Slashdot Mirror
EPA Blocks Warnings on Cancer-Causing Chemical: Report (politico.com)
The Trump administration is suppressing an Environmental Protection Agency report that warns that most Americans inhale enough formaldehyde vapor in the course of daily life to put them at risk of developing leukemia and other ailments, a current and a former agency official told POLITICO. The news outlet adds: The warnings are contained in a draft health assessment EPA scientists completed just before Donald Trump became president, according to the officials. They said top advisers to departing Administrator Scott Pruitt are delaying its release as part of a campaign to undermine the agency's independent research into the health risks of toxic chemicals.
Andrew Wheeler, the No. 2 official at EPA who will be the agency's new acting chief as of Monday, also has a history with the chemical. He was staff director for the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee in 2004, when his boss, then-Chairman Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), sought to delay an earlier iteration of the formaldehyde assessment. Formaldehyde is one of the most commonly used chemicals in the country. Americans are exposed to it through wood composites in cabinets and furniture, as well as air pollution from major refineries.
Andrew Wheeler, the No. 2 official at EPA who will be the agency's new acting chief as of Monday, also has a history with the chemical. He was staff director for the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee in 2004, when his boss, then-Chairman Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), sought to delay an earlier iteration of the formaldehyde assessment. Formaldehyde is one of the most commonly used chemicals in the country. Americans are exposed to it through wood composites in cabinets and furniture, as well as air pollution from major refineries.
OK, who here is snorting formaldehyde ?
It's in hair products apparently according to the article... so anyone who puts conditioner on their nose hair is at risk of snorting formaldehyde.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Environmental Pollution Agency
Because Jesus and the bible.
Thank you Jesus!
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Haha! Jokes on them because I am bald... ... ... Oh. Now I'm sad.
Poorly worded, but as you probably know it gives you a "chance" there's people who smoke 3 packs a day and live to 100 years old without cancer too, others get cancer and die after only 3 years of smoking. Humans aren't binary
As far as diseases go, leukemia is a pretty rare one. Formaldehyde has been commonly used for decades.
What exactly is the risk? If the risk is 1 extra person out of 1 million get it that's not significant. If it is 1 out of 1000, we'd be seeing a lot more people with it. The fact that leukemia is so rare makes me think that this is probably a non-event.
I'm not pro any sitting President stopping scientific announcements, don't get me wrong. I don't approve of Trump's actions; but I think in this instance the warning is probably for something minor.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
I've known several people with Leukemia. You wouldn't know them because they kind of drop out of life. Most of them die. Occasionally they go into remission but it's not like they all wear a big badge that says "Hi, I've got Leukemia!".
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
But this has been debunked 8 ways from Sunday.
Funny thing is all these conspiracy theories and bad press for Hillary helped get us Trump. And I"ll say one thing about Trump, he doesn't have any conspiracy theories to speak of. His administration is so openly corrupt what would be the point? He's like Dick Cheney times a million. When you tell people how corrupt he is they don't believe you because if anyone was that openly corrupt somebody, somewhere would do _something_. Right?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
What exactly is the risk?
We might be able to find out if the corrupt weasels in the EPA would publish this research. But no.
The warnings are contained in a draft health assessment EPA scientists completed just before Donald Trump became president, according to the officials. They said top advisers to departing Administrator Scott Pruitt are delaying its release as part of a campaign to undermine the agency’s independent research into the health risks of toxic chemicals......The current EPA official told POLITICO that political appointees have managed to avoid creating written evidence of their interference with the formaldehyde assessment by refusing to send emails or create other records that eventually could become public, instead using what the official described as “a children’s game of telephone."
Interestingly, this research comes from the EPA’s Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS).
Industry has long faulted the IRIS program, the agency’s only independent scientific division evaluating the health risks of toxic chemicals, whose assessments often form the basis for federal and state regulations.
Why would the chemical industries have issues with IRIS?
The small office of about 35 experts pores over the huge body of existing research on chemicals, including industry-backed studies aimed at proving the substances safe, to independently assess their risks.
Lol. So they actually dig into the industry backed studies and call BS on them. I can see why they'd be a threat.
Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
Poorly worded, but as you probably know it gives you a "chance" there's people who smoke 3 packs a day and live to 100 years old without cancer too, others get cancer and die after only 3 years of smoking. Humans aren't binary
As far as diseases go, leukemia is a pretty rare one. Formaldehyde has been commonly used for decades.
What exactly is the risk? If the risk is 1 extra person out of 1 million get it that's not significant. If it is 1 out of 1000, we'd be seeing a lot more people with it. The fact that leukemia is so rare makes me think that this is probably a non-event.
I'm not pro any sitting President stopping scientific announcements, don't get me wrong. I don't approve of Trump's actions; but I think in this instance the warning is probably for something minor.
Too many announcements is itself bad. So yes, it matters very much how great the risk is.
We're already at the point where most people just throw up their hands and say "ok, I guess everything causes cancer."
Too many warnings, too low of a threshold, is not only not useful; it's harmful.
Really? You're telling me that alcoholic drinks aren't healthy? Who knew?
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
It's not the individual incidents like this that you should be focusing on, it's the overall trend towards an anti-science, anti-facts, anti-truth attitude, and towards 'faith-based', 'superstition', 'mysticism', and my favorite: 'Dominionism', expecting that The Earth is going to be destroyed soon anyway, Zombie Jesus will take The Faithful home to Heaven, and all the Heathen Masses will die anyway, so why should they care? Don't think for a second I'm even kidding, these people exist, they think the Earth is only 6000 years old, and that Science is from Satan and is all lies. These are also often the 'anti-vaxers', too, who think vaccinations is literally injecting The Devil into their kids veins -- because 'science is evil'.
If most Americans got sick in that way, US pathologists and epidemiologist would have book chapters on that.
This is just like coal - Coal is actually good for you. This bullshit of leftists trying to besmirch the effects of chemicals is leading to the downfall of western civilization. Even CO2 is critical for health, and god fearing common sense Americans should breath a atmosphere of 100 percent CO2 for at least 5 hors everyt day. There are no substances that are bad for you. God would not put anything on earth that would harm his greatest creation.
Yours in Christ Jesus.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
The chance that a person will develop leukemia at some point in his life is 0.1%. Survival rates are about 2/3, higher for younger people. This means its virtually certain you've met someone who is a leukemia survivor, they just don't wear a sign around their neck announcing the fact.
The rate of new cases in the general population is about 12 per 100,000 population per year -- about 1.2 hundredths of a percent. If you live in a small town and have a job that doesn't involve dealing with a lot of people, it *is* possible you've never met anyone with active leukemia. However, even if you had you wouldn't necessarily know; the don't wear a sign around their neck announcing the fact either.
Initial leukemia symptoms are flu-like; so if you've ever met someone who is fatigued and achy they *might* have had leukemia. Once they are sick enough that they *obviously* have cancer, they're out and about a lot less, spending more time at home or sick in the hospital, where you're less likely to encounter them.
I trust this explains how leukemia could exist without your necessarily having had personal experience with it.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
I'm not impressed by anti-cancer hysteria therefore I am anti-science? I don't treat any random pronoucement from any random "authority" as the word of god, therefore I am anti-science.
YOU I think have no clue what that term really means.
Those of YOU treating the ALL parts of the scientific establishment as if they are the Pope, are the real anti-science crowd.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
> The rate of new cases in the general population is about 12 per 100,000 population per year
So... a bit like knowing a victim of gun violence.
The problem with attributing any singular cause to any cancer is that it is so poorly understood. Even when they think they have a handle on it and have identified a single gene, even have targeted therapies to deal with that gene, those therapies pretty much behave completely randomly within the patient population.
There's nothing like actually being a cancer patient to disabuse you of any notions that "the guys in the white robes" have any real clue what they are talking about.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
It's almost like you don't want to give government too much power because sooner or later someone you don't like will be running it.
Welcome to the Federalist Society.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
1. Because they're dead.
2. Because they don't introduce themselves by telling you they have leukemia.
Everyone gets cancer if they live long enough not to be killed by other things. As far as we know, about half of it is due to natural processes, half is triggered by environmental carcinogens.
Bruce Perens.
So far as I'm concerned if you treat anything as 'word of god' in an unironic manner then you're suspect.
Formaldehyde is a known carcinogen and highly toxic. Go right ahead and ignore it, you can serve as an example of others for what not to be.
Formaldehyde is in everything. Well, not quite everything, but a huge number of products. New clothes? Yep. That new flooring? Certainly
https://branchbasics.com/blog/...
https://hpd.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bi...
It even occurs naturally in some foods:
https://www.foodinsight.org/ch...
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Naw, it's ok to question the media coverage, but if you're questioning the paper without reading it, then yeah, you're anti-science.