+- Punaweb Forum (http://punaweb.org/forum)
+-- Forum: Punaweb Forums (http://punaweb.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Punatalk (http://punaweb.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: Sen Ruderman, where is the proof (/showthread.php?tid=12983)
RE: Sen Ruderman, where is the proof - Permie - 01-15-2014
Allergy and toxicity are very different things. With that said, some of the organic pesticides are absolutely horrible as well. There's a reason I want to grow my own food. Because I don't trust a lot of the organic food either.
Rob, it's not about death. It's relatively easy to prove that something isn't causing people to die over the short term. The issues that are arising is they are finding that (as just one example) these compounds are affecting the neural development of children. The kids don't die. But they end up with ADHD as a study in the highly reputable journal of pediatrics has correlated: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/125/6/e1270.short or lower IQ: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21507776
RE: Sen Ruderman, where is the proof - Rob Tucker - 01-15-2014
Permie,
I'm not buying it. I see the same hysteria as the anti vaccination crowd. Lot's of huffing and puffing, lots of hot air, lots of dubious web sites, not much substance.
I won't make death a measure of standards but fifty years ago everyone knew to wash your fruits and vegetables (and hands) before eating. It's not that complicated.
RE: Sen Ruderman, where is the proof - Permie - 01-15-2014
You're calling studies published at the Journal of Pediatrics, the NIH, and Environmental Health Journal dubious websites? I'm posting highly reputable, peer reviewed scientific data. If that sort of information doesn't make you open your mind a little about the possibility that this stuff isn't quite as safe as the manufacturers claim, I find that disappointing. But to each their own.
RE: Sen Ruderman, where is the proof - Rob Tucker - 01-15-2014
Cherry picking studies does not impress me. I glanced at a couple of yours and immediately noticed they were inconclusive. "A chance of" doesn't weigh much on my scale.
RE: Sen Ruderman, where is the proof - Permie - 01-15-2014
All good scientists will post a conclusion like this when research needs additional confirmation:
quote:The problem is, some then use such statements to mean they have no merit. What they mean is that more research needs to be done to confirm (or not) preliminary findings. Conversely, bad scientists test their compounds in a dozen rats and a couple goats, none die, so they call it safe. And for whatever reason, the same people that tend to find the studies I post as having no merit, take those manufacturers at their word.
These findings support the hypothesis that organophosphate exposure, at levels common among US children, may contribute to ADHD prevalence. Prospective studies are needed to establish whether this association is causal.
RE: Sen Ruderman, where is the proof - Russell - 01-15-2014
Richard Ha, the usual pseudonyms, and a couple of pro-GMO PR guys from the mainland have chosen to accuse me of conflict of interest. Having nothing of substance to say, he is repeating these false allegations everywhere he can.
I will reply in detail shortly. But for now please be assured there is no conflict of interest. I have this on the highest authority, that is, the Senate attorneys who decide such matters.
Richard Ha is incorrect ethically, legally, factually and logically. I have explained this to Mr. Ha on several occasions in print, including these pages and he ignores my answer, repeating the falsehood that I have not responded.
Freedom of speech is a two way street, and I did not relinquish my rights when I got elected. In fact I have a greater duty than ever to represent my community.
Mr. Ha subscribes to the infamous theory that if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it. I feel sorry for him, but I will not be silent on important issues.
Russell
RE: Sen Ruderman, where is the proof - Rob Tucker - 01-15-2014
Permie, You are reassuring me that studies put forth as evidence of a position are in fact inconclusive.
RE: Sen Ruderman, where is the proof - Permie - 01-15-2014
Rob, all studies by reputable scientists are inconclusive until peer review and confirmation by other studies. That doesn't make their data without merit.
RE: Sen Ruderman, where is the proof - Rob Tucker - 01-15-2014
They lack merit as an argument on a public forum or ethical debate. Lots of things get studied.
The GMO debate is rife with bad information and mixed purposes and unintended consequences.
Wash your apples and papayas and you will not be poisoned by pesticides.
RE: Sen Ruderman, where is the proof - Permie - 01-15-2014
Rife with bad information indeed. Please educate me as to how I am supposed to wash off a systemic pesticide? Thanks!