Caltrops - Motherfucking News





	[quote name="Mischief Maker"]<A HREF="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10728-2004Oct29.html" TARGET="new">JESUS CHRIST ON A POGOSTICK</A>! <FONT SIZE=1>Bear in mind this is the Washington Post so they're treating the story with the lightest touch possible</FONT> This is the kind of shit we would <I>jokingly</I> say the Bush administration was gonna do if he somehow got reelected. My favorite part is how the EPA quickly pulled the study and its materials (euphemistically called "C.H.E.E.R.S." don't you love how the White house PR people can put a happy face on every single initiative, no matter how odious?) off its website and away from public inspection the second the criticism began. [quote name="The Washington Post"]Families can remain in the study even if they stop using pesticides, Sheldon said, as long as they were using them before the experiment started. It was unlikely that any family would volunteer for the study out of financial need, she added, because researchers will require parents to invest time in monitoring their children's activities and diet. "Nobody can go into this study just for that amount of money," Sheldon said.[/quote] $970 and the loan of a camcorder. But... get this... after 2 years of studying their kid's deteriorations <B>they can KEEP the camera!!!</B> Where's Swift when you need him? Here's one theory on the <A HREF="http://www.ahrp.org/infomail/04/11/03.php" TARGET="new"><I>why</A>?</I> [quote name="ahrp"]Why is industry interested in conducting small human pesticide experiments? Since 1972, the assessment of pesticide safety is tested in animals--safety is determined by the "no observable effect level" (NOEL) baseline. A 10-fold margin of safety below NOEL is then calculated as safe for humans. However, a series of scientific reports in the 1990s raised serious concern about the safety of children who are increasingly being exposed to pesticides and its hazardous effects, as their use has increased. Children's environment is especially saturated with organophosphates - and these pose a serious risks for children's immune system, their developing brain and central nervous system. Indeed, in 1995, the EPA reviewed the scientific reports and confirmed the toxicity of organophosphates and validated the concern for children's safety. In 1996, when it became clear that the risk for children is greater than for adults, Congress enacted the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) requiring that pesticides that children are exposed to--such as organophosphates--be further reduced by 10-fold. Recently, the US government is betraying a public trust by radically changing public policy to accommodate the chemical / pharmaceutical industry. The industry wants to remove the safety margin for children required under FQPA. Inasmuch as the serious harmful effects of pesticides are not immediately detectable, industry is anxious to conduct a pesticide experiment using a small number of children to avoid detection of hazardous effects. Finding no hazardous effects, they will claim that pesticides are safe for children. This strategy is both morally unconscionable and scientifically invalid. Dr. Herbert Needleman,* Professor of Psychiatry and Pediatrics at University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, who served on EPA's Scientific Advisory Committee in 1998, provided strong documentation--by using well known statistical methods--to demonstrate why "no limited human study will provide information about safe levels of intake of pesticides by humans, especially children." To detect a small adverse effect requires at least 2500 test subjects in each comparison group. Thus, a sample of 60 children is inadequate to provide any scientifically valid information. For that reason, EPA's proposed experiment is disqualified as a legitimate scientific study. Lacking scientific legitimacy, the sturdy is automatically unethical - it must not be conducted.[/quote] So in the end, it's not just the children of stupid greedy poor people who get it in the ass, it's everyone.[/quote]