PDA

View Full Version : Tonight 8-10-02 on Fox 10PM EST


tremor
08-10-2002, 08:16 PM
The National Anxiety Center
9 Brookside Road, Maplewood, NJ 07040 (973) 763-6392 Alan Caruba, pundit, sage, and the scourge of
environmentalists everywhere, will be a guest on the Rita Cosby show, Fox News Channel, Saturday, August
10th. The program is aired from 10PM to 11PM. The subject will be West Nile Fever and why the banning of DDT and
loss of other major pesticides has needlessly been the cause of death for millions around the world and led to the
rapid spread of WNF here in the US. Caruba's views will be opposed by some poor soul who will wish she had not
accepted the invitation to appear with him. The show will be hosted by John Scott, sitting in for Rita.

National Anxiety Center, 9 Brookside Road, Maplewood, NJ 07040 (973) 763-6392 PS. As is frequently the case in
TV-land, I could be cancelled at any moment.

Organix
08-12-2002, 04:41 AM
Pestisides have caused more health problems in this country then WNV ever will. That is what can be proved up to now. There is still much that is suspected that cannot be proved. You just have to look at the population of farm laborors to see this.

Thousands of them have already been dying over the last decades because of being exposed to chemicals. Do you really think it's all just made up? What would be the motive for that? If people can use any substance that helps produce anything more efficiently they will use it if the costs do not out weigh the benifits.

Perhaps there is too much knee-jerk reactions about chemicals being used for pestisides and herbicides. But that is because it has always been a fight to convince those who are benifiting finacially from their use that they cause harm. So like all these political issues, people choose sides and dig in. Maybe if poeple like us would act responsibly in the first place, there would be more honesty in the debates.

DLS1
08-12-2002, 06:45 AM
The problem with any topic is it can become an emotional generalities gabfest. It you want someone to believe something is right or wrong then you need facts. I need more information Organix than generalities. Can you give web sites,etc. where it says DDT chemicals are bad for people. I would think they are not good but I don't have any knowledge one way or the other. Need the facts you have about the topic.

tremor
08-12-2002, 08:03 AM
Quote by Organix
Pestisides have caused more health problems in this country then WNV ever will. That is what can be proved up to
now. There is still much that is suspected that cannot be proved. You just have to look at the population of farm
laborors to see this.
_______________________________________

Facts are all that can be proven. Everything else is nothing.

What specific health problems are you refering to & what specific eveidence do you elude to?

I was in New York when WNV raised it's head. My warehouse was 8-10 blocks from the families home in West Harrison, just next to White Plains. The motherless children & their newly widowered father might beg to differ with you on this point. So too might the familes of the other 6 who lost their lives that year alone.

As I predicted on a syndicated radio program, there wasn't a single case of pesticide poisoning related to the broadcast treatment of Malathion over the 7.3 million people in New York City. NOT EVEN ONE! In my comments, I also offered my personal guarantee that more souls would be lost to WNV. To date 3 had been lost. 4 more were gone before the first frost.

Of the over 818 million people living in Africa, 1 million will die from Malaria this year. The majority will be children. The orimary path of infection is vector by mosquitoes. The population of Africa might enjoy the petty colateral risks that are associated with broadcast mosquito spraying. Since despite EXTREME research paid for by the liberal extereme left lobby in this country, there has never been a single conclusive study that would sugggest a significant health hazard associated with the proper use of pesticides. So while pesticides do carry a risk, the benefits far outweigh those risks.

Some REAL facts that I CAN prove with documentation:

-In 1999 there were 7 cases of WNV that resulted in death. All in New York.
-By 2001, 9 states had confirm cases of WNV to humans.
-By 2001 26 states had detected WVN in birds.
-In 2001 56 cases of WNV & 7 deaths confirmed.
-This year, up to now, 6 states have reported 135 confirmed cases of WNV. CDC media relations 8-9-02 3:30pm EST
-Fewer than 1% of the people who get WNV ever find out they had it.
-The CDC suspects that all states east of the Rockies have WNV present at this time.
-About 3 million people worldwide die every year from diseases that are vectored by mosquitoes.
-In California, in 2000, there were 35 suspected & confirmed case of pesticide poisoning related to children aged ten or younger. None were fatal.
-Between 1989-1997, 42 cases of flea treatment related pesticide cases were recorded in the US. 8 of these involved eye damage caused by splashing related to inert agents, mainly emulsifiers. 8 were systemic to the active ingredient. None were fatal. None involved permanant disability.

My references in this case:

http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvbid/westnile/surv&control.htm

http://ohioline.osu.edu/wnv-fact/1003.html

http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/pressrls/mar0702.htm

http://www.idrc.ca/books/reports/1996/01-07e.html

http://www.niaid.nih.gov/newsroom/releases/celera.htm

http://www.cdc.gov/od/oc/media/mmwrnews/n990604.htm#mmwr3



I'm out of time for now but will gladly debate this subject here in public. I will state facts as clearly as I can. I will list references. Please do the same for me. I know for a fact that there have been pesticide related harms done to individuals. Harms are done to people everyday. I got tail-ended in my truck just last week.
But please, if alegations are made, provide links to verifiable references so we can all decide for ourselves.

Out of time for now. Let's keep this going though.

Steve

thfireman
08-12-2002, 01:32 PM
BRAVO tremor! BRAVO

WatkinsLawn
08-12-2002, 02:25 PM
Tremor your my hero!
I wish I had the ability to articulate this arguement so intelligently.

dan deutekom
08-12-2002, 05:57 PM
Round one goes to Tremor

You have to weigh the benefits to the risks in every thing in life. You can't ban pesticides just because there is a little risk. Without them our lives would not be nearly as good or maybe even not at all. But everything we do changes the world some how. WE are nature too!!!

Keep the dialogue going.

DLS1
08-12-2002, 08:43 PM
WAY TO GO Tremor. I'm exhausted from reading your post.

Now I'm waiting from Organix.

thfireman
08-12-2002, 10:32 PM
You will probably be waiting a while!:blob3:

Tony Harrell
08-13-2002, 05:58 AM
This is kind of like the gun argument. I am a full time exterminator and have been for several years. I've serviced residential, commercial, institutional and have seen the effects of pests. We need every single control measure available. I don't mind regulations when it comes to this. As a matter of fact, I prefer them. The problem is, too many applicators are not supervised. Chlordane is a perfect example of how science worked for us. Chlordane is a persistant pesticide. What that means is, it doesn't break down for a long time. That could be under the foundation of a house for termites (about 35 years of protection), or it could get into a water supply with the same results. I know it's a dirty word but REGULATION is the answer to the pesticide problem. I was at a seminar years ago when WNV came up in NY. Dr. Austin Frischman(spell?) spoke about the consequences of the banning of aerial spraying for the vector for WNV. It was scary then and everything he said is coming true.

tremor
08-13-2002, 07:27 AM
Liberals won't stand for bothersome items like facts. Facts get in the way of their agenda, so when confronted, they usually just skulk off & hide for a while, then return again later when their adversary isn't watching in wait.

Science, sound medicine, & facts are bad things to liberals because these disciplins suggest that man, while a product of nature, has the ability to adjust his environment & the environment of his competitors to better suit his living conditions. Liberals call this cheating.

If they could talk, Beavers would call it damming & denning. Rabbit's digging. Birds, nesting. Bee's....I think we get the point. Anything that gives Man an edge on the rest of God's creatures is bad in the liberals eyes. Check the UN treaty.

Like all the rest of God's creatures, we seek to modify our environment to best perpetuate the species. (At the risk of dragging out another closet liberal, I'll make a reference to religeon.) God kind of told us to do this in the Bible. So liberals hate God and all references to him.

It's like this in business too. We attempt to create the best conditions for our companies to thrive. Whether we intend to harm other companies or not, this act has the opposite affect on our competitors. Is this predatory behavior?

You bet it is. In a very passive way, any attempt to rise above the worlds lowest life form is thus the opposite message the liberals preach.

That's why they abhor conservatives like myself. I won't be dragged down to become a part of some "lower common denominator".

I live for competition. My counterparts have quietly removed the sport of Kick-Ball from the grade school playgrounds. They claim that someone must lose in a sporting event with a score card. The loser may have his/her feelings hurt. Someone may even get picked last which would be devastating.

Survival of the fittest. Sorry liberals, that's just how nature is.

I know, I stretched it out on the edge this AM.

Steve

HBFOXJr
08-13-2002, 01:24 PM
Your statement is unsubstantiated, scare tactic conjecture that can not be proven regarding farm workers.

I am 53 years old and come from the farm as have my father, grandfathers, uncles and cousins. We have been around DDT, arsenic, copper, sulpher, 2,4,d, parathion, guthion and many more products for generations and obviously many total people years.

There have been no deaths, no ******ation, birth defects, cancers or anything else attributable to pesticide exposure. Everyone and their children and grandchildren are just regular folks living perfectly average life spans and dying from the same stuff people have died from for centuries.

I'm not saying pesticides are harmless to the environment and I'm not saying they shouldn't be regulated. I am saying the a farm worker claim is bogus!

Organix
08-16-2002, 08:20 AM
http://www.safe2use.com/pesticidenews/roundup.htm

Tremor ,

Did you get your name because of apparent symptoms of pesticide exposure? You seem a wee bit high strung, especially in your most recent post. I really do not see the need to go down that road, not on this site, anyway. That is really not why I come here. However, I do feel the need to point out a few a things to you.

First off, in my original RE .to you, I said that pesticides cause more health problems than WNV. In your so-called references you used the proof of ALL mosquito-transmitted diseases. (not very honest)

You also gave the stat. of KNOWN pesticides deaths in California. These are from ACUTE pesticide poisoning, not from cancer that is BELIEVED to be caused by pesticides (as I said originally, SUSPECTED but impossible to prove) They do know they are carcinogens, do they not? Also, it just so happens that the REGULATIONS that we have in the US, and especially here in California, seem to help with acute poisonings. Take a look here: http://www.communityipm.org/toxictrail/Documents/Jeryaratnam-WHO1990.pdf
Look at the 100's of thousands of health problems and thousands of deaths from pesticides worldwide.
This is a peer-reviewed journal probably by those non-science liking liberals so I'm sure you won't accept it. It's also from the UN and WHO which is part of that one world government conspiracy thing that Rush always talks about. (I can tell you have listened to him a LOT)
You may be an expert on pesticides, but I don't think your analysis on political ideology is too good. I could be wrong because I got my degree in POLISCI in college and you know you only get the liberal biased propaganda there.
HMM I just had an interesting thought; maybe the reason Republicans (your not a conservative, your views are more libertarian) seem to be so delusional and unable to accept the most easily provable facts is they are intoxicated by chemicals?
As far as being scared or whatever, hey you’re the one afraid of mosquitoes.

All that being said, I do use chemicals albeit sparingly. They make me more money. However, if I can find a safer alternative that is cost effective, I go with that. You need to keep an open mind and look at all the evidence un-emotionally. Being a partisan just makes you want to be right, and you dig in and refuse to accept even the conventional wisdom. It's either that or people tend to be penny- wise and pound-foolish. They see any form of regulation as a threat to their short-term profits. I'm sure Round up cost as much as it does in part from all those bogus migrant farm workers claims. Right? Well how much is it going to cost to do business when our water tables become so polluted with chemicals that we can no longer use chemicals? Or the air is so bad that power equipment has to be regulated or taxed. It costs the public money to clean water, so maybe the states will see landscapers as partially responsible for this cost and tax us for the privilege of doing business.

The Clean Water Act came about when the steel industry finally gave up fighting it because they finally realized it would cost them less to clean the water for manufacturing then it would to clean up their waste water. It's all a balance, politically, ecologically and economically.

thfireman
08-16-2002, 01:15 PM
:cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:

Kinda childish like when your not picked to be on a team in grammer school. The fit was pitched and you were still not picked cause you are weak. Only the strong survive and that was a weak attempt at proving your point. Like I said it was a childish attempt so spend a little time researching your facts next time and maybe someone could respect your opinions. You have a right to your opinions but at least make sure you are smart enough to pick a fight you can win. Even in nature (Where no chemicals are used the weak die and the strong survive). I want Tremor as the leader of my tribe. He is very strong on facts.

Thats MY Opinion.

Better luck next time.

Organix
08-16-2002, 04:20 PM
Only the strong survive that get bit by mosquittos too! Jeez! with all due respect what you had to say is weak - weak minded logic. For something that should be so commonly known, especially by a professional, I should not have to post links to prove what should be common knowledge. Tremor had the facts on his side? Well tremor makes up his fact as he goes, such as changing the argument from being about WNV and then citing statistics for

things like malaria. That is just a joke! read most of that or clicked on the link to read the stats from the worlds health organazation.

If you want to think that the much higher rate of cancer among mexican farm worker here in California is just a strange coicidence, that's your choice, but jury's, Goverments, and other people that are not Fox News and Rush Limbau seem to be able to do a little deductive logic on that one. You ought to try it some time. It takes putting emotion aside!

You can have tremor as captain of your little team, bud. I really don't want you on my team, you would probably be putting nascar stickers all over my lawn mowers and stuff like that. :);) My team is for the big boys who are not afraid of bugs.

BAH W/E:gunsfirin

Organix
08-16-2002, 04:45 PM
Also, I got sick when I lived in LA and the helicopters were spraying malathon down on the city to irridicate the japanese beatle or whatever it was. Had major soar throat and resipitory problems, who knows what the long-term effects can be. They know these chemicals cause cancer but you cannot trace what caused a cancer. To say the rest that can't be proved as a fact is nothing, shows how irresponsible you are. I don't want people like you making important decisions about spraying because your not even willing to look at probabilities, which is an accepted scientific method of predicting truth.

If you see a certain population that is more affected by cancer than the general population, you can use statisical methods to assign the probability that the cancer was caused by a certain factor. That IS the conventional wisdom in this country. That is the science. It is ironic that you say liberals are afraid of science when it is the right that refuses to accept the stastical method as science even though it continually is proved right over and over again in all aspects of our life.

It is also ironic that people on the right are so willing to accept the fables of the bible as truth but then turn around and say they want to be able to SEE what caused the cancer before they will believe it was caused by whateve they happen to be making money off of.

I accept the statical method as good science. It HAS been proven that pesticides cause cancer, and that populations that handle them and are exposed to them have a far greater probability of getting it. If you don't accept that, me posting links is not going to change your mind no matter who they were from or what they said. Because your disagreement is a cultural one, not a scientific one. So why should I waste my time on google?

dan deutekom
08-16-2002, 06:38 PM
Organix
Don't drag this into a mudslinging personel fight. It is an honest debate and if you want to sway people to your side then back up your facts with references and keep the personnel comments to yourself. (Did you get your name because of apparent symptoms of pesticide exposure? You seem a wee bit high strung, especially in your most recent post. I really do not see the need to go down that road, not on this site, anyway.) Don't go down that road and many of us will listen to your argument and make an informed decision based on facts and good honest debate. Round 2 goes to Tremor (just because he debates better)

tremor
08-16-2002, 07:25 PM
Ahhh,

ad hominum-typical liberal & exposed!

Where to start?

****************************************
Winded is the sailor...drifting by the storm...
Wounded is the organ he left all...bloodied on the shore...
Gorgeous was his savior, sees her...drowning in his wake...
Daily taste the salt of her tears, but...a chance blamed fate...

Little secrets, tremors...turned to quake...
The smallest oceans still get...big, big waves...

Ransom paid the Devil...He whispers pleasing words...
Triumphant are the angels if they can... get there first...

Little secrets tremors...turned to quakes...
The smallest oceans still get...big, big waves...

I'll decide...take the dive...
Take my time...not my life...
Wait for signs...believe in lies...
To get by...it's divine...whoa...
Oh, you know what it's like...

Turns the bow back towards him...drops the line...
Puts his faith and love in Tremor Christ..

********************************************
Also the name of my last boat.

The original post was informative so folks would see that FOX was airing the DDT show & when. The strongest argument for DDT useage is made by 3rd worlders who can't afford safer chemicals that we take for granted. That argument is usually saved for Malaria, which does kill 2 million people a year. See related thread. WNV may never reach this epidemic stage, but then it could.
FEAR MOSQUITOES? That's funny. If I were to fear an insect, it would be Deer Ticks. But there isn't much point in that now. I already have Lime Disease. Some might suggest that a person such as myself, living where I do, might spray the perimeter of my property with an insecticide to protect my 5-year-old son, wife, & dog from suffering my fate. And they'd be right too. I use Talstar because I can afford to. I still have DDT too, but can't justify going there.

Genetic Concern is a liberal PAC. For someone to reference this group would be the same thing as me referencing only RISE. Not a problem, but not a credible source in this case. Monsanto has gotten FDA approval to use Glyphosate to help control certain tumors. There has never been a link established that connects RoundUp with cancer. Rumors yes, but no facts. I defy anyone to post peer reviewed data of this claim.

http://www.agrifood2010.ie/Sub10.htm

http://www.pestfacts.org/

More liberal trash because this stuff is so amusing.

http://www.getipm.com/articles/ny-anvil.htm
_________________________________________

In order to be labeled a carcinogen, the item in question must first be PROVEN TO CAUSE CANCER. Here is how the EPA chooses to do it. It's based on the actual findings of science. If you have data that has been peer reviewed by the medical community, then please post it.

http://www.epa.gov/ORD/WebPubs/carcinogen/
___________________________________________

Since I know that facts make liberals squirm, I will list the known Human carcinogens. If anyone would like to take a shot at picking which ones are currently registered pesticides, then go ahead & have at it. Ask me & I'll tell. Avoid the subject & I'll yell. Either way, the truth will come out.

http://ntp-server.niehs.nih.gov/htdocs/8_RoC/Known_list.html
___________________________________________

Most liberals, might be disappointed to learn that cancer rates are down in the US. But that rate didn't decline at the rate as pesticide usage. Some might argue that the pesticides persisted in the environment, but science doesn't support that theory at all.

http://newscenter.cancer.gov/pressreleases/reportnation.html

Unless these facts get the way of an agenda, one may even wish to see the source.

http://newscenter.cancer.gov/pressreleases/2002reportq&a.html

___________________________________________


______________________ If only we knew it was this simple!____________________
I can't help but to share this liberal gem. I found it by mistake.
When you can't find anything wrong with the active ingredient, go for the inerts!
Why couldn't it have been OBL? With Rush holding the spray gun!

Health Effects Research Summaries Malathion Not as Safe as Believed - 5 Die - 2,800 Poisoned SOURCE: Archives in Toxicology, 42:95-106, 1979 The following information is from the report from the Bureau of Tropical Diseases, Center for Disease Control, Atlanta, Georgia entitled "The Toxicological Properties of Impurities in Malathion." Below is a direct quote from the introductory abstract to the article:

"During a malaria eradication program in Pakistan in 1976, out of 7,500 spray men, 2,800 became poisoned and 5 died. The major determinant of the poisoning has been identified as isomalathion present as an impurity in the malathion. It seems almost certain that the isomalathion was produced during storage of the formulated malathion.

The quantitative correlation found between isomalathion content and toxicity of many field samples of malathion has been confirmed by an examination of mixtures of pure compounds. Addition of known amounts of isomalathion to technical malathion indicates that other active substances are present. These impurities have been identified (trimethyl phosphorothioates) and have been shown to behave like isomalathion in potentiating the toxicity of malathion. Some preliminary work on their toxicological properties is reported."

Drs. W.N. Aldridge, J.W. Miles, D.L. Mount and R.D. Verschoyle Toxicology Unit, Medical Research Council Laboratories Pesticides Branch, Vector Biology and Control Division Center for Disease Control, Atlanta GA BACK

_________
Check the name of the above listed Control Division Center for Disease Control. Sort of like a child playing dress-up. And just about as credible too. It's just another Liberal PAC
This clip came from:
http://www.chem-tox.com/malathion/research/index.htm

And the REAL Center for Disease Control
http://www.cdc.gov/

The lengths some people will go to deceive the public & seperate us from our money.

The power equipment industry already has both taxes & emission standards in place. Europe is worse in some places. Did I miss something?

Oh yeah! I'll try to make it a little clearer this time.

There have been an average of SEVEN (7) dead Americans from WNV per year since 1999.
We're averaging about 60 confirmed cases per year, which (according to the CDC) represents 1% of the total. So about 600 people get WNV per year in theory. The number of people killed by pesticides in this country is so low that no one bothers to track it. Canada does track pesticide fatalities though. And I guess I was wrong after all Canada has averaged about 8 pesticide related deaths per year. But of course 6 out of those 8 are suicides.

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hpb/lcdc/publicat/farmfam/ff4-1b_e.html

It seem that 3/4 of the pesticide fatalities in Canada are intentional suicides. Must be a lot of liberals there?

Steve

Tony Harrell
08-16-2002, 08:46 PM
West Nile Virus has spread (as of today) to 39 states. I believe when the liberals are backed against the wall, they'll DEMAND that something be done about it. You know, I don't like using any more pesticide than I have to but, I'm smart enough to not bring a knife to a gun fight. We'll see where the debate goes when it's spread to the whole hemisphere.

gusbuster
08-16-2002, 09:01 PM
Originally posted by Organix
That is what can be proved up to now. There is still much that is suspected that cannot be proved. You just have to look at the population of farm laborors to see this.

Thousands of them have already been dying over the last decades because of being exposed to chemicals. Do you really think it's all just made up?

The issues and the reasons that farm labors get pesticide poisons are lack of controls. What I mean by that, kids would be playing around a field that is being sprayed from airplanes and get hit by drift or worse, actualy get sprayed. Or the workers, after being told to wear gloves, refuse to wear them because they're too hot or uncomfortable. Or respirators ,ghost suits ect... But most of all, people who shouldn't be using the chemicals due to lack of knowledge or ignorance.

Every case of poisonings that I have read about, the above are reasons that the people get poisoned. Not because the chemical in itself is dangerous, but the fact that proper precautions or ignorance of people.

By the way, my family has either been ranching or farming for the last 60 years. We all seem to be healthy and don't glow in the dark.

John

thfireman
08-16-2002, 10:53 PM
Organix Said I really don't want you on my team, you would probably be putting nascar stickers all over my lawn mowers and stuff like that.

That is proof you don't know your facts. FACT: I never asked to be on your team! And as for NASCAR, they are some of the best at the art of team work and if you ever could establish that type of team then you might get someone to believe you and your desperate attempt at being someone that made a difference in this world. As it is you will only be part of the problem.



If you see a certain population that is more affected by cancer than the general population, you can use statisical methods to assign the probability that the cancer was caused by a certain factor.

The sun is to blame for most types of skin cancer. Are you going to insist that God turn out the lights for the sake of our skin? Heck no, you will go out and buy clothes made with petroleum by products and chemical treatments and sunscreen that has an array of chemicals that block UV rays. Man lets just outlaw clothes! Hey maybe I will join your wanna be team.

It is also ironic that people on the right are so willing to accept the fables of the bible as truth...

Oh!! I forgot that you don't believe so you obviously don't have connections to complain about the suns harmful effects on us. I guess you will just have to deal with him later on about that subject.
:angel:

What a joke this "I'm righteous and all you BORN AND BREED AMERICANS are all wrong" environmentalist movement is....
What a waste of water and carbon!

:dizzy:

tremor
08-18-2002, 07:20 PM
It looks like WNV may cross the Rockies this year. That would have to be a record of some kind.

Steve______________________

West Nile Virus Reaches Colorado

Associated Press
Friday, August 16, 2002; 12:00 AM

LITTLETON, Colo., Aug. 15 --
The West Nile virus's westward
march has apparently reached
Colorado, where health officials
reported four animal cases today.

If the cases are confirmed by the
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, Colorado will become
the 38th and westernmost state to
report the presence of the
mosquito-borne virus this year.

The CDC lists 160 confirmed or
probable human cases of West Nile
disease and nine deaths this year.

New York, which had the first U.S.
cases three years ago, reported its
first human case of 2002 today, in
New York City. Illinois officials
reported three new human cases, all
in the Chicago area.

© 2002 The Associated Press

tremor
08-21-2002, 06:44 AM
Since I know that facts make liberals squirm, I will list the known Human carcinogens. If anyone would like to take a
shot at picking which ones are currently registered pesticides, then go ahead & have at it. Ask me & I'll tell. Avoid the
subject & I'll yell. Either way, the truth will come out.

http://ntp-server.niehs.nih.gov/htd...Known_list.html
_______________________

I wasn't kidding. I would very much like for Organix to pick the currently reg'd pesticides off this list. If no response by Friday, I will return to this thread & post the answer myself.

For the record, several more American died of WNV since our last volley.

Steve

MOW ED
08-21-2002, 09:56 AM
I'm liking this discussion.

WNV is now in Brown County, or the Green Bay Wisconsin area and there has been 1 confirmed death of a HORSE from WNV in this state within the last week and a half.

Tremor I am very impressed with your knowledge base and very much with you on the issues.

My state is full of liberals and I am waiting for the shoe to drop and they want to ban all pesticides. Fortunately the farmers in the state have a good lobby.

Tony Harrell
08-21-2002, 04:17 PM
Wonder what will happen when it gets to Berkley, Ca.?

thfireman
08-21-2002, 08:21 PM
His tune would change real fast. "Bugs, Bugs, YUK...Spray me Spray Me NOW!!! Notice there is still no reply!!:D

tremor
08-21-2002, 11:53 PM
I know how you guys feel. Sometimes it seems that the only folks with voices are the liberals.

That's not really the case. The rest of us are out earning an honest living. We just don't have time to sit here typing. (It's 11:05PM for those who are wondering. Yes, I actually live this stuff. But don't be sorry. It's my choice.)

Liberals are everywhere. But they usually don't work. They usually just collect state/federal assistance money instead. You know, all that tax revenue we pay. I paid more than the 3 TIMES the minimum wage in this country in personal income, sales, & property tax last year alone. Don't gasp. Check your forms. You probably did too. $40G isn't much in the grand sceme of things. Is it? Liberals think that makes us rich. Yet they make at least that much on average. What's up with that?

At best, it takes somewhere between 3 & 10 liberals to really screw up an entire community. Since most don't have jobs, they instead have time to hang out at "art galleries" & socialize with other "non-workers". Cappicino shops, fiction book stores, & other "liberal arts centers" also suffice. We could easily beat them with very little effort. Most of your neighbors want the option of hiring you if they want to. Deep down inside, normal folks hate being told what's best for them by liberals. But the liberals scream so loud, that the more rational (read normal folks), just sit back & stay out of harms way. Nobody really wants a liberal anti-pesticide/ anti-gun/ anti-life rally going on in their otherwise quiet & drought stressed front lawn. So they leave well enough alone.

This is really a shame. I'm shamed that the "normal folks" don't stand up for their freedom to choose. And I'm also ashamed that most of the time, WE don't even bother to fight it. WE'RE TOO BUSY! Guess what? If you have time to read this, you're NOT TOO BUSY.

It takes fewer than half of "US" to counteract the local results of the liberals. An equal number, when properly prepared, will defeat them thoroughly.

Too many of "US" don't even bother to put up a fight. The average nursery manager sees this as a "lawn care" issue. The LCO says it's a "Tree Company" issue. Growers call it a landscaper isssue. Landscapers call it a "Tru-Green/ChemLawn" issue. Everyone else knows that it's a "Pest Control Company" issue. The Golf Course crowd thinks it's literally everyones issue but theirs. The average "municipal pesticide applicator" just can't wait to get home & may not even know it's an issue at all. Tree care guys seem to know it's everyones issue, but never know where to turn.

Pitiful. They divide us with "categories" & we lose. And 95% of the folks who read this never even thought it was an issue. Uh-huh.

So what do we do? WE need to recognize who WE is!!!

WE are the most credible individuals in the country to make a decision whether pesticides need to be employed to solve a problem & how. In New York, liberals sit on boards that tell certified applicators what WE CAN DO!!! WE are the certified applicators. WE have the experience to make these decisions. NOT politicians. NOT " Political Action Committees". They couldn't pass a commercial operators license exam if their entire pitiful political career depended on it. That's why they're politicians! They'd NEVER make it in the private sector! They haven't a clue! These folks are just two paychecks away from the welfare rolls themselves!! Where is their degree? POLY-SCI???? LIBERAL ARTS??? That's for idiots that couldn't decide what to do!! LOL! LOL! LOL!

Most of us have a degree in a valid field of science. I do. I'll wager that many of the folks who read this do too. Agronomy, Horticulture, Weed Science, Entomology??? Embarassed? Don't be.

We have more credibility in out field than ANY poll has in theirs. There is no BS artist degres available in BS.

I've been certified to make these judgement calls for over 20 years. I represent the largest commercial "Plant Health Care" company on the planet. We're FOUR (4) times larger than our nearest competitor in our field. Does someone holding public office really expect to successfully challenge me when it comes to a pest issue?

Let's go.

GOOD LUCK!

I'll have'em for lunch!!@!

Where the heck is the competent counter-argument? They're quiet because they're afraid. Afraid to fight. Afraid to lose.

I'll be on a golf outing in Scotland next week. 8-25-02 through 9-01-02. Just look & see how many responses there are when no one is here to agrgue.

When I get back, I really hope my emails are spilling over with messages from folks who'd like to start a lobby, but to date, haven't figured out how. Don't be discouraged, I haven't either. But perhaps it's time we do.

Like I said before, the answer to the prior question will appear before I go. No matter if the liberals like the honest truth or not.

Just remember liberals, not answering the question is the same as accepting defeat.

2 days to go.

sls247@lesco.com

Steve

Organix
08-23-2002, 12:25 AM
Yes, Tremor, I can see this is sport for you, and like all sport, you just want to win regardless if the refs made the right call. I have not checked on here in the last few days, was waiting a reply from my former Environmental Science Professor. However, I think I made your 8/25 deadline, Tremor.

I sent an email to my Professor and asked her about, spraying for WNV, studies of health problems in populations who use pesticides, and studies about Roundup.

Before I post what she had to say about it, I want to point out that what Tremor has said about sound science is hollow. He does not seem to understand about research methodology and thinks only 100% black and white proof is proof. That is not sound-science, and is also why SOME people on the right can get so emotional about these issues.

Sound science uses mathematics to predict by using samples and models to predict as close to possible what the actual truth of an issue is. If you had to wait to actually observe a causal relationship happening we would not have ever developed treatments for heart disease for example. It is similar to the global warming argument; people on the right argue that it's not happening until it can be proved 100%. However, by that time the trend will be irreversible. It is ironic that Tremor chose to attack what I said based on sound science, when he does not seem to understand the scientific method of research and prediction.

This is what Proffessor Ostiguy, who is a Sr. Research Associate and Professor at Penn State University and currently involved in research in the area of environmental consequences of pest control strategies, including pesticide residues in foods and other products, non-pesticidal approaches to pest control (IPM), risk communication, and sublethal effects of pesticides on non-target organisms and is involved in a project to inform green industry professionals about pesticide safety. http://www.ento.psu.edu/personnel/Faculty%20pages/ostiguy.htm

----Quote-----
Dear Steve:

Yes, I did teach at CSUS and taught the ES 10 class you took. I've been at
Penn State for a little over 4 years and still teach a class similar to ES
10.

The West Nile Virus outbreak has certainly increased aerial spraying and
concern about pesticide exposure. The health impacts from the spray
programs are directly related to the chemical being used and the exposure
(time of day when spraying occurs, location of spraying, etc.). In the same
way that developing countries have to balance the use of spraying pesticides
to control mosquitoes carrying malaria, we are having to do the same thing.
>From what I know about the incidence of WNV (both illnesses and death) and
the consequences of pesticide spraying, I'd say we are over reacting a bit.
[The only exception might be Louisiana because the death rate has been
higher there and the ability to use IPM to control mosquitoes is more
limited.] Mosquito abatement folks will all agree that the order of
efficacy for mosquito control is eliminate breeding ground, spray breeding
grounds with insecticidal oils that target the eggs and larvae, and
absolutely last, spray to control the adults. The last tactic is the least
effective, causes the greatest environmental damage, and exposes the most
people to potential toxic chemicals. Here in Pennsylvania the public health
officials are trying to get people to empty containers with standing water.
[I've changed my routine for the two bird baths in my yard. The water dishes
are emptied and scrubbed every 24 to 36 hours.]


There have been some recent studies on pesticide exposure in farm workers
(including the farmers themselves).

Parker A.S. et al. "A cohort of farming and risk of prostate cancer in
Iowa", Epidemiology 1999: 10:452-455. [An increase in prostate cancer was
observed in men whose usual occupation was farmer.]

Recently the Cancer Registry of California reported that the incidence of
cancer among Latino farm workers (members of the United Farm Workers union)
was higher than the general public for leukemia (59%) stomach cancer (69%),
cervical cancer (63%) and uterine cancer (68%).
[http://www.ufw.org/paper.htm]

Other articles include:
"Agricultural Pesticide Use in California: Pesticide Prioritization, Use
Densities, and Population Distributions for a Childhood Cancer Study" 2001,
Environmental Health Perspectives 109:1071-1078
"Cancer Among Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers: An Epidemiological
Review and Research Agenda" 1993. American Journal of Industrial Medicine,
24:753-766
"Cancer Incidence in the United Farmworkers of American (UFW) 187-1997"
2001, American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 40:596-603
"Suffering in Silence: A Report on the Health of California's
Agricultural Workers", California Institute for Rural Studies, November
2000.

It is likely that you will also find that most of the studies done on farm
workers have been done in California. This is partly because of
California's strong pesticide exposure laws and because farm workers in
California are more organized than elsewhere.

About Roundup... I've chosen several websites that should be considered
reputable. [I stayed away from businesses and advocacy groups.] Roundup is
one of the better herbicides (better meaning least toxic). There are some
indications of human health effects, e.g., after long-term exposure above
the MCL, kidney damage is possible as are reproductive effects. There have
been a couple of studies that have raised concern about possible endocrine
disruption. No studies have specifically looked at this issue.

EPA fact sheet on glyphosate (Roundup)
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/dwh/c-soc/glyphosa.html


The Department of Justice Environmental Impact Statement has a section on
the human health and ecological effects of glyphosate.
http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/eradication/

The Forest Service has a report of glyphosate also.
http://www.fs.fed.us/foresthealth/pesticide/risk.htm

---End Quote----

I think I have more than proved my points that pesticides have caused more health problems than WNV, and ever will if same trends continue. That is if your willing to look at objective evidence and not allow your emotional and perhaps financial investments cloud your judgment. I doubt Tremor, and people like him will even defer to this persons expertise or the objective peer reviewed research that these studies show. I trust he will find a way to weasel out.

I also want to point out the people who said I was getting too personal that it was not I who started that. Tremor did that when he made his sweeping and insulting generalizations about liberals while they were indirectly directed at me. He thinks by not mentioning me by name he can get away with personal attacks. I don't call myself a Liberal but I do get sickened by the partisan Right-wing idiocy and propaganda by people like Tremor who have to invent a bad guy to blame the frustrations of their lives on. Someone mentioned about bringing a knife to a gunfight, well tremor brings nukes to a knife fight. He did that in this debate and he does it killing mosquitoes. It is bad science, bad debating, and cowardly. Cowardly because he has to attack the person who disagree, and does it indirectly by making sweeping generalizations that are just some figment of his imagination or that he has been spoon fed by listening to Rush Limbau for several years. And cowardly because he wants to shoot poison on a densely populated area from the air because he fears a virus that mostly only old people die from when we have had thousands and thousands dying from influenza for years which are basically the same symptoms. No, way over-kill and ineffective, no matter how many lies and exaggerations are told, it just does not make sense in the vast majority of cases. Drawing logical conclusions from faulty premises still gives you faulty conclusions.

Organix
08-23-2002, 01:48 AM
QUOTE Tremor....
Most of us have a degree in a valid field of science. I do. I'll wager that many of the folks who read this do too. Agronomy, Horticulture, Weed Science, Entomology??? Embarassed? Don't be.

We have more credibility in out field than ANY poll has in theirs. There is no BS artist degres available in BS.

end quote...

LOL, are you sure you don't have that BS Artist degree Tremor? You have a degree Entomology, huh? So then you probably have heard of professor Ostiguy, huh? Either way, I think her considerable objective experience sorta trumps your imitation Rush Limbau rants.

All your other **** of telling me to answer your question is just a red herring to the original issue of backing up what I said about pesticides causing more health problems than wnv. Its not that I don't have time or am scared, its that I think your an raving idiot and not worth my time anymore. You have well proven that IMHO. You have proved your more concerned about politics then actually having a helpful discussion about issues that concern our industry. I come to this site to learn mainly. I can also see that you do have a lot of knowledge about your profession, a lot more than me anyway. It's too bad you don't use it more wisely, just like you don't use pesticides more wisely. Your all hacked off about liberals, perhaps you work for too many in Cn. and resent them, I don't know, but Rush Limbau propaganda and insults is not going to increase anyone's knowledge about the green industry, unless your looking for someone to blame for your own failures frustrations.
You say Liberal Art's; you don't even understand where that word comes from. Your posts continually reveal your ignorance on so many levels. What is truly sad, is you actually have people thinking you know what you're talking about.

The bottom line is, I think pesticides and other chemicals have their place but should be used wisely. We are some of the people using them and should be responsible using them and in the information we give about them too. That is what I originally said. I objected to you making it the issue a partisan one at all because that is should not be what this site is used for IMHO.

I am done with this whole thread and issue because I believe I have backed up what I originally said. I realize that probably not everything I said was correct, but most of it was solid info and good to think about for people in our industry. Consider how many people die of influenza compared to WNV. Much of the panic is irrational and political and I sought to point that fact out.

As for when it comes to Berkley... well we have been using bacteria to kill mosquitoes in the larva stage for some time now. Hopefully that will reduce the spread of it. Also, hopefully good, solid, unemotional, apolitical, non-partisan, un-biased information will be given to the public so that if someone has symptoms, they seek help right away.

Steve

tremor
08-23-2002, 07:22 AM
Steve,

I agree with you with respect to the service this format provides us. It is through debate though, that we can see different angles that might not otherwise feel the light of day. If this isn't a benefit to the participants & readers, then what is?

In a set-up, I wouldn't have minded playing your side. But boy did the readers leave you out there on your own! You are to be commended for holding your ground all alone. Kudos.

If my partisan nature offends someone personally, then I am big enough to appologize. I won't change, per se, but I understand that partisan political attacks are not constructive. In some arenas, this is still good practice. Our industry IS a political red herring in many eyes. Honing defensive & offensive political skills is mandatory in todays world whether we like it or not.

Despite the space we have taken up here, we haven't once mentioned some of the alternative methods of controlling mosquitoes on a responsible & practical level. That really never was my intent.

Once the opportunity presented itself (your response), I took advantage of it. It became an inflamatory thread to expose the participants to what can happen at any time, in any community, when our industry clashes with the radical left.

Another thread is in order to expose the members to good control practices & explore more rational alternatives than doing nothing.

Please don't take this personally. I am much meaner here than I am in the real world.

For the record, none of the currently registered pesticides in this country are on that list of known human carcinogens. Mancozeb can be altered with heat to become a "suspected carcinogen". So even though I use Mancozeb, I still wash all purchased fruits & produce with soap & water. I would advise everyone else to do the same.

Thank You for allowing the sport to live to see another day by participating.

Steve

lawnstudent
08-23-2002, 07:33 AM
Originally posted by Organix
And cowardly because he wants to shoot poison on a densely populated area from the air because he fears a virus that mostly only old people die from when we have had thousands and thousands dying from influenza for years which are basically the same symptoms.
.

Yea, they are mostly old people who die from WNV. We don't need the old people. They are just going to die anyway. Why waste the money on old people? It's survival of the fittest baby!!! We just need to look at the economics of this situation. Is the cost of spraying worth saving the lives of a few old people? Besides most peolple would just think they died from influenza. We don't need no stinken spray.

Organix, you have no faith and apparently no respect or compasion for the elderly.

jim

ashanti
08-23-2002, 08:21 AM
Why bringing that to political groups ? My team, your team, why does it matters ? Shouldn't it about the opinions and the people instead ? Or did I confuse, it's a political group's headquarters ? Note that I'm not picking "a side" because both have their wrongs. Why not "it rains, so it's their fault", that's the same kind of point. And you all around making fun of the situation, i really feel sad for you. Get a life ! I've seen teens acting more maturely. Think about the image that you're giving.

And I'm not going to talk about religion, i stopped believing in fairy tales long ago, but it's a free country, it's up to you to believe or no and I can understand those who believe even if I chose not to. I guess it is useless to try to get you back on Earth, but at least I would have tried. I know this may come as a shock, but you're not the center of the Universe, neither am I.

If my message managed to make you think about the situation, even if you don't change of attitude it will already be a victory.


And now i apologize, but i have other deserts to preach in.

Organix
08-23-2002, 03:19 PM
Ashanti, your point about maturity is taken. However, I'm not sure you made it in the most mature way.

Jim, I see the humor in your post, and I hope you were joking in all of it. Of course I did not mean it in that way. What I meant was people with healthy immune systems are not the ones dying from WNV from what I understand. That means most people survive it. I'm sure there are exceptions. This is how it is with influenza too, but that kills over 1,600 people annually. So my point was to keep it in perspective. I do have faith that we will for the most part. I also have faith in a spiritual way if that's what you meant.

Tremor, I appreciate what you had to say in your last post. I too apologize to you and Fireman for my sarcasm and anything else I said that offended anyone personally.

I do understand that this information is clouded from zealots on both the left and right. However, I guess I am the type to error on the side of caution. I do see I was wrong about saying they were carcinogens because that term has a certain criteria that has to be met. However, even on the EPA link you posted about malithion it stated the studies were preliminary and there were descending opinions that were not comfortable in signing the document that said it did not cause cancer. It is apparent that more work needs to be done in this whole area. I think that is what we in our industry should advocate for the most. We are the one's that are most likely to get health problems be it from insects or pesticides.

I know when they sprayed malithion in the orchards around here for the med fly, the applicators where in full-body chemical suits. I think if everyone was so certain about its safety that would not be needed.

FYI I always see this trend from people from other states speaking of California like its nothing but "crunchy" people. This really is a misconception. We did use arial spraying of malithion in Los Angels to protect our Ag industry. However, that was probably more effective way at killing the bug than in the case of WNV. Our Ag industry is by far the nation's leading producer of AG. We would not be there if we were all just liberal zealots cowing the rest of the population

tremor
08-23-2002, 07:47 PM
Lawn Student Jim,

Where have you been? Can you forward me data on the Fairy Ring control procedure that involved blending soils (innoculum) from other FR's?
My email

sls247@lesco.com

Glad to see you back.
______________________________________
Steve,

An astronomical number of elements can cause cell damage. In other words, everything on this planet is fataly toxic to other living things at some RATE. So it's no wonder that if human cells are exposed to nearly anything for long enough, mutation of cells would be expected. Eventually even the healthiest persons cells will mutate into a cancerous cell. It's all a matter of time. If we live long enough, it's bound to happen sooner or later.

A compound that has been PROVEN to accelerate the process to a rate accepted by medical scientists is then labeled a carcinogen.

It really is frustrating for folks who are related to someone with cancer. To recognize the extent that genetics play a role is to accept that one might posess the same predisposition. The natural denial behavior then has people looking outside the family to the enviroment for the cause. It is much easier to believe that pesticides are responsible since most folks are truely ignorant as to how they work.

This isn't meant to down-play the need for caution & safety. But pesticides do routinely bear the brunt of the publics ignorance & resulting fears.

Our industries historical track record isn't anything to be proud of. Liberals have every reason to play this card on us at any opportunity. Before the days of quality testing labs, quite a few potential carcinogens found their way into our trade. The previous indiscriminate overuse of some materials has caused us greif we continue to pay for to this very day.

None of which though, should deflate my claims to the current levels of safety that exists in our industry. When LISENCED COMMERCIAL APPLICATORS with a reasonable amount of TRAINING use currently registered products in accordance with the LABEL, then the public is quite safe indeed. Throw in a measure of IPM & the public has very little to be concerned about.

But just in case we thought we'd seen it all, take a look at this website. I got the URL off a billboard that faces the Northbound traffic near exit 43 on I-95 in West Haven, CT.

Wish me luck on the links.

Steve/Tremor

http://www.green-ct.org/

Organix
09-17-2002, 11:11 PM
Saw this in the LA times thought someone may be interested in it. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-weeds17sep17.story?coll=la%2Dhome%2Dtodays%2Dtimes

tremor
09-18-2002, 06:27 AM
Steve Organix,

This computer has cookies shut off. I'll leave it that way since it isn't mine. And I'm not going to use my own personal computer to assist the LA Times with their marketing & deomgraphic data collection base.

So, in other words, I can't view this link.

Can you copy & paste the text without breaking any laws? There is usually a "permission slip" somewhere near the article.

Which herbicide is alleged to be dangerous?

And what happened to Ashanti? Was that a plant? First time user & now gone with the wind?

Steve

tremor
09-18-2002, 07:28 AM
I had been away for a week & am now very busy. As time allows, I will continue to analyze the information provided.


Quote clipped from the EPA fact sheet provided by Steve Organix

""What are the Health Effects?


Short-term: EPA has found glyphosate to potentially cause the following health effects when people are exposed to it at levels above the MCL for relatively short periods of time: congestion of the lungs; increased breathing rate.

Long-term: Glyphosate has the potential to cause the following effects from a lifetime exposure at levels above the MCL: kidney damage, reproductive effects.""

end quote

I don't see the relevance, nor any mention of Cancer. Sounds more like jogging & alcoholism.

It is worth mentioning that this fact sheet is geared toward consumer awareness of the risks of drink glyphosate laced water.
I don't ever recall stating that I think it is safe to DRINK Roundup.
What I do recall saying is that the benefits of spraying for mosquitoes (when called for in certain situations) far outweigh the risks.

The wanton consumption of drinking water that is laced with Roundup hardly constitutes an approved method of use.
For the record, IF drinking water is glyphosate contaminated, and that is a VERY RARE circumstance, the corrective action is to filter the water over charcoal. That's it. Problem solved. Then send the bill to the idiot that contaminated the well.

It sounds like drinking RoundUp is really no worse than a few beers or a couple too many Diet Cokes. On a serious note, this sort of issue, while worthy of awareness, does NOT pose the same threat to public health that WNV does.

All4now

Steve

Organix
09-20-2002, 02:51 AM
No, 2,4-D, not Roundup.
Here it is:
========================Start Article===============
A cocktail of the three most common herbicides used by about 29 million American households to kill dandelions may reduce fertility and cause miscarriages, according to a study published today in the toxicology journal Environmental Health Perspectives.

The results come as the Environmental Protection Agency prepares to review the licensing of one of the chemicals, now used in more than 1,500 lawn-care and agricultural products.







In the study, researchers at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the University of Valparaiso in Chile spiked the drinking water of laboratory mice with weed killer, then charted the animals' reproductive rates. They found a 20% increase in failed pregnancies at extremely low doses—seven times lower than the maximum allowable rate for U.S. drinking water.

University of Wisconsin toxicologist Warren Porter said his group deliberately selected the sort of weed killer most commonly employed by American homeowners on their lawns. He would not name the brand, other than to say: "We bought it in a hardware store."

He does, however, name the active ingredients: a mix of three "phenoxy herbicides" called 2,4-D, dicamba and mecoprop. Typically blended together into weed killers and "weed and feed" products, they kill broadleaf plants such as dandelions while sparing grass.

They work by confounding the hormone system of the broadleaf plants, causing them to choke their nutrient and water channels with their own growth.

The Scott and Dow Chemical Cos. were among the first to market 2,4-D in a host of weed killers and weed-and-feed formulations immediately after World War II. Since then, they have been formulated in more than 1,500 products made by scores of companies. Most of these are over-the-counter products and will contain, in addition to the herbicides, industrial soaps to help the chemical cling to and then penetrate the plants.

Trials scrutinizing the safety of the products have typically only looked at the herbicides singly and have shown the chemicals to have either low, or no, toxicity. In the last 10 years, the pesticide industry has spent $30 million on 2,4-D toxicity trials.

North Carolina agronomist Don Page, who represents the leading suppliers of the chemical in the U.S., has presented to the EPA 270 safety studies sponsored by his clients. He believes the chemical and products containing it are safe.

"The only verified examples of 2,4-D poisoning in humans is in suicides. If you drink enough of it, you can kill yourself," he said in June. He declined to comment on the latest study.

However, since the late 1970s, independent studies of crop workers in Europe and Kansas have suggested that pesticide applicators working heavily with products containing 2,4-D had higher rates of non-Hodgkins lymphoma.

In the mid-1990s, University of Minnesota pathologist Vincent Garry conducted studies in wheat, sugar beet and potato farming regions and found twice the rate of birth defects among children of crop workers who conceived the children during the months when the pesticide 2,4-D was sprayed.

Garry began to suspect that the reason the chemicals looked safe in trials conducted for the government regulators is because the labs were using pure 2,4-D, while crop workers were handling an enhanced chemical blend. Porter suspected the same thing. Designing the Wisconsin study, he set out to examine the toxicity of the mix as sold over the counter, not the single herbicides tested for the EPA.

"We have no idea what kind of reactions might be going on once these active ingredients are formulated into products," he said. "You're talking about putting a lot of very reactive chemicals together in a mix, and storing it at room temperature."

From Minnesota, Garry praised the choice to use the commercial mix. "It brings up the notion that it is the commercial-grade product that people are exposed to, and these need to be studied," he said. He added that he would like to see further tests to confirm the radical effects of such low doses.

Oakland research scientist Robert Gunier, an epidemiologist who has studied the effects of pesticides for the California Department of Health Services, praised the Wisconsin study for looking at such low doses. Most testing is done at extremely high doses, he said. "I think it really raises some important issues about how regulatory testing is done."

Spurred by the Kansas cancer study and Garry's work in Minnesota, the EPA is now reviewing the safety literature of 2,4-D and expects a decision on the status of the chemical in 2004.

==============end===========

GroundKprs
09-20-2002, 09:42 AM
Please, Organix, learn the difference between rave and knowledge. Apparently you are not in favor of chemical useage, and you find every snippet of info to support your belief. You must be aware of the whole picture to make an intelligent decision.

You must take negative comments about 2,4-D with a grain of salt (or a truckload, LOL). As all human endeavors, you must know the politics of a situation. The first round of chemical regulation grandfathered existing formulations. Then it was legislated that these grandfathered chemicals should be tested as were new ones. The radical movements in the 90s targeted 2,4-D: if they could stop use of this long term, widely used, effective helper, they could block any chemical use they wanted. Shortly after they cranked up this assault, Chemlawn went to use of non-phenoxy herbicides and Dow dropped using 2,4-D in any of its products. Other companies also reacted, not because of the danger of 2,4-D, but just so they would not be a target!

They are many studies quoted by the antis to promote the campaign against 2,4-D, and most all of them have been proven flawed. Most memorable to me was the report on lawn spraying and bladder cancer in family dogs. The day after this was front page news, I was working at an oncologists' office, and one of the doctors I knew came out and asked me about the study. I told him I'd wait for more info. Of course, it was not front page news when it was revealed that this was not a scientific study, but a telephone survey of pet owners. ROTFLMAO!!!

Note the last of your article: "Spurred by the Kansas cancer study and Garry's work in Minnesota, the EPA is now reviewing the safety literature of 2,4-D and expects a decision on the status of the chemical in 2004." These events did not "spur" the re-registration of 2,4-D. It was required by legislation. Just another example of emotional use of wording.

Yes, advances in human knowledge are frequently spurred by one person or one event. But to quote one item as the absolute truth, when there are so many other people and events involving the same topic, is just a small-minded or emotional approach.

thfireman
09-20-2002, 05:08 PM
OK, I wont spike my rats water with weed killer. There that problems solved.

:rolleyes: