[jkic47]

As with most things, it can be more nuanced than your comment suggests.

At the time this chemical was introduced, the hazards were not known to science. Over the decades, scientists began outlining the effects of this chemical on humans and the environment.

Once industry was able to study those findings and convince ourselves that this was a real problem, we adapted our operations to mitigate those harms.

Most industries in the US work pretty hard to keep our employees and environments safe, for self preservation, if for nothing else. I breathe the same air as my employees do, after all.

Most regulatory agencies are aware that dangerous chemicals have legitimate uses. The problem statement is how to balance those uses against the known hazards. They (mostly) find a sensible balance, but sometimes, they get taken over by leaders who push it too far in one direction or another. Overturning Chevron allows adjudication to reset the balance and that should be seen as a good thing.