Warning: Drinking Tea Party Rhetoric May Cause Cancer

[Bfgrn]

Jeff Schweitzer: Warning: Drinking Tea Party Rhetoric May Cause Cancer

That the Grand Old Party is hostile to environmental regulation is no grand revelation. But the most recent assault on the EPA is, even for Republicans and Tea Party enthusiasts, an unusually reckless and irresponsible attack on reasonable attempts to clean our air. We are talking coal ash. Nothing like taking in some lead, cadmium and mercury with each breath and every sip of water to brighten one's day. That is just the price we must pay to reduce government interference into our private affairs.

But coal is particularly nasty. Yes, the attraction to coal is powerful and obvious because the United States sits on a reserve of nearly 250 billion tons of coal, 112 billion of which are high-quality bituminous and anthracite coals; the remainder mainly being lower-energy and dirtier lignite. With such abundance the siren song of energy independence is difficult to resist. However, burning even the highest quality anthracite is dirty business. One 500 MW power plant generates about 3 million tons of carbon dioxide every year. Other toxic byproducts include fine-grain particulates, heavy metals like mercury, lead, chromium and nickel, trace elements such as arsenic and selenium, and various organics like dichloroethane, benzene, carbon tetrachloride, chloroform, and trichloroethylene. Oxides of nitrogen and sulfur are common pollutants from coal, and are found at higher levels in anthracite than in bituminous coal. The known health consequences of this toxic brew of air and water pollution are many, and include nervous system problems in infants and children, asthma, chronic bronchitis, lung cancer, a suite of cardiovascular problems and kidney disease. The environmental impacts are well documented, and not pretty.

But all of those inconvenient truths are just part of a liberal conspiracy if you believe the GOP.

And one wonders just why anybody believes anything the GOP has to say anymore. Talk about some nasty agendas.

This one wonders why you accept without question the opinion of a blogger on a left wing site.

If you had researched his credentials, you would know Dr. Schweitzer is a scientist. If you had researched his claims, you would know he is telling the truth...but you didn't, did you Cali Girl? You just 'know'...emotions are your guide, not intelligence.

Picking up some more of Dr. Schweitzer's article from the last sentence posted in the OP:

But all of those inconvenient truths are just part of a liberal conspiracy if you believe the GOP. Republicans in the House of Representatives have voted 169 times to weaken environmental laws on the notion that such regulations slow economic growth. The argument is that regulatory compliance is too costly to industry. What is forgotten in that logic is that exposing our children to toxic chemicals in our water and air cost the United States $76.6 billion in health expenses in 2008 (the number is certainly bigger now). And that figure does not include economic losses resulting from workers taking sick leave due to illnesses caused directly from exposure to pollutants. Nor do these figures take into account the positive impact on job creation when investing in clean water and air. Even without those adjustments, by any measure the economic impact of pollution greatly exceeds the total estimate annual cost of complying with environmental regulations: about $25 billion. To put these numbers in perspective, Exxon earned a profit of $10.7 billion in the second quarter of this year. The Clean Air Act Amendments (1990) are estimated to create $2 trillion (with a "t") in economic benefits in the 30 years following passage; compared to the total cost of complying with those amendments over that same period coming in around $65 billion. That is a cost/benefit ratio of 1:30. Any good businessman would look at that balance sheet and draw the obvious conclusion.

The GOP's assault on the EPA is an ideological attack with no foundation in fact, a political temper tantrum. Take away the theatrics, and the idea that growth suffers under environmental regulation is dangerously misguided in the short term and tragic when seen decades out. The idea is wrong because history has shown clearly enough that environmental regulations do not cost a net loss of jobs; and that the lack of such regulations leads to unrecoverable losses, costly clean ups and irreversible health consequences. We can look at both more closely.

Reading without reflecting is like eating without digesting.
Edmund Burke

 

[Bfgrn]

This thread is gay................

Its irrelevant.........except to the haters. But they dont matter as is brilliantly illustrated in my thread, "AGW Debate: The Bottome Line"

This glacier.........that temperature.........this ice..........that hockey stick. LMAO......nobody cares anymore. Indeed..........reality is 95% perception.

No, when it comes to science, reality IS reality. The dirty energy cartels have spent a lot of money creating perception. And parrots like you are their prey...

"We didn't inherit this land from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children."
Lakota Sioux Proverb

 

[Old Rocks]

The GOP has become the totally owned property of the very wealthy and the energy corps. The lies in their talking points are designed for only one purpose, to increase the wealth of the already wealthy. They care not one whit for the health or even the future of the citizens of this nation. The GOP has become a whore for a corperate state agenda.

 

[gslack]

"Milloy blames smokers for their illness and death."

Legacy Tobacco Documents Library

Steven Milloy, author of JunkScience.com, also criticized the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for claiming that 400,000 people die every year from alleged smoking-related illnesses, saying that studies linking smoking to heart disease are not entirely reliable. He pointed out that smokers have higher heart disease rates than non-smokers partly because smokers also tend to be people who do not exercise, have worse diets, avoid doctors and have less healthy lifestyles overall. (CNS News 8/1)



Steve Milloy denies coal plant pollution kills people


MILLOY: Show us the bodies, EPA

Green agency uses phony death statistics to justify job-killing rules

To paraphrase cinematic sports agent Jerry McGuire, “Show me the bodies.”

While that may sound harsh, given that the EPA is about to kill hundreds of thousands of jobs and cost our crippled economy countless billions of dollars, Republicans must demand some sort of proof that the alleged harms are indeed happening.

The EPA says air pollution kills tens of thousands of people annually. This is on a par with traffic accident fatalities. While we can identify traffic accident victims, air pollution victims are unknown, unidentified and as far as anyone can tell, figments of EPA’s statistical imagination.

May 10, 2011
The Honorable Joe Barton
Chairman Emeritus
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Representative Barton:
As doctors and on behalf of the organizations we represent, we write today to provide you with information regarding the wealth of peer-reviewed research that establishes a clear link between air pollution and a range of serious adverse human health effects.

During the Energy and Power subcommittee hearing on April 15th you expressed pollution, in particular mercury and particulate matter, does not cause health impacts. Further, you stated that that there was no science to back up the health benefits that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) expects to achieve as air toxics from power plants are reduced and that the impacted by lung, cardiovascular and neurological impairments, we were shocked at such statements.

We are doctors and we see in the patients we treat what that the scientific literature lets us know to expect: that air pollution makes people sick and cuts lives short.

The health impacts of short-term exposure (over hours to days) of particulate matter were found to include: death from respiratory and cardiovascular causes, including strokes; increased risk of cardiovascular harm, including acute myocardial infarction (heart attacks) and congestive heart failure, especially among the elderly and in people with cardiovascular disease; inflammation of lung tissue in young, healthy adults; increased hospitalization for cardiovascular disease, including strokes; hospitalization for asthma among children; and aggravated asthma attacks in children.

Exposure to year-round particle pollution has also been found to cause premature death and cardiovascular harm, especially greater risk of death from cardiovascular disease.

Particulate matter is considered likely to increase the risk of hospitalization for asthma attacks in children; stunt lung function growth in children and teenagers; damage the small airways of the lungs; increase the risk of heart attacks and strokes in older women; increased risk of dying from lung cancer; and. Evidence links long-term exposures to adverse reproductive and developmental outcomes such as low birth weight and
infant mortality.

During the hearing, you also stipulated that mercury is a poison and pollutant, a statement with which we concur. Given this, we fail to understand your subsequent statement that mercury does not pose a health threat. Mercury and other air toxics have serious health effects that compel EPA to act. Some toxic air pollutants, such as lead, mercury, and dioxins degrade slowly or not at all. These pollutants bioaccumulate in humans and other animals at the top of the food chain. Children can be exposed to toxic air pollutants through contaminated air, water, soil, and food.

Mercury is one example of a persistent pollutant emitted into ambient air that leads to exposure through another route: organisms metabolized mercury into methylmercury, a developmental neurotoxicant that poses a significant hazard for children. The developing fetus and young children are thought to be disproportionately affected by methylmercury exposure, because many aspects of development, particularly brain maturation, can be disturbed by the presence of methylmercury. Minimizing mercury exposure is, therefore, essential to optimal child health.

Industrial emissions, especially from coal-fired power plants, are the leading source of environmental mercury. Although the levels of ambient mercury may not be hazardous, mercury deposits into soil and surface waters and ultimately accumulates in fish. Because fish may contain large amounts of mercury, children and pregnant women can have significant exposure if they consume excessive amounts of fish.

...

Sincerely,

O. Marion Burton, MD, FAAP
President
American Academy of Pediatrics

Albert A. Rizzo, MD
Chair-elect
American Lung Association

Georges C. Benjamin, MD, FACP, FACEP (E)
Executive Director
American Public Health Association

Dean E. Schraufnagel, MD
President
American Thoracic Society

Bill McLin, M Ed.
President and CEO
Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America

Peter Wilk, MD
Executive Director
Physicians for Social Responsibility

Your first links doesn't go to anything related to Malloy.... Got an explanation for that? LIE 1

you second link, goes to an OP-ed he did for the Washington post where he disagrees with the EPA's new bill... It says nothing like what you claimed it did. LIE 2

Your third link, is to a letter to a representative from some doctors with the american lung association and other groups.... Nothing from Malloy... LIE 3


Tell ya what, from now on don't say "irony alert".. Say "Bullshit coming" its a lot more accurate...

So you can't produce anything that shows any of the claims you made earlier, and now you can't even show any evidence to back your latest round of exaggerated propaganda....

There are no lies. Maybe you just need help deciphering what Milloy said and MEANS. If you are looking for exact words that match my claim, that is deceitful and typical of you right wingers...I call it word bound.

1) Milloy blames smokers for their illness and death.

The first link goes to exactly what I said it did. A 2003 "Tobacco Weekly" newsletter. Go to the last article on the page. (Washington DC Oral Pathologist...)

Steven Milloy, author of JunkScience.com, also criticized the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for claiming that 400,000 people die every year from alleged smoking-related illnesses, saying that studies linking smoking to heart disease are not entirely reliable. He pointed out that smokers have higher heart disease rates than non-smokers partly because smokers also tend to be people who do not exercise, have worse diets, avoid doctors and have less healthy lifestyles overall. (CNS News 8/1)
# 1 accusation debunked.



2) Steve Milloy denies coal plant pollution kills people.

Milloy SAYS in the op-ed he wrote:
"Show me the bodies. While that may sound harsh, given that the EPA is about to kill hundreds of thousands of jobs and cost our crippled economy countless billions of dollars, Republicans must demand some sort of proof that the alleged harms are indeed happening...air pollution victims are unknown, unidentified and as far as anyone can tell, figments of EPA’s statistical imagination."
# 2 accusation debunked.



3) Milloy is WRONG. Coal plant pollution DOES kill people. According to numerous studies and the presidents and/or chairmans of:

American Academy of Pediatrics

American Lung Association

American Public Health Association

American Thoracic Society

Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America

Physicians for Social Responsibility
# 3 accusation debunked.



4) apology from you is in order...

"There are no lies. Maybe you just need help deciphering what Milloy said and MEANS."

Thats lying weasel speak for "that's what I decided he meant because that's what I want to believe and its fits my agenda right now." I get it, we have to interpret what he "meant" using your algorian goggles of faith.. No thanks I will just go with what he actually said as to what you or greenpeace decide he meant... WOW pathetic...

" If you are looking for exact words that match my claim, that is deceitful and typical of you right wingers...I call it word bound."

Uh yeah, that is what I am looking for when you say he said this or that.. Thats the point in saying he said it, trying to use his own words to assassinate his character only works if you can actually use HIS WORDS.. If you can't all you are doing is lying.. You understand that concept?

And yes it is deceitful and typical of YOU! Claiming he said something he didn't say is lying and deceitful, and trying to use links that do not back those claims is even more deceitful..

1) Okay where does he (malloy) " blames smokers for their illness and death." ? Seriously where in all of that does he say that? What he does say is certain studies are sometimes unreliable due to smokers habits, diet, way of life, etc.. Now I would think that isn't an untrue statement to be honest. Many smokers have poorer health habits than many non-smokers, thats just common sense man.. AGAIN THAT WAS A LIE YOU MADE UP...

2) As far that goes, exactly who is dead due to coal burning and where as well as how did they come up with this hypothesis is what he is saying. Now you tell us coal burning kills people yet I see nothing about a person dying as a direct result of a coal burning plant somewhere in their town or county for that matter. The fact is unless a person has direct prolonged contact or inhalation with coal smoke, its not exactly a cause of death. My grandfather was a coal miner who died of black lung due to conditions in the mines way back in the 20's and 30's. Now that was a death caused directly by black lung gotten from coal mine working for 30 years or more. Fact is now a days there is many things in place that cleans smoke from those stacks, you know it, I know it, so now if you can produce something that shows without a doubt these things are not enough and people are still dying from what comes out of those stacks please produce it.. Thats a fair demand, and I agree with it, and thats what Malloy was saying... SO THATS LIE #2..

3) Does coal burning using the mandatory procedures and measures and laws in place now, kill people? Thats the question and thats what Malloy says if you would read it minus the algorian goggles you would see that... THATS LIE #3

Keep on talking, you dig a bigger hole everytime.. You lied about what the man said, lied about what the man meant, and lied about modern coal burning killing people...

 

[skookerasbil]

This thread is gay................

Its irrelevant.........except to the haters. But they dont matter as is brilliantly illustrated in my thread, "AGW Debate: The Bottome Line"

This glacier.........that temperature.........this ice..........that hockey stick. LMAO......nobody cares anymore. Indeed..........reality is 95% perception.

No, when it comes to science, reality IS reality. The dirty energy cartels have spent a lot of money creating perception. And parrots like you are their prey...

"We didn't inherit this land from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children."
Lakota Sioux Proverb

Who cares s0n? WHo the fcukk cares?

Post up some links when the years come around that you guys start winning, ok??!!!!

 

[daveman]

The GOP has become the totally owned property of the very wealthy and the energy corps. The lies in their talking points are designed for only one purpose, to increase the wealth of the already wealthy. They care not one whit for the health or even the future of the citizens of this nation. The GOP has become a whore for a corperate state agenda.

Man, you sure are pissed that rich people won't give you money.

 

[Si modo]

The GOP has become the totally owned property of the very wealthy and the energy corps. The lies in their talking points are designed for only one purpose, to increase the wealth of the already wealthy. They care not one whit for the health or even the future of the citizens of this nation. The GOP has become a whore for a corperate state agenda.

Man, you sure are pissed that rich people won't give you money.

Nah, he just has invested in Gore's start-ups and he wants a return based on a market created by hysterics. Classic disaster capitalist.

 

[Bfgrn]

Your first links doesn't go to anything related to Malloy.... Got an explanation for that? LIE 1

you second link, goes to an OP-ed he did for the Washington post where he disagrees with the EPA's new bill... It says nothing like what you claimed it did. LIE 2

Your third link, is to a letter to a representative from some doctors with the american lung association and other groups.... Nothing from Malloy... LIE 3


Tell ya what, from now on don't say "irony alert".. Say "Bullshit coming" its a lot more accurate...

So you can't produce anything that shows any of the claims you made earlier, and now you can't even show any evidence to back your latest round of exaggerated propaganda....

There are no lies. Maybe you just need help deciphering what Milloy said and MEANS. If you are looking for exact words that match my claim, that is deceitful and typical of you right wingers...I call it word bound.

1) Milloy blames smokers for their illness and death.

The first link goes to exactly what I said it did. A 2003 "Tobacco Weekly" newsletter. Go to the last article on the page. (Washington DC Oral Pathologist...)

Steven Milloy, author of JunkScience.com, also criticized the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for claiming that 400,000 people die every year from alleged smoking-related illnesses, saying that studies linking smoking to heart disease are not entirely reliable. He pointed out that smokers have higher heart disease rates than non-smokers partly because smokers also tend to be people who do not exercise, have worse diets, avoid doctors and have less healthy lifestyles overall. (CNS News 8/1)
# 1 accusation debunked.



2) Steve Milloy denies coal plant pollution kills people.

Milloy SAYS in the op-ed he wrote:
"Show me the bodies. While that may sound harsh, given that the EPA is about to kill hundreds of thousands of jobs and cost our crippled economy countless billions of dollars, Republicans must demand some sort of proof that the alleged harms are indeed happening...air pollution victims are unknown, unidentified and as far as anyone can tell, figments of EPA’s statistical imagination."
# 2 accusation debunked.



3) Milloy is WRONG. Coal plant pollution DOES kill people. According to numerous studies and the presidents and/or chairmans of:

American Academy of Pediatrics

American Lung Association

American Public Health Association

American Thoracic Society

Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America

Physicians for Social Responsibility
# 3 accusation debunked.



4) apology from you is in order...

"There are no lies. Maybe you just need help deciphering what Milloy said and MEANS."

Thats lying weasel speak for "that's what I decided he meant because that's what I want to believe and its fits my agenda right now." I get it, we have to interpret what he "meant" using your algorian goggles of faith.. No thanks I will just go with what he actually said as to what you or greenpeace decide he meant... WOW pathetic...

" If you are looking for exact words that match my claim, that is deceitful and typical of you right wingers...I call it word bound."

Uh yeah, that is what I am looking for when you say he said this or that.. Thats the point in saying he said it, trying to use his own words to assassinate his character only works if you can actually use HIS WORDS.. If you can't all you are doing is lying.. You understand that concept?

And yes it is deceitful and typical of YOU! Claiming he said something he didn't say is lying and deceitful, and trying to use links that do not back those claims is even more deceitful..

1) Okay where does he (malloy) " blames smokers for their illness and death." ? Seriously where in all of that does he say that? What he does say is certain studies are sometimes unreliable due to smokers habits, diet, way of life, etc.. Now I would think that isn't an untrue statement to be honest. Many smokers have poorer health habits than many non-smokers, thats just common sense man.. AGAIN THAT WAS A LIE YOU MADE UP...

2) As far that goes, exactly who is dead due to coal burning and where as well as how did they come up with this hypothesis is what he is saying. Now you tell us coal burning kills people yet I see nothing about a person dying as a direct result of a coal burning plant somewhere in their town or county for that matter. The fact is unless a person has direct prolonged contact or inhalation with coal smoke, its not exactly a cause of death. My grandfather was a coal miner who died of black lung due to conditions in the mines way back in the 20's and 30's. Now that was a death caused directly by black lung gotten from coal mine working for 30 years or more. Fact is now a days there is many things in place that cleans smoke from those stacks, you know it, I know it, so now if you can produce something that shows without a doubt these things are not enough and people are still dying from what comes out of those stacks please produce it.. Thats a fair demand, and I agree with it, and thats what Malloy was saying... SO THATS LIE #2..

3) Does coal burning using the mandatory procedures and measures and laws in place now, kill people? Thats the question and thats what Malloy says if you would read it minus the algorian goggles you would see that... THATS LIE #3

Keep on talking, you dig a bigger hole everytime.. You lied about what the man said, lied about what the man meant, and lied about modern coal burning killing people...

What don't you comprehend about:

We are doctors and we see in the patients we treat what that the scientific literature lets us know to expect: that air pollution makes people sick and cuts lives short.

The health impacts of short-term exposure (over hours to days) of particulate matter were found to include: death from respiratory and cardiovascular causes, including strokes; increased risk of cardiovascular harm, including acute myocardial infarction (heart attacks) and congestive heart failure, especially among the elderly and in people with cardiovascular disease; inflammation of lung tissue in young, healthy adults; increased hospitalization for cardiovascular disease, including strokes; hospitalization for asthma among children; and aggravated asthma attacks in children.

Exposure to year-round particle pollution has also been found to cause premature death and cardiovascular harm, especially greater risk of death from cardiovascular disease.

Particulate matter is considered likely to increase the risk of hospitalization for asthma attacks in children; stunt lung function growth in children and teenagers; damage the small airways of the lungs; increase the risk of heart attacks and strokes in older women; increased risk of dying from lung cancer; and. Evidence links long-term exposures to adverse reproductive and developmental outcomes such as low birth weight and
infant mortality.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You know, a reasonable person like myself is skeptical of government, including agencies like the EPA. That is what intelligent people do. But, I also understand that the purpose of the EPA is environmental protection; a needed and vital function, if we are a civil society.

And I am very skeptical of people like Steve Milloy, bordering on cynicism, because of his long history of trying to protect dirty energy cartels from responsibility and cost for the harm they cause to human, fish and fowl.

You on the other hand only have cynicism for the EPA, and ZERO skepticism for people like Milloy. WHY is that?

It is a reasonable question. I expect an honest answer.


It is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners.
Albert Camus

 

[gslack]

There are no lies. Maybe you just need help deciphering what Milloy said and MEANS. If you are looking for exact words that match my claim, that is deceitful and typical of you right wingers...I call it word bound.

1) Milloy blames smokers for their illness and death.

The first link goes to exactly what I said it did. A 2003 "Tobacco Weekly" newsletter. Go to the last article on the page. (Washington DC Oral Pathologist...)

Steven Milloy, author of JunkScience.com, also criticized the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for claiming that 400,000 people die every year from alleged smoking-related illnesses, saying that studies linking smoking to heart disease are not entirely reliable. He pointed out that smokers have higher heart disease rates than non-smokers partly because smokers also tend to be people who do not exercise, have worse diets, avoid doctors and have less healthy lifestyles overall. (CNS News 8/1)
# 1 accusation debunked.



2) Steve Milloy denies coal plant pollution kills people.

Milloy SAYS in the op-ed he wrote:
"Show me the bodies. While that may sound harsh, given that the EPA is about to kill hundreds of thousands of jobs and cost our crippled economy countless billions of dollars, Republicans must demand some sort of proof that the alleged harms are indeed happening...air pollution victims are unknown, unidentified and as far as anyone can tell, figments of EPA’s statistical imagination."
# 2 accusation debunked.



3) Milloy is WRONG. Coal plant pollution DOES kill people. According to numerous studies and the presidents and/or chairmans of:

American Academy of Pediatrics

American Lung Association

American Public Health Association

American Thoracic Society

Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America

Physicians for Social Responsibility
# 3 accusation debunked.



4) apology from you is in order...

"There are no lies. Maybe you just need help deciphering what Milloy said and MEANS."

Thats lying weasel speak for "that's what I decided he meant because that's what I want to believe and its fits my agenda right now." I get it, we have to interpret what he "meant" using your algorian goggles of faith.. No thanks I will just go with what he actually said as to what you or greenpeace decide he meant... WOW pathetic...

" If you are looking for exact words that match my claim, that is deceitful and typical of you right wingers...I call it word bound."

Uh yeah, that is what I am looking for when you say he said this or that.. Thats the point in saying he said it, trying to use his own words to assassinate his character only works if you can actually use HIS WORDS.. If you can't all you are doing is lying.. You understand that concept?

And yes it is deceitful and typical of YOU! Claiming he said something he didn't say is lying and deceitful, and trying to use links that do not back those claims is even more deceitful..

1) Okay where does he (malloy) " blames smokers for their illness and death." ? Seriously where in all of that does he say that? What he does say is certain studies are sometimes unreliable due to smokers habits, diet, way of life, etc.. Now I would think that isn't an untrue statement to be honest. Many smokers have poorer health habits than many non-smokers, thats just common sense man.. AGAIN THAT WAS A LIE YOU MADE UP...

2) As far that goes, exactly who is dead due to coal burning and where as well as how did they come up with this hypothesis is what he is saying. Now you tell us coal burning kills people yet I see nothing about a person dying as a direct result of a coal burning plant somewhere in their town or county for that matter. The fact is unless a person has direct prolonged contact or inhalation with coal smoke, its not exactly a cause of death. My grandfather was a coal miner who died of black lung due to conditions in the mines way back in the 20's and 30's. Now that was a death caused directly by black lung gotten from coal mine working for 30 years or more. Fact is now a days there is many things in place that cleans smoke from those stacks, you know it, I know it, so now if you can produce something that shows without a doubt these things are not enough and people are still dying from what comes out of those stacks please produce it.. Thats a fair demand, and I agree with it, and thats what Malloy was saying... SO THATS LIE #2..

3) Does coal burning using the mandatory procedures and measures and laws in place now, kill people? Thats the question and thats what Malloy says if you would read it minus the algorian goggles you would see that... THATS LIE #3

Keep on talking, you dig a bigger hole everytime.. You lied about what the man said, lied about what the man meant, and lied about modern coal burning killing people...

What don't you comprehend about:

We are doctors and we see in the patients we treat what that the scientific literature lets us know to expect: that air pollution makes people sick and cuts lives short.

The health impacts of short-term exposure (over hours to days) of particulate matter were found to include: death from respiratory and cardiovascular causes, including strokes; increased risk of cardiovascular harm, including acute myocardial infarction (heart attacks) and congestive heart failure, especially among the elderly and in people with cardiovascular disease; inflammation of lung tissue in young, healthy adults; increased hospitalization for cardiovascular disease, including strokes; hospitalization for asthma among children; and aggravated asthma attacks in children.

Exposure to year-round particle pollution has also been found to cause premature death and cardiovascular harm, especially greater risk of death from cardiovascular disease.

Particulate matter is considered likely to increase the risk of hospitalization for asthma attacks in children; stunt lung function growth in children and teenagers; damage the small airways of the lungs; increase the risk of heart attacks and strokes in older women; increased risk of dying from lung cancer; and. Evidence links long-term exposures to adverse reproductive and developmental outcomes such as low birth weight and
infant mortality.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You know, a reasonable person like myself is skeptical of government, including agencies like the EPA. That is what intelligent people do. But, I also understand that the purpose of the EPA is environmental protection; a needed and vital function, if we are a civil society.

And I am very skeptical of people like Steve Milloy, bordering on cynicism, because of his long history of trying to protect dirty energy cartels from responsibility and cost for the harm they cause to human, fish and fowl.

You on the other hand only have cynicism for the EPA, and ZERO skepticism for people like Milloy. WHY is that?

It is a reasonable question. I expect an honest answer.


It is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners.
Albert Camus

First that is not what your argument or claim was remember? You said Malloy said things which he did not say. I pointed that out.. You since have been unable to show he said those things despite claiming still that he did..

Now onto your nonsense..

AIR POLLUTION!

Got it ? AIR POLLUTION! you nitwit... NOW want to point to where there is evidence that current systems in place to reduce air pollution coming from coal burning expressly, is not effective and killing people I will be glad to see it..

You make a claim and you can't back it up so you subtly change the argument... The argument was what you claimed malloy said, which we now know he didn't say.. then you made the argument he said other things, which again he did not say. Then you made the argument coal burning kills people, and use a source that speaks of air pollution in general and particles in the air on a broad scope to try and back that claim...

WTH is wrong with you man... AIR POLLTION, they don't say coal burning in modern times is killing people you idiot... Jesus man do you realize you have jumped to drastically inaccurate conclusions at every thing you have posted in here? You are like some kind of obsessed paranoid....

 

[Bfgrn]

"There are no lies. Maybe you just need help deciphering what Milloy said and MEANS."

Thats lying weasel speak for "that's what I decided he meant because that's what I want to believe and its fits my agenda right now." I get it, we have to interpret what he "meant" using your algorian goggles of faith.. No thanks I will just go with what he actually said as to what you or greenpeace decide he meant... WOW pathetic...

" If you are looking for exact words that match my claim, that is deceitful and typical of you right wingers...I call it word bound."

Uh yeah, that is what I am looking for when you say he said this or that.. Thats the point in saying he said it, trying to use his own words to assassinate his character only works if you can actually use HIS WORDS.. If you can't all you are doing is lying.. You understand that concept?

And yes it is deceitful and typical of YOU! Claiming he said something he didn't say is lying and deceitful, and trying to use links that do not back those claims is even more deceitful..

1) Okay where does he (malloy) " blames smokers for their illness and death." ? Seriously where in all of that does he say that? What he does say is certain studies are sometimes unreliable due to smokers habits, diet, way of life, etc.. Now I would think that isn't an untrue statement to be honest. Many smokers have poorer health habits than many non-smokers, thats just common sense man.. AGAIN THAT WAS A LIE YOU MADE UP...

2) As far that goes, exactly who is dead due to coal burning and where as well as how did they come up with this hypothesis is what he is saying. Now you tell us coal burning kills people yet I see nothing about a person dying as a direct result of a coal burning plant somewhere in their town or county for that matter. The fact is unless a person has direct prolonged contact or inhalation with coal smoke, its not exactly a cause of death. My grandfather was a coal miner who died of black lung due to conditions in the mines way back in the 20's and 30's. Now that was a death caused directly by black lung gotten from coal mine working for 30 years or more. Fact is now a days there is many things in place that cleans smoke from those stacks, you know it, I know it, so now if you can produce something that shows without a doubt these things are not enough and people are still dying from what comes out of those stacks please produce it.. Thats a fair demand, and I agree with it, and thats what Malloy was saying... SO THATS LIE #2..

3) Does coal burning using the mandatory procedures and measures and laws in place now, kill people? Thats the question and thats what Malloy says if you would read it minus the algorian goggles you would see that... THATS LIE #3

Keep on talking, you dig a bigger hole everytime.. You lied about what the man said, lied about what the man meant, and lied about modern coal burning killing people...

What don't you comprehend about:

We are doctors and we see in the patients we treat what that the scientific literature lets us know to expect: that air pollution makes people sick and cuts lives short.

The health impacts of short-term exposure (over hours to days) of particulate matter were found to include: death from respiratory and cardiovascular causes, including strokes; increased risk of cardiovascular harm, including acute myocardial infarction (heart attacks) and congestive heart failure, especially among the elderly and in people with cardiovascular disease; inflammation of lung tissue in young, healthy adults; increased hospitalization for cardiovascular disease, including strokes; hospitalization for asthma among children; and aggravated asthma attacks in children.

Exposure to year-round particle pollution has also been found to cause premature death and cardiovascular harm, especially greater risk of death from cardiovascular disease.

Particulate matter is considered likely to increase the risk of hospitalization for asthma attacks in children; stunt lung function growth in children and teenagers; damage the small airways of the lungs; increase the risk of heart attacks and strokes in older women; increased risk of dying from lung cancer; and. Evidence links long-term exposures to adverse reproductive and developmental outcomes such as low birth weight and
infant mortality.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You know, a reasonable person like myself is skeptical of government, including agencies like the EPA. That is what intelligent people do. But, I also understand that the purpose of the EPA is environmental protection; a needed and vital function, if we are a civil society.

And I am very skeptical of people like Steve Milloy, bordering on cynicism, because of his long history of trying to protect dirty energy cartels from responsibility and cost for the harm they cause to human, fish and fowl.

You on the other hand only have cynicism for the EPA, and ZERO skepticism for people like Milloy. WHY is that?

It is a reasonable question. I expect an honest answer.


It is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners.
Albert Camus

First that is not what your argument or claim was remember? You said Malloy said things which he did not say. I pointed that out.. You since have been unable to show he said those things despite claiming still that he did..

Now onto your nonsense..

AIR POLLUTION!

Got it ? AIR POLLUTION! you nitwit... NOW want to point to where there is evidence that current systems in place to reduce air pollution coming from coal burning expressly, is not effective and killing people I will be glad to see it..

You make a claim and you can't back it up so you subtly change the argument... The argument was what you claimed malloy said, which we now know he didn't say.. then you made the argument he said other things, which again he did not say. Then you made the argument coal burning kills people, and use a source that speaks of air pollution in general and particles in the air on a broad scope to try and back that claim...

WTH is wrong with you man... AIR POLLTION, they don't say coal burning in modern times is killing people you idiot... Jesus man do you realize you have jumped to drastically inaccurate conclusions at every thing you have posted in here? You are like some kind of obsessed paranoid....

Nitwit? A nitwit is someone who jumps without looking...find a mirror...

From the letter from medical experts:

During the Energy and Power subcommittee hearing on April 15th you expressed pollution, in particular mercury and particulate matter, does not cause health impacts. Further, you stated that that there was no science to back up the health benefits that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) expects to achieve as air toxics from power plants are reduced and that the impacted by lung, cardiovascular and neurological impairments, we were shocked at such statements.

BTW, Einstein, you said: "Fact is now a days there is many things in place that cleans smoke from those stacks"

HOW did these supposed 'things' come about? Was it magic?

If God created trees, shouldn't liberals be the ones calling CONSERVE-atives tree huggers?

 

[gslack]

What don't you comprehend about:

We are doctors and we see in the patients we treat what that the scientific literature lets us know to expect: that air pollution makes people sick and cuts lives short.

The health impacts of short-term exposure (over hours to days) of particulate matter were found to include: death from respiratory and cardiovascular causes, including strokes; increased risk of cardiovascular harm, including acute myocardial infarction (heart attacks) and congestive heart failure, especially among the elderly and in people with cardiovascular disease; inflammation of lung tissue in young, healthy adults; increased hospitalization for cardiovascular disease, including strokes; hospitalization for asthma among children; and aggravated asthma attacks in children.

Exposure to year-round particle pollution has also been found to cause premature death and cardiovascular harm, especially greater risk of death from cardiovascular disease.

Particulate matter is considered likely to increase the risk of hospitalization for asthma attacks in children; stunt lung function growth in children and teenagers; damage the small airways of the lungs; increase the risk of heart attacks and strokes in older women; increased risk of dying from lung cancer; and. Evidence links long-term exposures to adverse reproductive and developmental outcomes such as low birth weight and
infant mortality.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You know, a reasonable person like myself is skeptical of government, including agencies like the EPA. That is what intelligent people do. But, I also understand that the purpose of the EPA is environmental protection; a needed and vital function, if we are a civil society.

And I am very skeptical of people like Steve Milloy, bordering on cynicism, because of his long history of trying to protect dirty energy cartels from responsibility and cost for the harm they cause to human, fish and fowl.

You on the other hand only have cynicism for the EPA, and ZERO skepticism for people like Milloy. WHY is that?

It is a reasonable question. I expect an honest answer.


It is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners.
Albert Camus

First that is not what your argument or claim was remember? You said Malloy said things which he did not say. I pointed that out.. You since have been unable to show he said those things despite claiming still that he did..

Now onto your nonsense..

AIR POLLUTION!

Got it ? AIR POLLUTION! you nitwit... NOW want to point to where there is evidence that current systems in place to reduce air pollution coming from coal burning expressly, is not effective and killing people I will be glad to see it..

You make a claim and you can't back it up so you subtly change the argument... The argument was what you claimed malloy said, which we now know he didn't say.. then you made the argument he said other things, which again he did not say. Then you made the argument coal burning kills people, and use a source that speaks of air pollution in general and particles in the air on a broad scope to try and back that claim...

WTH is wrong with you man... AIR POLLTION, they don't say coal burning in modern times is killing people you idiot... Jesus man do you realize you have jumped to drastically inaccurate conclusions at every thing you have posted in here? You are like some kind of obsessed paranoid....

Nitwit? A nitwit is someone who jumps without looking...find a mirror...

From the letter from medical experts:

During the Energy and Power subcommittee hearing on April 15th you expressed pollution, in particular mercury and particulate matter, does not cause health impacts. Further, you stated that that there was no science to back up the health benefits that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) expects to achieve as air toxics from power plants are reduced and that the impacted by lung, cardiovascular and neurological impairments, we were shocked at such statements.

BTW, Einstein, you said: "Fact is now a days there is many things in place that cleans smoke from those stacks"

HOW did these supposed 'things' come about? Was it magic?

If God created trees, shouldn't liberals be the ones calling CONSERVE-atives tree huggers?

Again the argument was over what malloy said... You lied about it... You can pull out any quote you want from that article it won't change a damn thing..

What if any evidence is there that current coal burning stacks (current because that is what is relative to now) using current regulations and mechanisms in place, causes deaths.... I ask you to produce such evidence again...

Now I didnt ask for a quote from your article, or some other scientific argument or paper regarding general pollution in the air or mercury or whatever. I asked you about current coal burning systems in use following the rules put forth right now. So please try and stay focused...

Again I will wait for this... If you come back with another citation of a non-specific or "air pollution in general" article, study, or claim i will know your cannot produce this evidence and go back to poking fun at you..

You couldn't produce evidence of what you claimed malloy said, and now you aren't able to produce evidence to back this latest claim either.. I swear its like the same 2-3 people are posting eco threads under different names. You guys share the same brain or what?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

WOW another bash the pro American thread

 

[bripat9643]

"Milloy blames smokers for their illness and death."

Legacy Tobacco Documents Library

Steven Milloy, author of JunkScience.com, also criticized the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for claiming that 400,000 people die every year from alleged smoking-related illnesses, saying that studies linking smoking to heart disease are not entirely reliable. He pointed out that smokers have higher heart disease rates than non-smokers partly because smokers also tend to be people who do not exercise, have worse diets, avoid doctors and have less healthy lifestyles overall. (CNS News 8/1)

What part of Milloy's claim isn't true? Is it false that stuffing your face until you weigh 400 lbs can cause you to die prematurely?

Steve Milloy denies coal plant pollution kills people


MILLOY: Show us the bodies, EPA

Green agency uses phony death statistics to justify job-killing rules

To paraphrase cinematic sports agent Jerry McGuire, “Show me the bodies.”

While that may sound harsh, given that the EPA is about to kill hundreds of thousands of jobs and cost our crippled economy countless billions of dollars, Republicans must demand some sort of proof that the alleged harms are indeed happening.

The EPA says air pollution kills tens of thousands of people annually. This is on a par with traffic accident fatalities. While we can identify traffic accident victims, air pollution victims are unknown, unidentified and as far as anyone can tell, figments of EPA’s statistical imagination.

Again, what part of what he said isn't true? Can doctors tie any specific deaths to coal fired power plants? The fact is that the incidence of diseases blamed on coal fired power plants is no higher within a mile of the power plants than it is 500 miles away.

May 10, 2011
The Honorable Joe Barton
Chairman Emeritus
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Representative Barton:
As doctors and on behalf of the organizations we represent, we write today to provide you with information regarding the wealth of peer-reviewed research that establishes a clear link between air pollution and a range of serious adverse human health effects.

During the Energy and Power subcommittee hearing on April 15th you expressed pollution, in particular mercury and particulate matter, does not cause health impacts. Further, you stated that that there was no science to back up the health benefits that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) expects to achieve as air toxics from power plants are reduced and that the impacted by lung, cardiovascular and neurological impairments, we were shocked at such statements.

We are doctors and we see in the patients we treat what that the scientific literature lets us know to expect: that air pollution makes people sick and cuts lives short.

Bunk. Doctors see no such thing. No doctor has ever put down on a death certificate "Cause of death: pollution for coal fired power plants." No doctor as ever diagnosed a disease as being caused by pollution from coal fired power plants. The fact is that the incidence of diseases attributed to pollution are lower now than they were in the past.

The health impacts of short-term exposure (over hours to days) of particulate matter were found to include: death from respiratory and cardiovascular causes, including strokes; increased risk of cardiovascular harm, including acute myocardial infarction (heart attacks) and congestive heart failure, especially among the elderly and in people with cardiovascular disease; inflammation of lung tissue in young, healthy adults; increased hospitalization for cardiovascular disease, including strokes; hospitalization for asthma among children; and aggravated asthma attacks in children.

What quantity of "particulate matter" and from what source? The doctors don't specify. That's because if they did it would become obvious that coal fired power plants are not dangerous.

Exposure to year-round particle pollution has also been found to cause premature death and cardiovascular harm, especially greater risk of death from cardiovascular disease.

No it hasn't. No such experiment has ever been done. this is a flat out lie. All we have are highly dubious statistical inferences made by the EPA.

Particulate matter is considered likely to increase the risk of hospitalization for asthma attacks in children; stunt lung function growth in children and teenagers; damage the small airways of the lungs; increase the risk of heart attacks and strokes in older women; increased risk of dying from lung cancer; and. Evidence links long-term exposures to adverse reproductive and developmental outcomes such as low birth weight andinfant mortality.

"considered likely?" In other words, they don't have a clue. Once again, they don't specify the source or the quantity of the "particulate matter."

During the hearing, you also stipulated that mercury is a poison and pollutant, a statement with which we concur. Given this, we fail to understand your subsequent statement that mercury does not pose a health threat. Mercury and other air toxics have serious health effects that compel EPA to act. Some toxic air pollutants, such as lead, mercury, and dioxins degrade slowly or not at all. These pollutants bioaccumulate in humans and other animals at the top of the food chain. Children can be exposed to toxic air pollutants through contaminated air, water, soil, and food.

No one ever claimed Mercury doesn't pose a health threat, given exposure to a sufficient quantity. However, coal fired power plants emit no where near such an amount.

Mercury is one example of a persistent pollutant emitted into ambient air that leads to exposure through another route: organisms metabolized mercury into methylmercury, a developmental neurotoxicant that poses a significant hazard for children. The developing fetus and young children are thought to be disproportionately affected by methylmercury exposure, because many aspects of development, particularly brain maturation, can be disturbed by the presence of methylmercury. Minimizing mercury exposure is, therefore, essential to optimal child health..

No one has ever argued that Mercury is good for people. The question is how much is dangerous and where does it come from. Although an ounce of arsenic will kill you, small amounts are absolutely harmless. That is true of almost any substance that medicine labels "toxic." Water is toxic if you consume excessive quantities. Yet, you need it to live.

Industrial emissions, especially from coal-fired power plants, are the leading source of environmental mercury.

That is an outright lie. Natural sources, by far, are the largest source of Mercury. Hydro-thermal vents in the ocean spew out thousands of times more Mercury than all the power plants in the United States, and Chinese coal fired power plants emit 10 times as much as all US plants.

Although the levels of ambient mercury may not be hazardous, mercury deposits into soil and surface waters and ultimately accumulates in fish. Because fish may contain large amounts of mercury, children and pregnant women can have significant exposure if they consume excessive amounts of fish.

ROFL! 99.99% of the mercury in fish comes from natural sources. The EPA's jihad against coal will not improve that situation.