Hacker News Reader

Comment by glial | Hacker News Reader

I can't tell whether you're making an argument for or against it.

I don't think they're stating either - just that it's pretty impractical to remove plastic from clothing at this point.

As another commenter pointed out, you could (and people surely did) make the same argument about lead or asbestos. That alone doesn't mean it's not the right thing to do.

We have clear evidence that asbestos and lead are very harmful.

I don't think we have that evidence for plastic (yet).

Also you totally can start buying plastic free clothes here and now. Just more expensive usually.

Plus, plastics is a very very broad term. Saying "ban all plastics" isn't the same as saying ban lead, it's the same as saying "ban all metals".

Yeah, i.e., is rayon banned? Silicones (they're very different from all the classic oil-sourced plastics).

Sure we do, just look at the piles of clothing waste around the planet.

It was about health hazards.

Why is it impractical? It would be unpopular and put prices up but it could be done. We would have to reduce the amount of clothing that is produced but that is hardly a problem as we produce vastly more than we need. We could eliminate fast fashion for a start.

You don't hear people saying, man, that asbestos and lead did a bang up job on X. But you 100% see 100% of women wearing stretchy pants. For the longest time I exclusively wore cotton jeans and then they became impossible to find and I finally realized what plastic was good for: fat people. Now I see men wearing them all the time. The struggle of the 80s on people killing themselves to fit into jeans is not longer a thing.

Not sure how socks used to be without plastic but pretty sure they'd fall apart fast.

You don't need plastics for that. Warp knitting has been used for the last few centuries with cotton/linen/silk/wool to get stretchy textiles, and there are plenty of stretchy pants that are made of natural materials available today for those who struggle fitting into jeans.

> You don't hear people saying, man, that asbestos and lead did a bang up job on X.

Well, asbestos is a great insulator and lead makes beautiful bright paints, it's just that the downsides outweighed those great properties.

Cotton socks exist as well as wool worsted, so not a huge problem as far as I can see. Tights and stockings will be a much bigger challenge.

It's extremely practical. We have cotton, linen, and wool as great amazing fabrics. Drawstrings replace elastic.

In my opinion, no natural fabric is as comfortable as synthetics. But I have cotton bedding and curtains. I think these are higher priority: bedding is used while you're lying close to it and easily able to inhale any dust, and curtains are exposed to sunlight that can weaken the fabric and make it break down more easily. They're also both large, meaning there's more plastic to be released. Carpet also seems a high priority, although that's more expensive and difficult to change.

It doesn't need to be comfortable, it needs to not lay waste to the planet and shrink your balls.

Nothing is replacing nylon where it is best used anytime soon.

We can replace Nylon with get this, poorer alternatives, if we gave a shit about the environment. I know it's unthinkable to switch to a worse product or user experience, but imagine caring more about the health of the planet.

This feels naive. For things like parachutes or airbags, I question whether you would actually have benefits from using something like cotton. In particular, they almost certainly do not perform at the same level. As such, you run the real risk of losing gains from other material to losses to maintenance.

Might be time to scale up spider silk synthesis, then?

Or maybe (high strength successors to) Rayon, which as I understand should decompose like regular cotton.

So, materiel that doesn't really exist?

And rayon doesn't exactly have a good history.

I'm all for looking for better things. Will be hard to replace some stuff, though.

Some people would just prefer that more people die from lack of effective parachutes or worse airbags if it means reducing the environmental devastation we wreak on the planet. Not sure if that is something you've considered.

I do hate fast fashion, but I can think of many exceptions where natural fibers won't cut it. There is no natural fabric product on the market that can properly replace lightweight, waterproof clothing. Waxed cotton is waterproof but heavy. Rubber is not breathable. Technical synthetics like Goretex have its issues (low durability, high cost, coated with PFAS), but it sure beats getting hypothermia.

It's a rare exception that natural fibers won't serve. Alaska, Arctic circle, Antarctica, disaster prep.

You don't need lightweight waterproof clothing, you just like it. Getting a little sweaty under a non-breathable fabric or getting wet but staying insulated with wool will be just fine. Umbrellas are great as well.

What beats lightweight breathable fabric is not desecrating the planet.

People will make all kinds of excuses as to not impose any minor inconvenience to themselves, even if it means making species go extinct and killing the planet.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com