242
Gavin Newsom’s veto on bill to ban Pfas hands industry a win, advocates fear
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2025
242 points (98.0% liked)
News
32926 readers
2463 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't know enough about the risks to confidently say whether or not a ban is a good idea. (But what I do know leads me to keep using nonstick pans.) However, what jumped out at me in this article was this:
People freely choose whether or not to use nonstick pans, so how can passing a ban possibly represent constituents even in principle? A law regulating the negative externalities of pollution makes sense as something that constituents might want, but is the concern here really about the harm done to one person by a different person in a different house using nonstick cookware? It seems to me that laws like this are about protecting constituents from themselves, which is often justifiable but not really representative.
(A ban on pfas in other contexts where people don't expect to find it does make sense as something that could represent constituents.)
I hate to break it to you but PFAs are in a lot more than just nonstick pans. They're on literally anything that might be a tad bit on the non stick side such as dental floss or the cardboard under store bought cakes. They're on nearly all water resistant products such as shoes, rain coats, and camping gear. They're used as a fire retardant which means if you live near an airport, military base, or fire training facility your water supply is likely full of them. And even after all of this, we know that the factories that make and utilize these coatings don't tend to dispose of them properly and taint the water supply in nearby areas. And if that wasn't enough, these bonds have been found in water supplies and even rainwater around the world because they don't break down easily.
TLDR: PFAs are in loads of products you may not expect, have proliferated worldwide water supplies, and don't break down easily. This is about far more than nonstick pans and people don't have a say in being exposed to them.
Yes, but the controversy (and Newsom's stated justification for his veto) seems to be primarily related to the ban on nonstick pans.
"they're trying to ban non-stick pans" is the same type of distraction as "they're trying to ban gas stoves".
It's an attempt to reframe curbs on pollution as attacks on personal freedoms.
Teflon(PTFE) being one of the most common sources of PFAS is notably dirty to make and Dupont has had more than one major lawsuit or incident involving byproducts polluting the environment. I could see laws getting passed to reduce overall manufacturing capacity. -That said, Teflon is kind of a miracle material that can do what almost no other material can with it's chemical stability which also happens to be it's greatest flaw but i think it would be a mistake to completely ban that.
The article mostly focuses on cookware but they do mention a few other goods that would be affected by the proposed ban.