Knowing something is "toxic" is not the same as knowing we should not use it, or that it's particularly dangerous. Tylenol is very toxic to ingest. So is gasoline. Yet we use both every day. Caffeine is pretty toxic as well. Not only do you need to know a product's toxicity, but also the expected dose, and exposure over time. PFAS may very well be dangerous -- I haven't looked at it closely -- but the reporting has all been a mess.

Even the linked article here doesn't tell us much. In the first bullet, the quote of a quote with excerpts out of context is telling. The second bullet about toxicity when ingested -- again, that's true of lots of products. At what dose, over what period of time? The third bullet about birth defects -- that happens. The question is whether they had reason to believe it was related to exposure to C-8.

As a modern society, it would be extremely expensive to have a zero tolerance position for toxics. Many every-day products that produce a great deal of value in our lives are toxic. The question is one of whether the toxicity is material or likely to affect people, and whether the risks outweigh the benefits. None of this reporting grapples with those issues.