I'd rather we just had better diets (like via government n communism n shit) and could actually sweeten things with the well known and studied, biocompatable, sugar.

Could you expand on this? What is the end goal, cause that informs the process considerably.

I mean, that's what enzymes do. If biology is finding some weird shit you can generally bet on it being correct.

Second question: its not as bad as lead but still pretty bad. It's hard to say exactly.

Extending that, if you were exposed to large concentraions more than a handful of times, you should probably be a little more on the ball regarding cancer screenings. Better safe than sorry.

They are pretty awful but they do have some amazing properties. If a full life cycle was implemented for them they could be a great positive for humanity without the ecological impact.

Yeah that'd be an interesting side product. I would add another 5k or so for purification and testing, in order to validate the purity. You need an effective distribution method. It'd have to be fairly scaled unfortunately.

You're going to want the physics department's help for that one.

No under capitalism, but yes under communism :)

hahahahahahaha very funny

Any time there is a new chemical, all they do is make sure it doesn't make you immediately sick and ship it out the door. They don't care, plus ,they get contracted to clean them up in many cases.

I have never heard of BioLargo, but I don't do much on that side. It isn't impossible or completely infeasible to filter PFAs, I am very familiar with some of that work. I'm having trouble finding any real details on their site, so I'm hesitant to say anything further. I would err on the side of caution as I am unable to find any publications from the company or real technical details.

Chemistry textbooks are probably your best bet.

At this point, I think all sources are contaminated. They have been in wide circulation since the 40s.

They definitely will have an impact, but if you are taking care of your body, they will probably not be a major concern. It's unfortunately hard to say exactly what they might do to you in high concentrations, which is part of the problem with capitalism's "make something then get the consequences" approach, instead of a well put together society where anything going into wide production needs to be carefully examined for risk.

I'm not sure what you mean exactly. A brick of carbon would either be a diamond or compressed soot.

Badly, but probably in weird ways that no one is expecting. We will be able to keep living, albeit in worse circumstances.

Rain water is probably okish, if you are breathing normal people air then it's the same stuff.

Lead is probably worse.

Yes, they don't degrade so can clog micro fluid pathways, leading to all sorts of here-to-unknown effects. The recorded effects tend to be related to endocrine, liver, and reproductive systems. Unfortunately, the science is only just starting to really get a handle on the specifics in the broader body.

Yes, but I don't know the specifics. It seems to be not overly common, i.e. for specific types of fires, and in very high concentrations.

Pretty much everything is contaminated with PFAS, it's a question of how much. High concentrations are detrimental to people's health, but the wider environmental effects aren't well known.

It looks like it is possible to do, but it seems like the efficacy is related to the type of compound. It also requires very high concentrations to be effective.