Researchers found low concentrations of so-called forever chemicals in various “eco-friendly” straws, raising doubts about whether they’re an appropriate alternative.
Researchers found low concentrations of so-called forever chemicals in various “eco-friendly” straws, raising doubts about whether they’re an appropriate alternative.
This isn’t even a fair argument. The subset of people I refer to who benefit from straws would have had a whole host of different things working against them pre-straws. Sort of a silly strawman because that’s not my point. I honestly think you just forgot to qualify a previous statement by emphasizing that you think plastic straws are useless and not all straws are useless. I was responding to your blanket statement that straws are useless.
I agree that disposable straws are useless, no disagreement there. It’s why I own metal ones. I disagree that straws themselves are useless. They are useful.
This comment thread is about disposable/plastic straws. I have been talking about getting rid of plastic/disposable straws in every comment. I never implied I was talking about reusable. I didn’t know I needed to be so pedantic.
Jesus man, ok. Let’s get pedantic about this. I’m sick, I’ve got time.
Parent comment of this thread is:
So, on the table are both forms of straws. In fact, the immediate response to the parent comment leads with
A few comments later you say
To which I call you out and point out that they do, in fact, have a use. Instead of just conceding that they do have a use for a subset of the population, and aren’t totally useless, you pivot to disposable.
In context of this conversation, you absolutely need to qualify if you are talking about all straws or just disposable straws. That’s literally the conversation being had. You just seem to not like that someone pointed out a flaw to your logic. It’s fine to have someone offer different perspectives that cause you to refine your position. Nothing wrong with that. That was my whole point about acknowledging nuance.