 |
 |
||
|
|
|||
 |
|||
|
|
|||
|
The New Dark Age
For two decades this pesticide thrived. I wrote case histories of where it was used in hotels, casinos, restaurants, and theme parks, as well as in homes and apartments. The pest control profession embraced it and there never was a single case of it causing any hazard to those who applied it or benefited from it. I never found out why, but for some reason the EPA demanded that the manufacturer re-register the product and the decision was made that would be withdrawn instead. It was just too costly to prove what everyone already knew. It worked wonders protecting people against the diseases and property damage a wide variety of insect pest species cause on a daily basis. The EPA did a similar number on a pesticide called "Dursban." This excellent pesticide had been around for decades and was widely used because it was a component in more than 80 products that the public could purchase off the shelf of the supermarket or garden supplies store. The EPA proceeded to restrict its consumer use against insect pests. If it posed such a health hazard, why wasn’t there evidence of countless people being affected? Who benefited from its loss? The insects. Some may remember the "Alar" crisis that impacted the apple growers, particularly in the northwest. Millions of dollars were lost until it became clear that there was no threat whatever to the public from its use. People are still safely eating apples, just as they were before an environmental group perpetrated the manufactured crisis. The reason cited for these actions is called "the precautionary principle" that says that, if anything poses a possible risk, no matter how small, a chemical cannot be used. Proof of its effective use, in the case of pesticides, in protecting the public against the vast range of diseases pest insects or rodents routinely spread, was not to be considered. What any chemist or pharmacist will tell you is "the poison is in the dose." It is the amount of exposure that determines the level of hazard and we routinely eat, drink, and use things that have chemicals as part of their structure in such minute quantities as to constitute no threat. As just one example, potatoes contain trace amounts of arsenic, a deadly poison, but no one is ever going to consume enough potatoes at a single sitting. I was reminded of this when I recently read of still more fear mongering against a plastic ingredient called bisphenol-A, otherwise known as BPA. The food packaging industry has used BPA in the linings of metal cans since as far back as the 1950s. It is also used to make hard plastic as well as lacquers for bottle tops, water pipes, and even dental sealants and tooth coatings. The Environmental Working Group, a self-anointed "watchdog" organization rolled out the usual scare campaign in early March, claiming that BPA "may be poisoning pregnant women and infants" according to a study by the Group. Typically, these "studies" involve force-feeding huge amounts of the chemical to laboratory rats until a correlation can be made that it poses a threat to humans, but correlation is not the same as causation. I can assure you that the cost of the canned foods identified and probably all others is about to rise. Indeed, the cost of everything that uses chemicals in the course of its manufacture is going to rise. The reason for this is a program initiated by the European Union that has passed sweeping new chemical regulations that will go into effect in June. Based on that idiotic precautionary principle, the EU has instituted a program intended to rid the world of chemicals they deem to have an impact on the environment and human health. It is called "Green chemistry" and it has more to do with eliminating the use of beneficial chemicals than in offering any protection to Mother Earth and human beings. The U.S. Commerce Department is putting on "roadshows" for U.S. businesses to bring them in line with the Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of Chemicals ("REACH") regulations. As Kathleen Morson of Stratfor, a private intelligence group that advises U.S. corporations, says, "The REACH regulation represents a shift from the Western regulatory world’s reliance on risk assessment to something more precaution-based. Significantly, it shifts the regulatory burden from government agencies to the producers themselves to demonstrate that their chemicals are safe." No chemical is safe if it is ingested in an amount wherein the dose becomes injurious. This includes the chemical we commonly call water. Because American manufacturers commonly export their products all over the world and Europe represents a major market for them, they will have no choice but to submit to this EU plan to restrict chemicals, some of which have been safely in use for decades and longer. A little group of Green gnomes in Helsinki will decide the fate of every chemical in use today. This is what I predict. At some point in the future, after most of the world’s pesticides and herbicides, after chemicals used to clean water, after various chemicals used in the ways plastic is a part of our lives have been restricted, a huge plague will make its way across the world. It will be spread as the famed Black Plague was, by insect and rodent pests, and it will kill countless millions of people. A new Dark Age will follow. It will, in fact, have been in place since the imposition of the European Union’s draconian anti-chemical program was imposed. What is REACH really about? It’s about killing you. The Center needs your donation to maintain this website and our communications programs. Help the Center to keep you informed in ways the mainstream media never will. If you prefer, send your check payable to The Caruba Organization, 28 West Third St., Suite 1321, South Orange, NJ 07079. Thank you! Recently I helped a friend of mine revise his resume. This gentleman, now in his early 70s, has a Ph.D. and the kind of knowledge and skills it literally takes a lifetime to acquire. But there’s a catch. Most of the people with whom he has worked over his distinguished career are no longer active. There is an entire cohort of men and women in their 70s these days who are at the top of their skills with a vast body of knowledge that permits them to quickly advise clients what direction to take and what mistakes to avoid. These are people who know well the various trends in their industries and businesses, but who are often perceived to be too old to understand today’s quick-paced culture. Ironically, these are often the people who fashioned and shaped it. Because Americans are living longer, often enjoying good health late in life, the question must be asked, is 70 the new 50? According to data from the Senior Job Bank, America’s workforce is aging. By 2006 more than 15% of the U.S. labor force was 55 or older. By 2004 there were more than 33 million people aged 65 or older living in America, representing12.7% of the total population, about one out of every eight Americans. With every passing year, those numbers increase. Senior citizens and aging baby boomers are the fastest growing demographic segment of the population. The stereotypes surrounding today’s senior frequently do not apply and this is especially true of those who have led vigorous intellectual lives in various professions and enterprises, and who want to continue. Financially, they run the gamut from those who, if they wanted to, could play golf or pursue other interests for the rest of their days, to others who made plans for the future only to find themselves victimized by ever-rising property taxes, medical and other expenses that have risen in ways that no one could have predicted. Yes, Medicare does help, but one had better have other insurance plans in place as well. The doors to useful employment are often closed to this remarkable cohort of people who were born just before, during or just after World War II. They have experienced the rapid changes technology have introduced and many are quite comfortable in front of a computer these days. Old doesn’t mean brain-dead. It took the oldest President of our era to bring the Soviet Union to its knees and the senior citizen vote can determine who gets elected. A generation whose parents went through the Depression, who recall the abuse of presidential power that Watergate represents, or the folly of the Vietnam War, is not likely to be fooled by political clichés. The irony is that, when they were born, the average life expectancy for a man was about 60 years of age. That’s why, when Social Security was introduced, one began receiving checks on reaching age 65. A lot of folks didn’t and the government, not their families, pocketed their withheld earnings. Today, it is just the opposite. The average life expectancy these days is 78 years of age and lots of people are living well beyond that. My own father and mother lived to 93 and 98 respectively. Today, Social Security is either technically broke or soon will be. I don’t want to even think about where the government will find the cash for the new prescription program of Medicare or for Medicare itself. Since Congress doesn’t want to deal with the problem, it will get very ugly one of these days that is going to arrive too soon for too many. A nation that ignores a large part of its population with excellent skills is making a very big mistake. This is particularly true as we witness whole new generations that lack fundamental skills in reading, writing, and mathematics, many of whom have graduated from failed schools where indoctrination outweighs education. The cost of a college education today is truly obscene, saddling students with large debt before they even step out into the working world. It is a fearful thing to encounter the gross ignorance of a younger generation that often seems only to know what it has "learned" from television and movies. I am all for youth. However, until they can figure out what they’re going to do with their lives, it remains the task of older heads to insure they have a good future and I suspect that a vast treasure of people in their 70s—the "kids" who grew up preserving traditional values—are seeing their knowledge and skills wasted. Writers like myself have a special advantage as we can work our trade well into our senior years. The age barrier, however, is very real and I suspect that many very capable seniors like my friend are encountering hardships despite being 70 and savvy. You can share any of the commentaries that appear on this site by using Referral Blast (i.e. "Send This Article to Others" link), an easy way to send them to friends. If you have a website of your own, I would recommend you add Referral Blast to it and discover how it enhances traffic and recognition.
©
2007 Alan Caruba. |
||||||||||||||||||||
In the 1970s, as a public relations consultant, I helped introduce a new pesticideto the American market. More specifically, to the pest control industry as it was not available for use by the public. It was called "Ficam" and, after having undergone the costly Environmental Protection Agency registration process, it was quickly and widely used by pest control professionals, not just for its capacity to eliminate cockroaches and a variety of other pest insects, but because it was applied with nothing more toxic than water.