I admire a certain writer who puts up this fine piece on why small particles–tiny dust–don’t kill nobody the way the EPA claims.
Category Archives: Precautionary principle
Charles is a physician/anesthesiologist/electrical engineer and a cogent commenter on the human foibles.
If you try hard and are lucky on selection–you too can show a causal relationship.
In this case assume that PETA has an agenda–and after that it goes down hill.
For many years now I have been a fan of the American Council on Science and Health and am honored to be on their advisory panel.
OOOOOOH so scary, say the professional Chicken Littles.
This silly little research announcement about ‘potential’ toxicity from crib mattresses is an annuity for the authors.
From ACSH: Upholding its tradition, a new Lancet piece on chemicals aims to scare rather than inform
The current issue of Lancet Neurology has a “sky is falling” alarm about the alleged ever-rising threat of environmental chemicals for our children’s neurological development. The authors are well-versed in this subject: not toxicology or neurology, no, we mean they are experts in the subject of trying to scare parents and the media about remote or hypothetical chemical threats. Continue reading
Frank Furedi writes and speaks on the vicious problem of the precautionary principle.
Steve Milloy, Stan Young and many others have argued that EPA researchers should show their data and methods.
Thomas Sowell continues his series of essays on fact free liberal thinking.
We already put up the first and II.
Gee, there just isn’t enough information on the health risks of fracking for this Penn journalist.
This essay is about surveys of professionals involved in assessing chemical/toxicological risks.
Very enlightening and more sensible than what we see in the political forums and the media. These professionals are properly concerned about the political “consensus” and the fanatic influence, and would prefer more science, less hysteria.
I know, maybe you want to see the latest–later.
Now we talk PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE, since it drives much of what we criticize here at JunkScience.com.
The idea that one bad event is too intolerable and you can’t be too risk averse.
“Former Chief Government Scientist Professor Sir John Beddington has accused EU policymakers of misusing the precautionary principle in their approach to pesticides such as neonicotinoids.” Continue reading
Companies selling dietary supplements containing lead have convinced a California Superior Court judge that chemicals occurring naturally in foods do not count as chemical exposure for consumers and are exempt from Proposition 65’s warning label requirements. Continue reading
Limits on electromagnetic radiation emissions by power stations in Argentina do not respect the precautionary principle. Continue reading
Government approves world’s first commercial deep-sea mining project despite vehement objections over threat to marine life Continue reading
Really? I thought the mealy-mouthed empty nonsense a great improvement over previous efforts. Definite progress. Continue reading
Sigh… Actually Tim, Australia is still pretty much a blank sheet, waiting for us to terraform into an environment that suits us better. Once we have done so we can sustain anything we want. There is nothing magical about the way it was before we started improving it any more than there is some special quality about its previous desperately unproductive state.
We were a country of nation builders but constant white-anting by the green left has eroded us to a collection of effete worriers, too uncertain to manage a trip to the corner store. That’s not ‘public wisdom’ but societal sabotage. Continue reading