"The truth is more important than the facts."
-- Frank Lloyd Wright
Hmmm! Makes sense to me! Here are links to some of the latest facts about dioxin in the Tittabawassee River floodplain:
- Tittabawassee River Sampling Identifies Areas for Interim Clean-up Action, MDEQ Contact: Robert McCann (517) 241-7397 - January 11, 2007. This information also advises us of the next public information session presented by Dow and MDEQ - 'The public will have an opportunity to ask questions about short and long-term actions that will be developed during the February 8, 2007 Tri-Cities Community Meeting at The Horizons Center in Saginaw Township from 7-9pm'
- River cleanup could begin this month, Midland Daily News, 01/11/2007. This reporter does a remarkable job of presenting the facts without trying to insert her personal opinions.
- Hot spots may demand action, The Saginaw News, 01/12/2007. This reporter included viewpoints from our own Len Heinzman, but wow! - the quote from a guy further downriver sure hits on the dramatic! '...said he and his family have endured "an unusual amount" of illnesses over the years and points to a contaminated river as the potential culprit. "With these kinds of levels, anybody in this area should be concerned. It makes you think. I used to fish down there." '
What do I think? It is a fact that 87,000 parts per trillion is a really really high concentration of dioxin. The Dow people will clean it up asap... I know because they said so.
It is true that the University of Michigan study showed that living along the Tittabawassee River does not significantly increase dioxin in our bodies; eating too much fat does!
It is true and it is a fact that extremist environmentalists are so tunnel-visioned that they would have the precautionary principle applied to all things scientific.
It is a fact that one of the tri-cities' area antagonists supports the precautionary principle, especially regarding dioxins in the environment.... evidenced by his recently published letter to the editor of the Saginaw News. Dr. Neill Varner responded with his own letter to the editor titled Principle arguments.
I'm sure I've shared this article about the precautionary principle before, but here it is in case you missed it - Challenging the precautionary principle by Helene Guldberg. In case you don't have time to read the whole thing, it all boils down to this excerpt from the Ms. Guldberg, 'the precautionary principle.... demands that we take regulatory action on the basis of possible 'unmanageable' risks, even after tests have been conducted that find no evidence of harm.'
It is true that, had the precautionary principle been used throughout the years, we would have no aspirin or cold remedies, no medicines, no vaccines, and on and on and on... Would we have the wheel... or fire? We could suppose then that one who totally supports the precautionary principle is the ultimate Luddite!
