-- Edited by alwayswatching at 11:27, 2005-06-10

-- Edited by alwayswatching at 11:29, 2005-06-10

i am not very distracted - just waiting to join activity -

  nobody seems to agree that testing ex school students in a controlled accurate manor , with no screwing around with the actual #s will identify problem areas - nobody except THE FAMOUS NUCLEAR LOU and me & dovey and a few  others , and we can not accomplish such a huge undertaking on our own .  

      i dont pretend to have the only answer - such a project must be begun and then problems will have to be addressed as they become apparent ... it wont be easy .

the political stuff is fun ,  but remember , people not yet born are going to die horribly from this problem - until it is fixed ... our parents did not fix it ,they did not know what it was ,  if we dont , someone's children are going to have to.  

my mom and uncle on my dad's side died badly from this recently ,Dovey's parents [an aunt and uncle on my mom's side ] and many in her family have died from related stuff , her parents recently , Nuclear Lou's parents and sister , and who knows how many others -   [ that is the question really ]   i may be already screwed and not have symptoms yet ,    but for now i feel good - i am ready .

  i hope i am not alone .....

-- Edited by mike of the mountain at 16:02, 2005-05-23

quote:

---

Originally posted by: mike of the mountain
"nobody seems to agree that testing ex school students in a controlled accurate manor , with no screwing around with the actual #s will identify problem areas - nobody except THE FAMOUS NUCLEAR LOU and me & dovey and a few  others , and we can not accomplish such a huge undertaking on our own

MotM -

I think a lot of people (self included) would like to see this done ... I just can't commit any time to it and fear others are the same. I'll gladly help rustle up some help, though, or something.

Without creating a huge sighing sound in Niagara County ... is there a group or organization that can assist you all? And if not ... maybe it's your calling to create one.

Let me know what I can do.

-- Edited by alwayswatching at 11:31, 2005-06-10

well that is a beggining , it should not be assumed that i know how to do this  , a calling ?   i have heard that word used to describe this type of thing only in one other place .               

  if my mom were still around , she would be helping .      

   i know one of us does have  more info than i -   one guy has been storing up knowledge about this very subject  for years , waiting for the right time to use it ... without his leadership and or assistance and or guidance it will be much more difficult ,         the famous Nuclear Lou .

   

-- Edited by forgottenchild at 00:13, 2005-06-06

quote:

---

Originally posted by: alwayswatching
"Sure that works, we can call the Niagara Counties Dirty Dozen. What do you think guys?"

---

That has a nice ring to it, what do you think guys?

 

 1/18/02

Excerpt from article posted by Physicians For Social Change
(psr.org/trireport):

Washington, DC --The National Environmental Trust, Physicians for Social Responsibility and the Learning Disabilities Association of America announced research findings today estimating that releases into the environment of developmental and neurological toxins amount to about 24 billion pounds a year-enough toxic chemicals to fill railroad tanker cars
stretching from New York to Albuquerque, New Mexico.

About 12 million U.S. children under 1ne out of every six children-suffer from one or more developmental, learning, or behavioral disabilities. These include disabilities like mental retardation, birth defects, autism, or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

Based on recent estimates by the National Academy of Sciences, Polluting Our Future concludes that more than 360,000 U.S. children-more than one in every 200 children-suffer from developmental or neurological disabilities caused by a range of toxic exposures including developmental and neurological toxins. The report finds that it is likely that the actual impact of toxic chemicals on child development and learning is much greater.

"Now we know what we have suspected for years, that toxic chemicals are bringing anguish to thousands of families in this country," said Larry B. Silver, M.D., president of the Learning Disabilities Association of America and clinical professor of psychiatry at Georgetown University Medical Center. "These are families that worry, work overtime, and go without to take care of a child with a developmental or neurological disability like mental retardation or learning disabilities."

The report finds that chemical manufacturers; makers of paper, metal, and plastics; and electric power utilities are the largest emitters of developmental and neurological toxins nationwide. One of the report's surprising findings is that the printing industry is the largest source of air emissions of toluene -- one the most released developmental and neurological toxins. "Because many printing facilities are often closer to residential areas than other industries, this industry and government should make greater efforts to switch to safer technologies that present less of a potential health risk to children nearby," according to Lynn Goldman, M.D., a pediatrician and professor at Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health.

-- Edited by alwayswatching at 11:37, 2005-06-10

Does any one know the mercury levels in LP? The two have been linked. Ca has banned its use in vacines for children under 5 and pregnant women. NY has banned its use in schools.

 

Toxic releases decline, but worst soups persist     By Brad Knickerbocker The Christian Science Monitor May 17, 2005     The good news about toxic pollutants in the air, soil, and water is that overall levels are coming down. But according to the Environmental Protection Agency some of the most toxic substances - mercury, dioxin, lead, and PCBs - remain an increasing problem.
The recent announcement of another round of military base closures could put more focus on the problem of toxic waste and how to solve it.     
The EPA notes significant pollution problems at some 100 military bases, and 34 already-shuttered bases are among the most toxic "Superfund" sites, according to an Associated Press survey. Problems persist with such hard-to-remove contaminants as cleaning solvents, asbestos, radioactive materials, unexploded ordnance, and lead paint. The Pentagon already has spent $8.3 billion cleaning up recently closed military sites, and the total bill could top $12 billion.   All of this makes it difficult for the Pentagon to convert such facilities to state or privately owned properties, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported recently. In most cases, it takes years, if not decades, to finish the cleanup. In some places, for example, poisonous chemicals have seeped into groundwater flowing off-base.   According to the GAO, which looked at the previous four rounds of base closures going back to 1988, 28 percent of the total acreage has yet to be transferred "due primarily to the need for environmental cleanup."   While new base closures announced last week will add to that problem, total amounts of toxic pollution in the US environment have edged down.   In its latest annual Toxics Release Inventory, which covers more than 23,000 facilities and about 650 chemicals, the EPA reports that 4.4 billion pounds of toxic chemicals were released in 2003 (the latest available figures), about 6 percent less than the previous year. Most of the decrease was in metal mining and chemical manufacturing. Since 1998, before which fewer chemicals and fewer facilities were reported, toxic releases have gone down 42 percent.   At the same time, EPA officials and environmentalists note the worrisome release of persistent bioaccumulative and toxic chemicals (PBTs), which increased by 50 million pounds or 11 percent in the latest reporting year. These include dioxins, mercury, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).   "PBT chemicals are of particular concern," reports the EPA, "not only because they are toxic, but also because they remain in the environment for long periods of time and are not readily destroyed (they persist) and build up or accumulate in body tissues (they bioaccumulate)."   In 2003, for example, mercury and mercury-compound releases jumped 41 percent. Mercury is a highly toxic substance that can poison wildlife and cause brain and nervous-system damage in children and fetuses. Unlike most other pollutants, mercury tends to concentrate in dangerous "hot spots."   "Although it is good news that overall releases are back on track, it is a major concern that some of the most hazardous chemicals have increased so dramatically," says Meghan Purvis, an environmental health specialist with US Public Interest Research Group in Washington.   Meanwhile, according to the watchdog group Environmental Integrity Project, the 50 dirtiest among the nation's 359 largest power plants generate as little as 14 percent of the electric power but account for a disproportionately large share of pollution emissions: up to 50 percent of sulfur dioxide emissions, 42 percent of mercury, 40 percent of nitrogen oxides, and 35 percent of carbon dioxide.   "A huge share of these emissions comes from a handful of unnecessarily dirty power plants that have not yet installed modern pollution controls, or which operate inefficiently," says Eric Schaeffer, director of the Environmental Integrity Project and the EPA's former chief of regulatory enforcement.   Others take a longer view of pollution in the United States.   "In reality, the data is very clear," says Scott Segal, director of the Electric Reliability Coordinating Council in Washington, which lobbies on behalf of power plants and utilities around the country. "Power-plant emissions, along with other indicators of air quality in the United States, continue to improve as part of a trend dating back several decades."   "With a decade of compiled research ... we've found that it is nearly impossible to paint a grim, doom-and-gloom picture anymore," says Steven Hayward of the Pacific Research Institute, a free-market think tank in San Francisco that copublishes the "Index of Leading Environmental Indicators" with the American Enterprise Institute in Washington. "The facts speak for themselves, and the facts are hugely encouraging."   Other more recent facts may be less encouraging, however. For example, the Sierra Club reported last month that leaky underground storage tanks "are a growing threat to public health."   In all, there are some 130,000 leaking tanks around the country, including 17,544 needing cleanup in Florida, 15,049 in California, 9,039 in Michigan, and 1,221 in Tennessee.   "More than 100 million people drink groundwater in states where thousands of underground storage tanks are leaking and need cleanups," says Grant Cope, a toxics specialist with the Sierra Club. "These sites include toxics like benzene, toluene, and heavy metals that can quickly pollute groundwater, threaten public health, burden taxpayers with cleanup costs, and hurt real estate values.... A pin-prick sized hole in one fuel tank can leak 400 gallons of contamination a day, and one gallon of gasoline can pollute one million gallons of groundwater."  
 

 

-- Edited by alwayswatching at 11:34, 2005-06-10

of course having more knowledge is better than haveing less , i encourage all reading this to study up on what we must do - but we have limits on our time - so , i have chosen to focus on the LOOW site problem because mostly i lived there and my mom taught there and i attended the schools 2nd and 3rd grades .   i am not in any way minimising the problems in other schools and areas .    which are terrible also .   methods used here can also be implemented in other areas in the future -

  the CDC and NYS DOH published #s for cancer death rates are artificially low for the area of the LOOW site , the reason for this is not known to me -   our goal here will be to establish a test group from the school alumni and past and possibly present staff - and to record ACCURATLY  their medical history , concentrateing on cancer incedence and mortality -     and ?                there can be no fudgeing of the #s even if we dont get the expected results or we will loose all credibility -       i believe however the results will show a much greater percentage than shown by NYS DOH and CDC .                        if and when this study is completed - we will have to decide what to do with the results , how best to demonstrate to the world that people are dieing needlessly and that in the long run THAT MUST STOP -    we will not have the choice of how to stop it .   BUT we will have the responsability to make sure that the truth is known and the responsability to make sure the truth is used . 

we will learn as we go - mistakes will be made and repaired  -     it is not reasonable to expect anyone to oppose  this kind of thing as it will benefit all living in the area -  some people may choose to not participate  , that is their right  , we cannot badger them .   hopefully most will cooperate .