[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: REHW #555 - an opening
yet another reason to eat low on the food chain
vegetable fats (soy!) do not bio-accumulate fat soluble dioxin as much as
it is also an opportunity for animal rights activists to point out the
unsustainability of meat-centric diets, especially since far more energy,
water and other inputs are needed for hamburgers instead of veggie burgers.
Much of the chlorinated pesticides used in the US are for animal feeds (a
lot is not -- but half of the water in agriculture is for meat, not veggies
that people eat).
Chicken, beef and other animals have always been contaminated with dioxin
over the past several decades due to bioaccumulation. A particular scandal
where extra dioxin gets into the feed does not change the need to eat lower
on the food chain and buy organic.
At 07:19 PM 7/19/1997 -0400, you wrote:
>The information in REHW #555 (FDA ban on dioxin-contaminated
> provides a unique opening for all dioxin activists. If we do
>not act to take advantage
> of the opening, we possibly lose a
>For those who haven't read their copy yet, REHW reports that the
> finding much-higher-than-average dioxin levels in some
>chickens, has found
> that chickens fed with soybean from a
>particular grain mill had 3-4 ppt dioxin.
> The grain mill had added
>bentonite clay (finely ground kitty litter) to the feed
>to make it "flow" better (raises questions about what these
> before being slaughtered...), and the clay mine was
> with dioxin (unknown origin, perhaps
>toxic disposal, perhaps a dioxin-polluting
> industry nearby).
>Anyhow, a large number of chicken farms are affected, about 350.
>(but not specified) some of the contractors or farms
>owned by the multinationals
> (Tyson, etc. Tyson chickens are the
>ones that showed the first signs of
> elevated dioxin).
>We have an opportunity to say, very simply:
>1. The FDA is right in banning shipments of these chickens.
>Dioxin is the most toxic organic substance known, etc,
>is associated with horrific diseases and afflictions, etc.
>in essence, the normal stuff we have in a "What is dioxin"
>flyer. (For example, see http://www.cqs.com/dioxin.htm).
>2. The FDA's ban does not go far enough. According to
>REHW #555, catfish measured at 10-30 ppt (!), beef is
>typically >1 ppt, and many other meats and dairy products
>are severely contaminated.
>3. The entire upper end of the food chain is contaminated,
>as are people's bodies (incl mother's milk). Meat, fish, and full-fat
>dairy products should be very limited in the diet.
>4. We need to cut dioxin production and exposure now. Stop
>incineration, phase out PVC and organochlorine chemicals
>In other words, we have the opportunity to finally make dioxin
>a national issue. The chemical companies and the meat, dairy,
>and fish industries are probably going to go to great lengths
>to spin-control this action by the FDA, and may even attempt
>to debunk the FDA's and EPA's relatively lame activities
>regarding dioxin regulation to date.
>Let's make the most of it while the door is open.
>Thanks for your time