I accidentally touched quote while reading your post on my phone, nothing to add really but I have been following this process since DDT was sprayed over my house in Maine, “to control malaria”.This is true of the for-profit media, but it doesn't mean the genuine crises in climate and contamination aren't real. And not all media outlets are profit-driven. There is still fact-checked and relatively impartial information to be had from actual journalists.
But in recent decades many have become addicted to the gratification of having their preconceptions fed and their outrage stoked. Objective information fails to satisfy.
"When you want to help people, you tell them the truth; when you want to help yourself, you tell them what they want to hear." - Dr. Thomas Sowell
Far too many have been led to consider all science suspect, often for two main reasons that can't be discussed here.
Science - even though it can be manipulated - is at its heart a search for proven fact, and nearly all scientists are in fact pursuing the truth.
It's when we decide we want a truth that's divorced from fact that we get into real trouble.
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
A study several years ago was seeking a control group uncontaminated by PFOA/PFAS.
They sampled populations in many of the most remote areas of the world.
100% of the blood samples showed contamination. Everyone, everywhere.
There is literally nobody on the planet who doesn't already have this stuff in their blood.
These chemicals don't break down - they'll be around for decades, perhaps centuries, and they'll be far more concentrated in our great-grandchildren than they are in us.
And now the stuff is in the rainwater. Everywhere.
How many more samples do we need before deciding maybe it's time to do something?