| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Harry Hope" |
| Date: |
08 Apr 2005 11:03:09 PM |
| Object: |
Rightards respond to some good old arm-twisting by Democrats |
From The Associated Press, 5/8/05:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050408/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/senate_epa_nominee
EPA Cancels Controversial Pesticide Study
By JOHN HEILPRIN, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON -
The Environmental Protection Agency on Friday canceled a controversial
study using children to measure the effect of pesticides after
Democrats said they would block Senate confirmation of the agency's
new head.
Stephen Johnson, as EPA's acting administrator, ordered an end to the
planned study, a reversal from the agency's position just a day
earlier when it said it would await the advice of outside scientific
experts.
_______________________________________________________
There ya go. Ya see what a li'l pain can do?
Harry
.
|
|
| User: "Harvey" |
|
| Title: Re: Rightards respond to some good old arm-twisting by Democrats |
09 Apr 2005 09:16:59 AM |
|
|
"Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:bvke511ceo8bqmke2fcj6jrnp9f0lp1bje@4ax.com...
From The Associated Press, 5/8/05:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050408/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/senate_epa_nominee
EPA Cancels Controversial Pesticide Study
By JOHN HEILPRIN, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON -
The Environmental Protection Agency on Friday canceled a controversial
study using children to measure the effect of pesticides after
Democrats said they would block Senate confirmation of the agency's
new head.
Stephen Johnson, as EPA's acting administrator, ordered an end to the
planned study, a reversal from the agency's position just a day
earlier when it said it would await the advice of outside scientific
experts.
_______________________________________________________
There ya go. Ya see what a li'l pain can do?
Harry
Yes, I do see. Did you actually look into the study?
If you had, you would have seen that they were attempting to collect
field data on how pesticides and other potentially harmful common
household chemicals are presently used. Among scientists and, I guess,
"rightards" this is known as "collecting baseline data," and is highly
useful where it is ***nearly entirely lacking*** as it is in this case.
But Barbara Boxer gets the elderly soiled panties in a wad below her
immobile strained facelift because low income households are targeted,
and chemical industry money is funding research. The fact that low
income households are unlikely to pay for routine pest control and buy
many more $3 cans of Raid to compensate, and that she should *insist*
that chemical companies fund this sort of research, doesn't matter at
all because she's a brain-dead Dimocratic political hack.
So, yeah, I do see. You morons have stopped some very useful research on
a real problem. We'll continue to know very little about how these
chemicals are really used by people at risk.
Congratulations, nitwits.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Larry Hewitt" |
|
| Title: Re: Rightards respond to some good old arm-twisting by Democrats |
09 Apr 2005 03:04:34 PM |
|
|
"Harvey" <researchermd@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:M7KdnX-2AqFOfsrfRVn-ig@comcast.com...
"Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:bvke511ceo8bqmke2fcj6jrnp9f0lp1bje@4ax.com...
From The Associated Press, 5/8/05:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050408/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/senate_epa_nominee
EPA Cancels Controversial Pesticide Study
By JOHN HEILPRIN, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON -
The Environmental Protection Agency on Friday canceled a controversial
study using children to measure the effect of pesticides after
Democrats said they would block Senate confirmation of the agency's
new head.
Stephen Johnson, as EPA's acting administrator, ordered an end to the
planned study, a reversal from the agency's position just a day
earlier when it said it would await the advice of outside scientific
experts.
_______________________________________________________
There ya go. Ya see what a li'l pain can do?
Harry
Yes, I do see. Did you actually look into the study?
If you had, you would have seen that they were attempting to collect
field data on how pesticides and other potentially harmful common
household chemicals are presently used. Among scientists and, I guess,
"rightards" this is known as "collecting baseline data," and is highly
useful where it is ***nearly entirely lacking*** as it is in this case.
But Barbara Boxer gets the elderly soiled panties in a wad below her
immobile strained facelift because low income households are targeted,
and chemical industry money is funding research. The fact that low
income households are unlikely to pay for routine pest control and buy
many more $3 cans of Raid to compensate, and that she should *insist*
that chemical companies fund this sort of research, doesn't matter at
all because she's a brain-dead Dimocratic political hack.
So, yeah, I do see. You morons have stopped some very useful research on
a real problem. We'll continue to know very little about how these
chemicals are really used by people at risk.
Congratulations, nitwits.
What nitwit rightards fail to see is that there are non-invasive ways of
collecting this data. Methods in widespread use for a ling time, like air
quality monitors, purchasing surveys, animal studies, and dispersal
analysis.
What nitwit rightards fail to consider is that the household exposure to
cleansers and pesticides is probably _lower_ in lowincome households than
high income househilds, but the environmental exposure is much, much higher.
And that studies of environmental exposures can be simulatd very easily by
non-invasive techniques.
What nitwit rightards either fal to consider or outright dismiss because
they despise the poor is that repeated blood sampling can be terrifying to
youung children.
What nitwiot rightards fail to uderstand is that the poor are very mobile,
moving frequently. This would mae long-term baseline studies difficult or
even worthless.
What nitwit rightards faill to realize that the sancitiy of the human body
is supreme, that invasion of our bodies by the government except in extreme
circumstances is unwarranted and dangerous.
What nitwit rightards fail to relaize is that once blood has been drawn it
can be subjected to a whole battery of tests, and that esposure of the
results of these tests would be a violation of the children's right of
provacy.
It is not surprising that nitwit rightards are so ignorant.
larry
.
|
|
|
| User: "Harvey" |
|
| Title: Re: Rightards respond to some good old arm-twisting by Democrats |
09 Apr 2005 06:39:01 PM |
|
|
"Larry Hewitt" <larryhewi@comporium.net> wrote in message
news:d39ccp$82e3$1@news3.infoave.net...
"Harvey" <researchermd@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:M7KdnX-2AqFOfsrfRVn-ig@comcast.com...
"Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:bvke511ceo8bqmke2fcj6jrnp9f0lp1bje@4ax.com...
From The Associated Press, 5/8/05:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050408/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/senate_epa_nominee
EPA Cancels Controversial Pesticide Study
By JOHN HEILPRIN, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON -
The Environmental Protection Agency on Friday canceled a
controversial
study using children to measure the effect of pesticides after
Democrats said they would block Senate confirmation of the agency's
new head.
Stephen Johnson, as EPA's acting administrator, ordered an end to
the
planned study, a reversal from the agency's position just a day
earlier when it said it would await the advice of outside
scientific
experts.
_______________________________________________________
There ya go. Ya see what a li'l pain can do?
Harry
Yes, I do see. Did you actually look into the study?
If you had, you would have seen that they were attempting to collect
field data on how pesticides and other potentially harmful common
household chemicals are presently used. Among scientists and, I
guess,
"rightards" this is known as "collecting baseline data," and is
highly
useful where it is ***nearly entirely lacking*** as it is in this
case.
But Barbara Boxer gets the elderly soiled panties in a wad below her
immobile strained facelift because low income households are
targeted,
and chemical industry money is funding research. The fact that low
income households are unlikely to pay for routine pest control and
buy
many more $3 cans of Raid to compensate, and that she should *insist*
that chemical companies fund this sort of research, doesn't matter at
all because she's a brain-dead Dimocratic political hack.
So, yeah, I do see. You morons have stopped some very useful research
on
a real problem. We'll continue to know very little about how these
chemicals are really used by people at risk.
Congratulations, nitwits.
What nitwit rightards fail to see is that there are non-invasive ways
of
collecting this data. Methods in widespread use for a ling time, like
air
quality monitors, purchasing surveys, animal studies, and dispersal
analysis.
Absolute crap.
What nitwit rightards fail to consider is that the household exposure
to
cleansers and pesticides is probably _lower_ in lowincome households
than
high income househilds, but the environmental exposure is much, much
higher.
And that studies of environmental exposures can be simulatd very
easily by
non-invasive techniques.
Seriously wrong absolute crap...
What nitwit rightards either fal to consider or outright dismiss
because
they despise the poor is that repeated blood sampling can be
terrifying to
youung children.
A particularly stupid reason not to do the study, since a toxic screen
of urine *does not involve* blood collection, but don't let actual facts
get in your way.
What nitwiot rightards fail to uderstand is that the poor are very
mobile,
moving frequently. This would mae long-term baseline studies difficult
or
even worthless.
Yeah, they're poor. They might move. Best not to study the problem,
there's a chance the data might be imperfect. God, you're a moron...
What nitwit rightards faill to realize that the sancitiy of the human
body
is supreme, that invasion of our bodies by the government except in
extreme
circumstances is unwarranted and dangerous.
Whoop, sorry, you're not a moron, you're a loon...
What nitwit rightards fail to relaize is that once blood has been
drawn it
can be subjected to a whole battery of tests, and that esposure of the
results of these tests would be a violation of the children's right of
provacy.
Ah, that clears it up, you're both.
It is not surprising that nitwit rightards are so ignorant.
larry
Your other brother larry around anywhere?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rich Travsky " |
|
| Title: Re: Rightards respond to some good old arm-twisting by Democrats |
10 Apr 2005 02:09:32 AM |
|
|
Harvey wrote:
"Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:bvke511ceo8bqmke2fcj6jrnp9f0lp1bje@4ax.com...
From The Associated Press, 5/8/05:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050408/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/senate_epa_nominee
EPA Cancels Controversial Pesticide Study
By JOHN HEILPRIN, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON -
The Environmental Protection Agency on Friday canceled a controversial
study using children to measure the effect of pesticides after
Democrats said they would block Senate confirmation of the agency's
new head.
Stephen Johnson, as EPA's acting administrator, ordered an end to the
planned study, a reversal from the agency's position just a day
earlier when it said it would await the advice of outside scientific
experts.
_______________________________________________________
There ya go. Ya see what a li'l pain can do?
Harry
Yes, I do see. Did you actually look into the study?
If you had, you would have seen that they were attempting to collect
field data on how pesticides and other potentially harmful common
household chemicals are presently used. Among scientists and, I guess,
"rightards" this is known as "collecting baseline data," and is highly
useful where it is ***nearly entirely lacking*** as it is in this case.
But Barbara Boxer gets the elderly soiled panties in a wad below her
immobile strained facelift because low income households are targeted,
and chemical industry money is funding research. The fact that low
income households are unlikely to pay for routine pest control and buy
many more $3 cans of Raid to compensate, and that she should *insist*
that chemical companies fund this sort of research, doesn't matter at
all because she's a brain-dead Dimocratic political hack.
So, yeah, I do see. You morons have stopped some very useful research on
a real problem. We'll continue to know very little about how these
chemicals are really used by people at risk.
Congratulations, nitwits.
Using children as guinea pigs? THAT'S OK WITH YOU?
RT
.
|
|
|
| User: "Harvey" |
|
| Title: Re: Rightards respond to some good old arm-twisting by Democrats |
10 Apr 2005 08:22:55 AM |
|
|
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:4258D12C.86C25221@hotmMOVEail.com...
Harvey wrote:
"Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:bvke511ceo8bqmke2fcj6jrnp9f0lp1bje@4ax.com...
From The Associated Press, 5/8/05:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050408/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/senate_epa_nominee
EPA Cancels Controversial Pesticide Study
By JOHN HEILPRIN, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON -
The Environmental Protection Agency on Friday canceled a
controversial
study using children to measure the effect of pesticides after
Democrats said they would block Senate confirmation of the agency's
new head.
Stephen Johnson, as EPA's acting administrator, ordered an end to
the
planned study, a reversal from the agency's position just a day
earlier when it said it would await the advice of outside
scientific
experts.
_______________________________________________________
There ya go. Ya see what a li'l pain can do?
Harry
Yes, I do see. Did you actually look into the study?
If you had, you would have seen that they were attempting to collect
field data on how pesticides and other potentially harmful common
household chemicals are presently used. Among scientists and, I
guess,
"rightards" this is known as "collecting baseline data," and is
highly
useful where it is ***nearly entirely lacking*** as it is in this
case.
But Barbara Boxer gets the elderly soiled panties in a wad below her
immobile strained facelift because low income households are
targeted,
and chemical industry money is funding research. The fact that low
income households are unlikely to pay for routine pest control and
buy
many more $3 cans of Raid to compensate, and that she should *insist*
that chemical companies fund this sort of research, doesn't matter at
all because she's a brain-dead Dimocratic political hack.
So, yeah, I do see. You morons have stopped some very useful research
on
a real problem. We'll continue to know very little about how these
chemicals are really used by people at risk.
Congratulations, nitwits.
Using children as guinea pigs? THAT'S OK WITH YOU?
RT
Do you have *any* idea wtf you're talking about?
The study is a survey of what is *already happening now*. Direct
involvement of the study staff involves... or rather, would have
involved... interviewing families and collecting urine and food samples.
The study design was cleared by four independent human studies ethics
panels. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE STUDY, LEFTY MORONS! Follow the
links your own dumbass Harry here provided for you in the article, and
actually *read* about it, nitwits!
I *swear*, if the Terry Schiavo case shows how stupidly non-conservative
Republicans are, this sort of thing shows how outrageously hypocritical
you idiotic lefty morons are about the poor. You don't give one good
***** about the poor... you care about their votes. You *think* you
see an opportunity for political advantage so you trash some perfectly
sound science with your stupid weepy "concern" about ***** that doesn't
even exist.
No wonder you idiots loose so many elections. When the Reps are being
morons, they're at least being morons for something they believe in. You
morons don't even clear *that* very low hurdle.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rich Travsky" |
|
| Title: Re: Rightards respond to some good old arm-twisting by Democrats |
12 Apr 2005 10:34:13 AM |
|
|
Harvey wrote:
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:4258D12C.86C25221@hotmMOVEail.com...
Harvey wrote:
"Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:bvke511ceo8bqmke2fcj6jrnp9f0lp1bje@4ax.com...
From The Associated Press, 5/8/05:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050408/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/senate_epa_nominee
EPA Cancels Controversial Pesticide Study
By JOHN HEILPRIN, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON -
The Environmental Protection Agency on Friday canceled a
controversial
study using children to measure the effect of pesticides after
Democrats said they would block Senate confirmation of the agency's
new head.
Stephen Johnson, as EPA's acting administrator, ordered an end to
the
planned study, a reversal from the agency's position just a day
earlier when it said it would await the advice of outside
scientific
experts.
_______________________________________________________
There ya go. Ya see what a li'l pain can do?
Harry
Yes, I do see. Did you actually look into the study?
If you had, you would have seen that they were attempting to collect
field data on how pesticides and other potentially harmful common
household chemicals are presently used. Among scientists and, I
guess,
"rightards" this is known as "collecting baseline data," and is
highly
useful where it is ***nearly entirely lacking*** as it is in this
case.
But Barbara Boxer gets the elderly soiled panties in a wad below her
immobile strained facelift because low income households are
targeted,
and chemical industry money is funding research. The fact that low
income households are unlikely to pay for routine pest control and
buy
many more $3 cans of Raid to compensate, and that she should *insist*
that chemical companies fund this sort of research, doesn't matter at
all because she's a brain-dead Dimocratic political hack.
So, yeah, I do see. You morons have stopped some very useful research
on
a real problem. We'll continue to know very little about how these
chemicals are really used by people at risk.
Congratulations, nitwits.
Using children as guinea pigs? THAT'S OK WITH YOU?
RT
Do you have *any* idea wtf you're talking about?
The study is a survey of what is *already happening now*. Direct
involvement of the study staff involves... or rather, would have
involved... interviewing families and collecting urine and food samples.
The study design was cleared by four independent human studies ethics
panels. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE STUDY, LEFTY MORONS! Follow the
links your own dumbass Harry here provided for you in the article, and
actually *read* about it, nitwits!
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=BBOOGOQDIWN0ECRBAELCFFA?type=scienceNews&storyID=8130958
...
The Children's Environmental Exposure Research Study would have paid
families $970 to videotape how spraying insecticides in their homes
affected infants over two years.
...
The research project would have examined the homes of selected children
in Duval County, Florida, and given participants a camcorder, children's
clothes and a $970 payment.
...
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/8242/8242notw3.html
...
The children chosen to participate must live in homes with potentially
high pesticide use. Their parents must agree to spray or have pesticides
sprayed inside their homes routinely during the two-year study period,
and will receive up to $970 for participating.
The homes and children will be monitored five or six times during the
study for exposure levels before and after pesticide applications.
Chemical concentrations will be measured in air, dust, and urine samples,
and by analyzing chemicals absorbed in clothing.
...
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/8246/8246notw3.html
...
According to the original design, the research was to involve 60 children
from birth to three years of age, all from Duval County, Fla. Each
participating family was to receive up to $970 and a video camcorder. The
original brochure and fact sheet on EPA's website both stated that to be
selected, participants "must spray or have sprayed pesticides" inside
their homes routinely during the two-year study period. After press
reports made an issue of this, however, EPA removed almost all information
about the study from the brochure and changed the fact sheet to read, "You
must maintain your normal pesticide or nonpesticide use patterns for your
household."
...
I *swear*, if the Terry Schiavo case shows how stupidly non-conservative
Republicans are, this sort of thing shows how outrageously hypocritical
you idiotic lefty morons are about the poor. You don't give one good
***** about the poor... you care about their votes. You *think* you
see an opportunity for political advantage so you trash some perfectly
sound science with your stupid weepy "concern" about ***** that doesn't
even exist.
This sort of thing shows how outrageously hypocritical you idiotic
rightard morons are. You don't care about the poor, you just see them as
guinea pigs.
No wonder you idiots loose so many elections. When the Reps are being
morons, they're at least being morons for something they believe in. You
morons don't even clear *that* very low hurdle.
Apparently the cons believe in paying people to expose their children
to pesticides...that's the ticket to winning elections, eh?
RT
.
|
|
|
| User: "Harvey" |
|
| Title: Re: Rightards respond to some good old arm-twisting by Democrats |
12 Apr 2005 07:23:02 PM |
|
|
"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:425BEA75.CC47C551@hotmMOVEail.com...
Harvey wrote:
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:4258D12C.86C25221@hotmMOVEail.com...
Harvey wrote:
"Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:bvke511ceo8bqmke2fcj6jrnp9f0lp1bje@4ax.com...
From The Associated Press, 5/8/05:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050408/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/senate_epa_nominee
EPA Cancels Controversial Pesticide Study
By JOHN HEILPRIN, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON -
The Environmental Protection Agency on Friday canceled a
controversial
study using children to measure the effect of pesticides after
Democrats said they would block Senate confirmation of the
agency's
new head.
Stephen Johnson, as EPA's acting administrator, ordered an end
to
the
planned study, a reversal from the agency's position just a day
earlier when it said it would await the advice of outside
scientific
experts.
_______________________________________________________
There ya go. Ya see what a li'l pain can do?
Harry
Yes, I do see. Did you actually look into the study?
If you had, you would have seen that they were attempting to
collect
field data on how pesticides and other potentially harmful common
household chemicals are presently used. Among scientists and, I
guess,
"rightards" this is known as "collecting baseline data," and is
highly
useful where it is ***nearly entirely lacking*** as it is in this
case.
But Barbara Boxer gets the elderly soiled panties in a wad below
her
immobile strained facelift because low income households are
targeted,
and chemical industry money is funding research. The fact that low
income households are unlikely to pay for routine pest control and
buy
many more $3 cans of Raid to compensate, and that she should
*insist*
that chemical companies fund this sort of research, doesn't matter
at
all because she's a brain-dead Dimocratic political hack.
So, yeah, I do see. You morons have stopped some very useful
research
on
a real problem. We'll continue to know very little about how these
chemicals are really used by people at risk.
Congratulations, nitwits.
Using children as guinea pigs? THAT'S OK WITH YOU?
RT
Do you have *any* idea wtf you're talking about?
The study is a survey of what is *already happening now*. Direct
involvement of the study staff involves... or rather, would have
involved... interviewing families and collecting urine and food
samples.
The study design was cleared by four independent human studies ethics
panels. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE STUDY, LEFTY MORONS! Follow
the
links your own dumbass Harry here provided for you in the article,
and
actually *read* about it, nitwits!
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=BBOOGOQDIWN0ECRBAELCFFA?type=scienceNews&storyID=8130958
...
The Children's Environmental Exposure Research Study would have paid
families $970 to videotape how spraying insecticides in their homes
affected infants over two years.
...
The research project would have examined the homes of selected
children
in Duval County, Florida, and given participants a camcorder,
children's
clothes and a $970 payment.
...
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/8242/8242notw3.html
...
The children chosen to participate must live in homes with potentially
high pesticide use. Their parents must agree to spray or have
pesticides
sprayed inside their homes routinely during the two-year study period,
and will receive up to $970 for participating.
The homes and children will be monitored five or six times during the
study for exposure levels before and after pesticide applications.
Chemical concentrations will be measured in air, dust, and urine
samples,
and by analyzing chemicals absorbed in clothing.
...
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/8246/8246notw3.html
...
According to the original design, the research was to involve 60
children
from birth to three years of age, all from Duval County, Fla. Each
participating family was to receive up to $970 and a video camcorder.
The
original brochure and fact sheet on EPA's website both stated that to
be
selected, participants "must spray or have sprayed pesticides" inside
their homes routinely during the two-year study period. After press
reports made an issue of this, however, EPA removed almost all
information
about the study from the brochure and changed the fact sheet to read,
"You
must maintain your normal pesticide or nonpesticide use patterns for
your
household."
...
I *swear*, if the Terry Schiavo case shows how stupidly
non-conservative
Republicans are, this sort of thing shows how outrageously
hypocritical
you idiotic lefty morons are about the poor. You don't give one good
***** about the poor... you care about their votes. You *think* you
see an opportunity for political advantage so you trash some
perfectly
sound science with your stupid weepy "concern" about ***** that
doesn't
even exist.
This sort of thing shows how outrageously hypocritical you idiotic
rightard morons are. You don't care about the poor, you just see them
as
guinea pigs.
No wonder you idiots loose so many elections. When the Reps are being
morons, they're at least being morons for something they believe in.
You
morons don't even clear *that* very low hurdle.
Apparently the cons believe in paying people to expose their children
to pesticides...that's the ticket to winning elections, eh?
Wow, Rich. Ya got a couple of iffy pieces of crap out of the web.
Whoopee.
Listen up, lefty moron. Snopes is kind enough to say what you, and Harry
Hope, and the rest of you fucks have done here is an "urban legend." It
isn't, of course, it's lefties doing their usual stupid hypocritical
*****... in this case, sinking some good science.
But you already knew that, didn't ya?
http://www.snopes.com/toxins/cheers.asp
CHEERS
Claim: An EPA study proposes paying families to allow their children
to be exposed to toxic pesticides.
Status: Multiple - see below.
The EPA plans to expose youngsters to pesticides in order to study what
those chemical compounds do to little children: False.
The EPA plans to study children who live in an area where pesticides are
used year-round: True.
Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2004]
****************************
EPA Will Use Poor Kids as Guinea Pigs to Test Toxic Chemicals
Dear friend,
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has announced plans to launch
an outrageous new study in which participating low income families will
have their children exposed to toxic pesticides over the course of two
years. For taking part in these studies, each family will receive $970,
a free video camera, a T-shirt, and a framed certificate of
appreciation. The study entitled CHEERS (Children's Environmental
Exposure Research Study) will look at how chemicals can be ingested,
inhaled or absorbed by children ranging from babies to 3 years old.
Please take a moment to follow this link and join tens of thousands of
citizens in petitioning the EPA to terminate this study prior to its
proposed launch in early 2005.
More information, related newspaper headlines and petition here:
http://www.organicconsumers.org/epa-alert.htm
Please also forward this message.
****************************
Origins: Yet again an interesting mix of truth and scare has been
loosed upon us all. While the November 2004 e-mail quoted above is
relatively factual, its wording leaves those who receive it with an
impression far removed from the truth. While the proposed investigation
is real, the nature of the test subjects is misunderstood, leading to
the wrong conclusion being arrived at by those who hear of it.
Through a research project known as the Children's Environmental
Exposure Research Study (CHEERS), the United States' Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) plans to gather data about pesticide and
household chemical exposure in very young children. The study will begin
in the summer of 2005 in Jacksonville, Florida, and will entail
monitoring 60 infants (newborn to just shy of 13 months old) for a
period of two years.
However, while the e-mail leaves the impression that poverty-stricken
families are for the price of a camcorder and $970 heartlessly offering
up their tots as lab rats, the little ones to be deliberately sickened
by cruel scientists intent upon advancing human knowledge even at the
price of 60 babies potentially dealt life-long serious physical ailments
by exposure to dreadful chemicals, the truth is quite different. One of
the reasons the EPA chose Duval County, Florida, as the site of this
research had to do with year-round pesticide use in that area. The
children who will be the subjects of the study live there. In other
words, if all the clipboard-wielding EPA people stayed home and the
project were cancelled before it began, these same children would be
exposed to these same pesticides and in the same amounts, due to nothing
more sinister than where their parents chose to settle and raise their
families.
The EPA will not be administering pesticides to children. Children who
are ingesting pesticides thanks to where they live will be studied by
the EPA.
Given that these youngsters are coming into contact with noxious
chemicals thanks to where they live, the EPA saw a good opportunity to
examine the effects of such compounds on small children by studying
subjects drawn from this particular group. CHEERS will track 60 of these
little ones over the course of two years, measuring not only their
exposure to pesticides but also to ordinary household chemicals
(cleaning products and the like). The parents of kids taking part in the
study will have to keep very careful logs on which products are used and
in which amounts in their homes. They will also be required to videotape
their tykes being studied and maintain logs of the little ones'
activities. For this and for allowing researchers into the family
domicile every few months to assess the child being observed and to
examine the home, these parents will receive a $970 stipend and will at
the end of the two years get to keep the video camera.
RT
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rich Travsky " |
|
| Title: Re: Rightards respond to some good old arm-twisting by Democrats |
13 Apr 2005 12:07:31 AM |
|
|
Harvey wrote:
"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:425BEA75.CC47C551@hotmMOVEail.com...
Harvey wrote:
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:4258D12C.86C25221@hotmMOVEail.com...
Harvey wrote:
"Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:bvke511ceo8bqmke2fcj6jrnp9f0lp1bje@4ax.com...
From The Associated Press, 5/8/05:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050408/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/senate_epa_nominee
EPA Cancels Controversial Pesticide Study
By JOHN HEILPRIN, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON -
The Environmental Protection Agency on Friday canceled a
controversial
study using children to measure the effect of pesticides after
Democrats said they would block Senate confirmation of the
agency's
new head.
Stephen Johnson, as EPA's acting administrator, ordered an end
to
the
planned study, a reversal from the agency's position just a day
earlier when it said it would await the advice of outside
scientific
experts.
_______________________________________________________
There ya go. Ya see what a li'l pain can do?
Harry
Yes, I do see. Did you actually look into the study?
If you had, you would have seen that they were attempting to
collect
field data on how pesticides and other potentially harmful common
household chemicals are presently used. Among scientists and, I
guess,
"rightards" this is known as "collecting baseline data," and is
highly
useful where it is ***nearly entirely lacking*** as it is in this
case.
But Barbara Boxer gets the elderly soiled panties in a wad below
her
immobile strained facelift because low income households are
targeted,
and chemical industry money is funding research. The fact that low
income households are unlikely to pay for routine pest control and
buy
many more $3 cans of Raid to compensate, and that she should
*insist*
that chemical companies fund this sort of research, doesn't matter
at
all because she's a brain-dead Dimocratic political hack.
So, yeah, I do see. You morons have stopped some very useful
research
on
a real problem. We'll continue to know very little about how these
chemicals are really used by people at risk.
Congratulations, nitwits.
Using children as guinea pigs? THAT'S OK WITH YOU?
RT
Do you have *any* idea wtf you're talking about?
The study is a survey of what is *already happening now*. Direct
involvement of the study staff involves... or rather, would have
involved... interviewing families and collecting urine and food
samples.
The study design was cleared by four independent human studies ethics
panels. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE STUDY, LEFTY MORONS! Follow
the
links your own dumbass Harry here provided for you in the article,
and
actually *read* about it, nitwits!
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=BBOOGOQDIWN0ECRBAELCFFA?type=scienceNews&storyID=8130958
...
The Children's Environmental Exposure Research Study would have paid
families $970 to videotape how spraying insecticides in their homes
affected infants over two years.
...
The research project would have examined the homes of selected
children
in Duval County, Florida, and given participants a camcorder,
children's
clothes and a $970 payment.
...
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/8242/8242notw3.html
...
The children chosen to participate must live in homes with potentially
high pesticide use. Their parents must agree to spray or have
pesticides
sprayed inside their homes routinely during the two-year study period,
and will receive up to $970 for participating.
The homes and children will be monitored five or six times during the
study for exposure levels before and after pesticide applications.
Chemical concentrations will be measured in air, dust, and urine
samples,
and by analyzing chemicals absorbed in clothing.
...
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/8246/8246notw3.html
...
According to the original design, the research was to involve 60
children
from birth to three years of age, all from Duval County, Fla. Each
participating family was to receive up to $970 and a video camcorder.
The
original brochure and fact sheet on EPA's website both stated that to
be
selected, participants "must spray or have sprayed pesticides" inside
their homes routinely during the two-year study period. After press
reports made an issue of this, however, EPA removed almost all
information
about the study from the brochure and changed the fact sheet to read,
"You
must maintain your normal pesticide or nonpesticide use patterns for
your
household."
...
I *swear*, if the Terry Schiavo case shows how stupidly
non-conservative
Republicans are, this sort of thing shows how outrageously
hypocritical
you idiotic lefty morons are about the poor. You don't give one good
***** about the poor... you care about their votes. You *think* you
see an opportunity for political advantage so you trash some
perfectly
sound science with your stupid weepy "concern" about ***** that
doesn't
even exist.
This sort of thing shows how outrageously hypocritical you idiotic
rightard morons are. You don't care about the poor, you just see them
as
guinea pigs.
No wonder you idiots loose so many elections. When the Reps are being
morons, they're at least being morons for something they believe in.
You
morons don't even clear *that* very low hurdle.
Apparently the cons believe in paying people to expose their children
to pesticides...that's the ticket to winning elections, eh?
Wow, Rich. Ya got a couple of iffy pieces of crap out of the web.
Whoopee.
Listen up, lefty moron. Snopes is kind enough to say what you, and Harry
Hope, and the rest of you fucks have done here is an "urban legend." It
isn't, of course, it's lefties doing their usual stupid hypocritical
*****... in this case, sinking some good science.
But you already knew that, didn't ya?
http://www.snopes.com/toxins/cheers.asp
Wow Harv. Ya got a couple of iffy pieces of crap out of the web.
Listen rightard idiot.
Do you know who or what acs.org is?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Harvey" |
|
| Title: Re: Rightards respond to some good old arm-twisting by Democrats |
13 Apr 2005 06:52:33 PM |
|
|
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:425CA913.7E3637E4@hotmMOVEail.com...
Harvey wrote:
"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:425BEA75.CC47C551@hotmMOVEail.com...
Harvey wrote:
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:4258D12C.86C25221@hotmMOVEail.com...
Harvey wrote:
"Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:bvke511ceo8bqmke2fcj6jrnp9f0lp1bje@4ax.com...
From The Associated Press, 5/8/05:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050408/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/senate_epa_nominee
EPA Cancels Controversial Pesticide Study
By JOHN HEILPRIN, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON -
The Environmental Protection Agency on Friday canceled a
controversial
study using children to measure the effect of pesticides
after
Democrats said they would block Senate confirmation of the
agency's
new head.
Stephen Johnson, as EPA's acting administrator, ordered an
end
to
the
planned study, a reversal from the agency's position just a
day
earlier when it said it would await the advice of outside
scientific
experts.
_______________________________________________________
There ya go. Ya see what a li'l pain can do?
Harry
Yes, I do see. Did you actually look into the study?
If you had, you would have seen that they were attempting to
collect
field data on how pesticides and other potentially harmful
common
household chemicals are presently used. Among scientists and, I
guess,
"rightards" this is known as "collecting baseline data," and is
highly
useful where it is ***nearly entirely lacking*** as it is in
this
case.
But Barbara Boxer gets the elderly soiled panties in a wad
below
her
immobile strained facelift because low income households are
targeted,
and chemical industry money is funding research. The fact that
low
income households are unlikely to pay for routine pest control
and
buy
many more $3 cans of Raid to compensate, and that she should
*insist*
that chemical companies fund this sort of research, doesn't
matter
at
all because she's a brain-dead Dimocratic political hack.
So, yeah, I do see. You morons have stopped some very useful
research
on
a real problem. We'll continue to know very little about how
these
chemicals are really used by people at risk.
Congratulations, nitwits.
Using children as guinea pigs? THAT'S OK WITH YOU?
RT
Do you have *any* idea wtf you're talking about?
The study is a survey of what is *already happening now*. Direct
involvement of the study staff involves... or rather, would have
involved... interviewing families and collecting urine and food
samples.
The study design was cleared by four independent human studies
ethics
panels. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE STUDY, LEFTY MORONS!
Follow
the
links your own dumbass Harry here provided for you in the article,
and
actually *read* about it, nitwits!
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=BBOOGOQDIWN0ECRBAELCFFA?type=scienceNews&storyID=8130958
...
The Children's Environmental Exposure Research Study would have
paid
families $970 to videotape how spraying insecticides in their homes
affected infants over two years.
...
The research project would have examined the homes of selected
children
in Duval County, Florida, and given participants a camcorder,
children's
clothes and a $970 payment.
...
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/8242/8242notw3.html
...
The children chosen to participate must live in homes with
potentially
high pesticide use. Their parents must agree to spray or have
pesticides
sprayed inside their homes routinely during the two-year study
period,
and will receive up to $970 for participating.
The homes and children will be monitored five or six times during
the
study for exposure levels before and after pesticide applications.
Chemical concentrations will be measured in air, dust, and urine
samples,
and by analyzing chemicals absorbed in clothing.
...
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/8246/8246notw3.html
...
According to the original design, the research was to involve 60
children
from birth to three years of age, all from Duval County, Fla. Each
participating family was to receive up to $970 and a video
camcorder.
The
original brochure and fact sheet on EPA's website both stated that
to
be
selected, participants "must spray or have sprayed pesticides"
inside
their homes routinely during the two-year study period. After press
reports made an issue of this, however, EPA removed almost all
information
about the study from the brochure and changed the fact sheet to
read,
"You
must maintain your normal pesticide or nonpesticide use patterns
for
your
household."
...
I *swear*, if the Terry Schiavo case shows how stupidly
non-conservative
Republicans are, this sort of thing shows how outrageously
hypocritical
you idiotic lefty morons are about the poor. You don't give one
good
***** about the poor... you care about their votes. You *think*
you
see an opportunity for political advantage so you trash some
perfectly
sound science with your stupid weepy "concern" about ***** that
doesn't
even exist.
This sort of thing shows how outrageously hypocritical you idiotic
rightard morons are. You don't care about the poor, you just see
them
as
guinea pigs.
No wonder you idiots loose so many elections. When the Reps are
being
morons, they're at least being morons for something they believe
in.
You
morons don't even clear *that* very low hurdle.
Apparently the cons believe in paying people to expose their
children
to pesticides...that's the ticket to winning elections, eh?
Wow, Rich. Ya got a couple of iffy pieces of crap out of the web.
Whoopee.
Listen up, lefty moron. Snopes is kind enough to say what you, and
Harry
Hope, and the rest of you fucks have done here is an "urban legend."
It
isn't, of course, it's lefties doing their usual stupid hypocritical
*****... in this case, sinking some good science.
But you already knew that, didn't ya?
http://www.snopes.com/toxins/cheers.asp
Wow Harv. Ya got a couple of iffy pieces of crap out of the web.
One. Which you snipped.
Listen rightard idiot.
Do you know who or what acs.org is?
Lessee... on the one hand, we have Snopes, which has been debunking
urban legends for many years, and four ethical review boards, two of
them at major universities. On the other, we have dear ol' lefty Bette
Hileman with her BA in Chemistry writing for a chemical society rag no
one ever reads.
And, ultimately, we have no baseline data on drug metabolites being done
on these kids. Good work, lefty.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rich Travsky " |
|
| Title: Re: Rightards respond to some good old arm-twisting by Democrats |
16 Apr 2005 11:41:40 PM |
|
|
Harvey wrote:
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:425CA913.7E3637E4@hotmMOVEail.com...
Harvey wrote:
"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:425BEA75.CC47C551@hotmMOVEail.com...
Harvey wrote:
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:4258D12C.86C25221@hotmMOVEail.com...
Harvey wrote:
"Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:bvke511ceo8bqmke2fcj6jrnp9f0lp1bje@4ax.com...
From The Associated Press, 5/8/05:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050408/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/senate_epa_nominee
EPA Cancels Controversial Pesticide Study
By JOHN HEILPRIN, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON -
The Environmental Protection Agency on Friday canceled a
controversial
study using children to measure the effect of pesticides
after
Democrats said they would block Senate confirmation of the
agency's
new head.
Stephen Johnson, as EPA's acting administrator, ordered an
end
to
the
planned study, a reversal from the agency's position just a
day
earlier when it said it would await the advice of outside
scientific
experts.
_______________________________________________________
There ya go. Ya see what a li'l pain can do?
Harry
Yes, I do see. Did you actually look into the study?
If you had, you would have seen that they were attempting to
collect
field data on how pesticides and other potentially harmful
common
household chemicals are presently used. Among scientists and, I
guess,
"rightards" this is known as "collecting baseline data," and is
highly
useful where it is ***nearly entirely lacking*** as it is in
this
case.
But Barbara Boxer gets the elderly soiled panties in a wad
below
her
immobile strained facelift because low income households are
targeted,
and chemical industry money is funding research. The fact that
low
income households are unlikely to pay for routine pest control
and
buy
many more $3 cans of Raid to compensate, and that she should
*insist*
that chemical companies fund this sort of research, doesn't
matter
at
all because she's a brain-dead Dimocratic political hack.
So, yeah, I do see. You morons have stopped some very useful
research
on
a real problem. We'll continue to know very little about how
these
chemicals are really used by people at risk.
Congratulations, nitwits.
Using children as guinea pigs? THAT'S OK WITH YOU?
RT
Do you have *any* idea wtf you're talking about?
The study is a survey of what is *already happening now*. Direct
involvement of the study staff involves... or rather, would have
involved... interviewing families and collecting urine and food
samples.
The study design was cleared by four independent human studies
ethics
panels. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE STUDY, LEFTY MORONS!
Follow
the
links your own dumbass Harry here provided for you in the article,
and
actually *read* about it, nitwits!
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=BBOOGOQDIWN0ECRBAELCFFA?type=scienceNews&storyID=8130958
...
The Children's Environmental Exposure Research Study would have
paid
families $970 to videotape how spraying insecticides in their homes
affected infants over two years.
...
The research project would have examined the homes of selected
children
in Duval County, Florida, and given participants a camcorder,
children's
clothes and a $970 payment.
...
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/8242/8242notw3.html
...
The children chosen to participate must live in homes with
potentially
high pesticide use. Their parents must agree to spray or have
pesticides
sprayed inside their homes routinely during the two-year study
period,
and will receive up to $970 for participating.
The homes and children will be monitored five or six times during
the
study for exposure levels before and after pesticide applications.
Chemical concentrations will be measured in air, dust, and urine
samples,
and by analyzing chemicals absorbed in clothing.
...
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/8246/8246notw3.html
...
According to the original design, the research was to involve 60
children
from birth to three years of age, all from Duval County, Fla. Each
participating family was to receive up to $970 and a video
camcorder.
The
original brochure and fact sheet on EPA's website both stated that
to
be
selected, participants "must spray or have sprayed pesticides"
inside
their homes routinely during the two-year study period. After press
reports made an issue of this, however, EPA removed almost all
information
about the study from the brochure and changed the fact sheet to
read,
"You
must maintain your normal pesticide or nonpesticide use patterns
for
your
household."
...
I *swear*, if the Terry Schiavo case shows how stupidly
non-conservative
Republicans are, this sort of thing shows how outrageously
hypocritical
you idiotic lefty morons are about the poor. You don't give one
good
***** about the poor... you care about their votes. You *think*
you
see an opportunity for political advantage so you trash some
perfectly
sound science with your stupid weepy "concern" about ***** that
doesn't
even exist.
This sort of thing shows how outrageously hypocritical you idiotic
rightard morons are. You don't care about the poor, you just see
them
as
guinea pigs.
No wonder you idiots loose so many elections. When the Reps are
being
morons, they're at least being morons for something they believe
in.
You
morons don't even clear *that* very low hurdle.
Apparently the cons believe in paying people to expose their
children
to pesticides...that's the ticket to winning elections, eh?
Wow, Rich. Ya got a couple of iffy pieces of crap out of the web.
Whoopee.
Listen up, lefty moron. Snopes is kind enough to say what you, and
Harry
Hope, and the rest of you fucks have done here is an "urban legend."
It
isn't, of course, it's lefties doing their usual stupid hypocritical
*****... in this case, sinking some good science.
But you already knew that, didn't ya?
http://www.snopes.com/toxins/cheers.asp
Wow Harv. Ya got a couple of iffy pieces of crap out of the web.
One. Which you snipped.
Wow, and people said you were slow....a bit thick...
Listen rightard idiot.
Do you know who or what acs.org is?
Lessee... on the one hand, we have Snopes, which has been debunking
urban legends for many years, and four ethical review boards, two of
them at major universities. On the other, we have dear ol' lefty Bette
Hileman with her BA in Chemistry writing for a chemical society rag no
one ever reads.
And, ultimately, we have no baseline data on drug metabolites being done
on these kids. Good work, lefty.
Lessee - you have NO idea what the American Chemical Society is...premier
professional organization for chemists in America, founded in 1876 with
159,000 members...oldest such professional organization in the world...
publisher or co-publisher of thirty peer reviewed journals and magazines...
resource for published chemistry papers going back to 1879...just had
their 125th anniversary...
Yeah, that sounds REAL lefty...
I suppose we'll have to forgive your ignorance on this ...
RT
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
Re: Where the Good Jobs Are Going
Re: US economy fucked! - But Good, Real GOOD, Eh.
Good News - "US to face labour shortage by 2010"
Re: Taking good men and making them better?
The Bush Legacy: Read my lips, no new (good) jobs...
Republicans prove, once again, that they are the good ole family values, ethics, integrity party
A good week for America is a bad week for liberals.
9/11 Clowns let a dishy schoolmarm get the good lines
| Re: Limbaugh Says Prison Guards Were "Just Having a Good Time"
Anal Cyst Limbaugh turns torture into a "good time"
Re: Taking good men and making them better?
American military not very good at fighting guerilla wars...heavy casualties, much stress, little real success.
Re: yes executing chimp is too good for him
Good That We've Lost War in Iraq
Alberto Gonzalez, torture fetishist, is a modest, good-natured fellow.
|
|
|
