In the news

You are reading a single comment by @mmccarthy and its replies. Click here to read the full conversation.

•

greentricky

[https://www.theguardian.com/environ

Those with higher levels of PFAS in their blood had 40% lower chance of conceiving within a year of trying

•

mmccarthy in reply to @greentricky

Looks like there's a chunk missing off that URL. I assume the full one is:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/apr/06/forever-chemicals-infertility-women-pfas-blood

It would be good if articles like that highlighted the important figures. The fact that this higher level is only mentioned halfway through the article, and in an oddly verbose manner ("Those women with PFAS mixture levels one quarter higher than the average") seems like an odd choice. Would also be nice if they gave an estimate for how prevalent this is, how many of the people tested are at this higher level?

Naturally I'm sure this info is all contained in the papers linked, but surely this information should be included in an article whose entire purpose is to summarise the findings in a way that makes sense to us common folk.

About

Avatar for mmccarthy @mmccarthy started