| 09-15-01 I want to talk about arsenic. I may have discussed arsenic before, but I want to return to the subject. Not everyone remembers, especially now, but one of the first acts of W. Bush when he became president was to suspend a regulation created by Clinton to reduce the legally permitted quantity of arsenic in drinking water. Previously, America allowed 50 parts per billion (ppb) in drinking water, and Clinton passed a regulation to reduce that to 10 ppb. Bush cancelled that law, the reason of course being that it would cause expenses to be incurred by a variety of chemical plants and other industries that produce arsenic in their "run-off." These companies would have to dramatically reduce the amount they are polluting. Bush claimed that the risks of arsenic in water need "further study." I say: It's a goddamn POISON! The article I read on Friday indicates that a new study released by The National Academies of Science proves that I am in fact correct: It's a goddamn POISON! This report by a prestigious panel of scientists shows that, "Even very low concentrations of arsenic in drinking water appear to be associated with a higher incidence of cancer," The report found a high risk of cancer at the current limit of 50 parts ppb. No other developed nation allows that much arsenic in drinking water. The scientists found that men and women who daily consume water containing 20 ppb -- less than half the current limit -- have a 7 in 1,000 risk of developing bladder or lung cancer during their lifetime. That risk declines to 3 in 1,000 at a level of 10 ppb and to 1.5 in 1,000 at 5 ppb, the panel said. EPA officials privately said that the new information raised questions whether the 10 ppb limit proposed by the Clinton administration was low enough. The agency has long held that the maximum acceptable cancer risk for various substances regulated by the EPA was 1 in 10,000. So let's figure this out for a second. At 20ppb, about 7 in 1000 people will get cancer from the arsenic in drinking water, but we permit 50ppb thanks to Bush. So let's guess that means about 15 people in 1000 will get cancer from it (it's probably higher, but let's be conservative.) The U.S. has a population around 285,000,000. If 15 out of a 1000 get cancer or other disease from this arsenic, it would affect 4,275,000. Now the arsenic is not evenly distributed throughout the country, it's concentrated in certain areas. The number who actually drink it would be less; just for argument let's say about 1/10 of that number will be exposed - that's 425,000 people who will get cancer from arsenic in drinking water. And it's all thanks to Bush. He's happy to give cancer to hundreds of thousands of Americans. Personally, I'd call that chemical/terrorist warfare perpetuated by our government and industry on the people of America. Is he really a hero, a protector of the people worth a high approval rating? Just because he happened to be President when terrorists attacked the U.S.? Or is our government really acting to protect property rights and business interests rather than people? The Natural Resources Defense Council sued the government several months ago over suspending the proposed rule, and a U.S. Court of Appeals is expected to soon set a hearing schedule in the case. Arsenic may also increase the chance of other diseases, but more study is needed to pinpoint the exposure risk, the science panel said. Some foreign researchers have linked arsenic exposure to diabetes, respiratory and cardiovascular ailments, and birth defects. Do we really need to wait longer to find out if this is also true? |
previous || entry index || next