than toxic chemicals, of course.
* Safety is just a feeling, nothing more.
This person also thought it was a good idea to mock my views, urging everyone to “avoid the coffee” during the break.
The essential message was full of whataboutism, that there are far worse things out there than toxic chemicals, so why are we even discussing the risks of chemicals? While it’s obviously true that people die of many different things and that chemicals are not the only problem in the world, we must be able to have an intelligent conversation about the issues they actually do cause!
Not only are these kinds of arguments tiresome and do nothing for the debate, but they are also going in a completely different direction than what Cefic and BASF say publicly in news media and official statements.
I wonder if the progressive nature that the chemical industry has adopted in recent years is just for show and if the whataboutism and sauna talk behind closed doors is what they really believe? And are these kinds of 20-year-old arguments sanctioned to use by the leadership and Dr. Martin Brudermüller?
