EPA's Never Ending Dioxin Scare


Blog For Free!


Archives
Home
2008 October
2008 September
2008 August
2008 July
2008 June
2008 May
2008 April
2008 March
2008 February
2008 January
2007 December
2007 November
2007 October
2007 September
2007 July
2007 June
2007 May
2007 April
2007 March
2007 February
2007 January
2006 December
2006 November
2006 October
2006 September
2006 August
2006 July
2006 June
2006 May
2006 April
2006 March
2006 February
2006 January
2005 December
2005 November
2005 October
2005 August
2005 July
2005 June
2005 May
2005 April
2005 March
2005 January
2004 December
2004 November
2004 October
2004 September
2004 August
2004 July

My Links
Global Warming: A Chilling Perspective
Watts Up With That?
Internet Haganah
Jihad Watch
Ponder the Maunder
The Dissident Frogman
Barking-Moonbat EWS
Just Barking Mad!
The Malaria Clock
Project Valour-IT
Islam: Turning everything it touches to Shi'ite since 632 AD...
10 Myths of Islam

tBlog
My Profile
Send tMail
My tFriends
My Images


Sponsored
Blog



Get Firefox!

Tell me when this blog is updated

what is this?


Click to Read


hacker emblem






EPA's Never Ending Dioxin Scare
07.23.06 (5:28 pm)   [edit]

f ever there was an example of what’s wrong with the intersection of government and science, the Environmental Protection Agency’s 20-year campaign to scare the public about dioxin is certainly a leading candidate.

The EPA slammed into a bureaucratic wall this week when a National Academy of Sciences panel told the agency to take its dioxin report back to the drawing board. But the NAS’ rejection of the EPA report was handled with kid gloves -- permitting the agency to save face by allowing the dioxin scare to continue indefinitely.

“EPA assessment of dioxin understates uncertainty about health risks and may overstate human cancer risk,” was the headline of the NAS’ media release announcing (and summarizing) its review of the EPA’s latest dioxin scaremongering.

The NAS said the evidence that dioxin caused cancer in humans was “not strong” and that risk estimates had to be imagined through use of mathematical models. Despite the acknowledged absence of evidence linking dioxin with cancer in humans, the NAS panel bizarrely agreed that dioxin was “likely to be carcinogenic to humans.”

It’s the sort of 2-plus-2-equals-five conclusion that only connoisseurs of regulatory bureaucracy can fully appreciate.

The EPA issued in 2003 a draft report on dioxin alleging that the substance was 10 times more carcinogenic than the agency previously claimed -- and some dioxin hysterics had already been calling it the “most toxic manmade chemical” for which there was “no safe exposure.”

Read the rest at Fox News. 

 


posted by: surrogate (reply)
post date: 07.23.06 (2:23 pm)

You know what you remind me of? A guy who's accused of embezzling a hundred thousand dollars and bases his defense on the fact he only got 95 grand out of the deal.

and let me get this straight... YOU are the arbiter of what the "real science" is? Or Fox news? Don't make me laugh.



posted by: thoolou (reply)
post date: 07.23.06 (3:08 pm)

In the interest of keeping this discussion on a higher level, I'll ignore the ad hominim and try to answer your "refutation?"

OK. Dude, I really try to give you the benifit of the doubt. You don't think Fox is a credible source? OK, I can cite dozens of other studies, papers, and conferences that back up the premise of the story.

Are you willing to look at other data without being a condescending prig?

And by all means, please feel free to link to any proof you have of my claim to be "the arbiter of what the 'real science' is." [Perhaps you should consult your Strunk and White's.]

(No, prig is *not* misspelled)



posted by: azuretiger (reply)
post date: 07.23.06 (3:34 pm)

Re: surrogate's reply ...

You know you remind me of? A person who attacks a blogger for something they have cut-and-pasted as if said blogger had written it himself. Maybe next time you should try the link (also called "doing your research") before spreading your venom, or at least direct it at the appropriate party.



posted by: thoolou (reply)
post date: 07.23.06 (3:44 pm)

Oh, for the love of Pete!

I just spent some time at your blog, surrogate, and I now understand!

You're a progressive! Huzzah! That means you can do nothing but spew DNC talking points and leave snarky comments. Forget bringing anything constructive to a conversation, as a liberal, you are correct on all things, regardless of your blatent ignorance! My apologies! I had no idea I was in the presence of perfection!

Let's take a look at your links:

Hmmm...

Quite the little terrorist thug supporter, are we?

Wow. Anti-Semitism seems to be a theme here...
Oh! And ChimpieMcBu$hitler references, bonus points!

"Felt like writing something quasi-humorous this morning, but I keep thinking about some footage I saw last night of George Bush walking up behind German Chancellor Angela Merkel and starting to massage her shoulders. It was immediately apparent that she was uncomfortable with the gesture and eventually she wriggled free by raising her arms and twisting out of his grasp." That's what passes for "news" with you miscreants? Feh. Have ya seen the whole tape? Probably not expected at a G8 conference, but fuck. Get a grip. Bush did not "grope" Chancellor Merkel. For comparison, see "Bill Clinton get his knob polished in the Oval Office, and lies to Congress."

Ya know, the only thing "progressive" about you "Progressives" is decline of your credibility with the American people.

Go ahead. Run Hillary in 2008. We dare ya.



posted by: thoolou (reply)
post date: 07.23.06 (3:45 pm)

*the* decline of your credibility.

Your Name:


Your Comment:


Locations of visitors to this page





 Use OpenOffice.org

My computer geek score is greater than 100% of all people in the world! How do you compare? Click here to find out!




Get this widget!