Anonymous #4 13w

People got sick before because there were no industrial safety procedures for it in large part because we didn’t know how hazardous it was when friable. That’s not the case anymore. We have nuclear power plants next to preschools. There’s no reason we can’t use dangerous things safely, we just need correct informed consent of the people doing the work and good safety procedures.

6

Anonymous #2 13w

it opens with time, it’s safe until it starts breaking apart. why are we only thinking short term here?

11

Anonymous #5 13w

No it doesn’t open with time. It opens when there’s damage to it. If you keep and respect your house it should be good for a long time just like anything, car, lawn, walls.

-5

Anonymous #3 13w

Idk why they’re booing you man ur just stating facts

-1

Anonymous #2 13w

tell that to my landlord

1

Anonymous #2 13w

Idk maybe they assumed I’m MAGA instead of a person who’s had a job working with asbestos before /shrug

8

Anonymous #3 13w

This app is terrible bias

-4

Anonymous #3 13w

this administration ran on and has been dismantling regulations. why do you expect them to instate some for asbestos?

6

Anonymous #3 13w

Ah see this man is bought off by Big Asbestos

5

Anonymous #5 13w

The regulatory system for asbestos disposal is already in place, they would have to repeal those safety regulations in order for it to have any impact. And even if they did, most states have their own disposal regulations, many of which are already more stringent than the federal process.

1

Anonymous #2 13w

“When there’s damage” and what happens to houses over time…… that’s right, damage! So you’re basically saying “it’s up to the homeowner to make sure their house isn’t made of cancer fibers and that every surface is perfectly sealed 24/7 if it is” because why again? Why do we even need to bring asbestos back in the first place when we have much better alternatives already? This is literally just a way to kill the poor my guy and you’re falling for it

3

Anonymous #3 13w

Me when we try to ban harmful chemicals and additives in EVERY single product but sure asbestos is the only outlier even though there are safer and cheaper alternatives. Like you aren’t wrong, but then why do we need it back if it’s so dangerous and expensive? Isn’t it just better to use more modern, safer methods instead of making a time bomb for future damages?

1

Anonymous #3 13w

They’re trying to investigate whether workplaces that use asbestos actually need more in-depth safety systems, and while oversight is always a good thing, when it comes to cancerous materials we shouldn’t be making policies on the bare minimum side of things. Companies have and still do skirt around regulations for known carcinogenic and harmful chemicals, loosening the regulations won’t help with that but make it easier for them to save a couple more bucks dumping more into our water

1

Anonymous #6 13w

And it all comes at the expense of the middle and lower class people that live next to these factories, mines and plants. There’s ALWAYS environmental damages from chemical pollution, sometimes it’s negligible and sometimes it’s so bad that it blows up into lawsuits, but we shouldn’t absolutely be trying to minimize the risks for these things instead of making future American suffering even more inevitable

1