Home | About | Donate

When Will We Start Applying the Precautionary Principle to the Chemicals that Are Killing Our Kids?

Originally published at http://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/08/02/when-will-we-start-applying-precautionary-principle-chemicals-are-killing-our-kids

Why have we come so far on protecting our kids from some harms, only to allow chemical companies to poison them?
Here’s an important reason:



For my sophomore year in college, I was a chemistry major and was employed in a professor’s laboratory. The building, built in 1912, did not have the best ventilation system. I decided that I did not want to dedicate my body to science that early in life and changed majors to focus on my love of the environment.

1 Like

Lets take you’re question a step further Katherine.
Why was a doctor who found a cure for cancer, destroyed by the agencies that regulate the medical industry?
The short answer…Money.


This is a long, but worthwhile video. Note: Don’t have anything around you, that could be thrown at the screen while you watch.

Why ?

How this ~ In John Cremony’s 1868 classic “Life Among the Apaches”, I remember vividly Cremony’s shock when he reported that though the Apache recognized the power of writing, and that the white mans’ technology was superior to theirs,

They would not give up their “precious children” to be ‘educated’.

Again, it was Cremony’s shock that impressed me, as much as the Apaches’ regard for their way of life, as represented by their children.

Today - how many children are given over to ‘others’ to be raised - either with pre-pre-kindergartens, with low paid day care workers, or imported women to ‘care’ for the children at home while the ‘professional’ and ‘elite’ class goes out to advance the cause ?

The institutional raising of children - a form of corporate externalization, n’est pa ?

Our society is very very sick.

Thank the fates I found the mountains, where I applied the precautionary principle as a matter of course, as would any sane human being.


“Sane - human being” One or the other ?

It would be admittedly hard to argue we are not human beings ~

That leaves “sane” - doesn’t it ?

I don’t want to take away from the empathy for our children.

A secondary situation looms since our national longevity went DOWN this past year.
There goes one of the ploys to negate the viability of social security.
Can’t ask us to work longer if we are dying sooner.

I have all four of Rachel Carson’s books, including, of course, Silent Spring. JFK and Jacqueline were fans of Ms. Carson, and I thought it proper to bring this association up here, on this article’s byline.

Here we are, 57 years after Silent Spring - turning back the clock - dismantling every possible noble and right cause.

Rachel Carson and JFK, an Environmental Tag Team

Just to put things in perspective on the level of risk involved here.

Probable human carcinogen is a category (Group 2A) from the International Agency for Research on Cancer.

In the same category as Glyphosate and Malathion are “emissions from high temperature frying”, red meat, “drinking hot beverages”, shift work, wood smoke.

So Roundup carries about the same risk as a bacon sandwich.

The vast majority of diseases prevalent in modern society today can be attributed to exposure to Chemicals. Historically there have always been “Childhood” diseases but most of those were due to sanitary issues such as contiminated water and the like. The modern diseases are very new.

Tell you what. I will eat 4 bacon sandwiches and you can drink 4 glasses of Roundup.

You sound like this guy.

1 Like

So you are saying that the International Agency for Research on Cancer have put red meat in the wrong list?

Also, you might note that they are talking about the risk of getting cancer from using Roundup as a herbicide, not about the risk of using it as a soft drink. A difficult concept I know.

You are the one that proposed Roundup poses the same risks as a bacon sandwich. I know it difficult to grasp but when on eats food that has been dosed with chemicals those chemicals go into your body.

No that’s what the International Agency for Research on Cancer proposes.

That is not what they proepose. That is what you decided was the case. This the same sort of nonsense that people supporting the Nuclear industry attempt when they claim exposure to radiation the sam as eating a banana.

So your case is that when they place Glyphosate on the list of probable carcinogens, they mean it, but when they place “red meat” on the same list they don’t mean it?

Actually the bacon sandwich carries the higher risk because “processed meats” are in the Group 1 carcinogens - as “substances known to be carcinogenic” as opposed to the list containing Roundup which is for “probable carcinogens”.

“This the same sort of nonsense that people supporting the Nuclear industry attempt when they claim exposure to radiation the sam as eating a banana.”

Except that on many occasions that “nonsense” is actually accurate due to radiation limits enforced by the NRC and other nuclear regulatory agencies. However what is misleading about these claims is that they typically do not describe the type of radiation exposure, type of radiation decay from specific isotopes, bioaccumulation of the isotopes, water soluability of the isotopes or additional biological factors that may increase the risk of exposure.

Although in most cases people freak out about radiation without understanding any of the variables I listed above anyways and for some reason people are more concerned about isotopes from a nuclear facility than from a coal facility or from industrial, medical, research or other industries even if they are exactly the same isotope of the exact same quantity, which is complete insanity…

1 Like

I have yet to see anyone putting on a heavy lead blanket with the grocer hiding in the other room when a person eats a banana.

As alluded to the body by design can cleanse itself of those radioactive isotopes from Bananas. We have evolved to deal with it. Exposure to herbicides , by the same token is not the same as eating a bacon sandwich. I can make a bacon sandwich and not have to wear a mask or sent my kids and pets to another room when i do so. The warning label on Roundup takes up 90 percent of the label.

Those people making such comparisons are generally shills hired by Monsanto.

1 Like

All the same as why you don’t need to buy a car with lead cladding when youre driving through an area where a nuclear plant exists…

Not an apt comparison. Persons that work in those plants will experience cumulative exposure which the same reason that Dentist hides in the other room when he takes an x-ray. This is hardly the same as eating more then one banana a day.

Those people working the cleanup at Fukishima have to be pulled out after the Cumulative exposure too high and Robots do not suffer breakdowns and failure after a few hours of operation just because ther lots of banana trees around.

I do not know what it like in the USA but Nuclear Power plants carry a warning sign on all fences and entrances warning of the Radiation, not something I see in stores with shelves of Bananas or bacon.

1 Like

“Not an apt comparison. Persons that work in those plants will experience cumulative exposure which the same reason that Dentist hides in the other room when he takes an x-ray. This is hardly the same as eating more then one banana a day.”

Well that’s ironic considering youre comparing radiation dosage of a banana to the worker’s safety limits of exposure, which of course would be higher than acceptable levels of radiation emitted by a plant. This is why employees who work in a nuclear facility take necessary precautions and wear high density materials.

Believe it or not the NRC, DOE, and EPA have a plethora of reports detailing the different levels of adequate of radiological exposure dependent on working areas, environment and events. To categorize all types and conditions under acceptable levels for exposed workers is purposefully misleading and malicious.