House Dems press EPA on dioxin; Ben & Jerry's to the rescue!

Seventy-two House Democrats wrote to the EPA yesterday pressing the agency to complete its 20-years-in-the-making risk assessment on dioxin. Possibly they don’t know this, but one of the reasons the dioxin assessment has taken so long is that it was debunked and derailed by JunkScience.com and Ben & Jerry’s in November 1999.

JunkScience.com aficionados will recall that, following Ben & Jerry’s claim printed on its ice cream containers that “there is no safe exposure to dioxin,” we tested Ben & Jerry’s for dioxin and found that a single serving contained 200 times the level of dioxin that the EPA said was safe and 2,000 times the level of dioxin that the EPA would eventually propose to set as the safe level.

Our results were published at the Dioxin 2000 scientific meeting and Steve Milloy testified before the EPA’s Science Advisory Board along with a carton of Ben & Jerry’s “(Agent) Orange Cream.”

The dioxin scare debunked, courtesy of Ben & Jerry's.

Our results were confirmed by prominent dioxin alarmist Arnold Schecter shortly thereafter.

As no one considers Ben & Jerry’s to be a threat to human health, it follows that dioxin isn’t one either.

Related links and references:

  • Gough M and Milloy S, “Dioxin in Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream“, JunkScience.com, November 8, 1999.
  • “Food rules out of sync, study says: Dioxin in ice cream safe, but far exceeds federal standards’, Detroit News, November 7, 1999, page A1.
  • “Ben & Jerry’s dioxin surprise,” National Post (Canada), November 11, 1999.
  • A Scoop of Debunkey Monkey, Please, FOXNews.com, July 8, 2000.

3 thoughts on “House Dems press EPA on dioxin; Ben & Jerry's to the rescue!”

  1. “Seventy-two Senate Democrats”

    I think there is an error in that quote. If there were 72 Democrat Senators, we would be in a lot more trouble than we are in.

  2. Facts!!?? Facts!!?? We don’t need no stinkin’ facts!!

    Your naivete is showing dudes. You actually think the B&J fiasco will have one whit of influence on the EPA or the proposed legislation? Ha. Lots of luck with that.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.