Monday, May 17, 2010

Environmental No No’s

Although environmentalists and the media speak freely of Climate Change, pollution, oil spills, invasive species and the like--though, dysfunctionally--there are two topics that often don’t get any press because they’re so toxic.  One is over-population and the other is the possible environmental links with manmade chemicals and cancer. 

Over-population doesn’t get the media’s attention, because nobody knows how to approach it tastefully, even though we have probably over populated planet many times over.  Got solutions?  Get ready to be pillaged. 

On environmental links to manmade chemicals and cancer it is often so difficult to link the two (though, it does seem likely) that few dare to make the connections with cancers and manmade chemicals once they escape the lab.  Mysteriously, over the decades we have assumed that if we dump terrifically toxic chemicals into our land, air, and water, our environment will neutralize them.  How does that work?  (Even our oceans seem to be hitting a limit as to what it can dilute and dissolve.)  It’s one of those assumptions that may radically ramp up the incidences of cancer.  Perhaps it has:

President's Cancer Panel: Environmentally caused cancers are 'grossly underestimated' and 'needlessly devastate American lives.' — Environmental Health News "The true burden of environmentally induced cancers has been grossly underestimated," says the President's Cancer Panel in a strongly reported report that urges action to reduce people's widespread exposure to carcinogens. The panel today advised President Obama "to use the power of your office to remove the carcinogens and other toxins from our food, water, and air that needlessly increase health care costs, cripple our nation's productivity, and devastate American lives." (May 6, 2010) Environmental Health News

No comments: