[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: More or Less Dioxin???...good news and nad news

  In British Columbia, where we are just recovering from massive dioxin
  output in effluent from kraft pulp mills, dioxin levels have gone down
  dramatically in fish-eating birds and their eggs, and somewhat down in
  crab, fish etc, since the switch to using Chlorine dioxide. However, I
  think levels in humans are just about the same, (As far as I know there are
  no "before" and "after" tests of native people, who probably EAT more fish
  than anyone else.) and it is my impression that so-called background levels
  eg air, soil etc, have not declined. 
  Nor do these tests include all the "dioxin-like" chemicals considered by
  the EPA. 
  But I'm no expert in this area. 
  Delores Broten
  At 06:02 PM 25/07/97 -0400, you wrote:
  >>Accept it or not, the data's the data.  Numerous studies of environmental
  >>at deposition in the environment and probably gives a better relative look.
  >The original claim (Sam's post) against which the question was raised was:
  >>fifteen years.  Yet, dioxin exposure has dropped by over 75% in the
  >>last decade; I am talking the total biologically available as a
  >>function of TEQ.  Seems to me that if the PVC industry was the smoking
  Delores Broten, 
  Reach for Unbleached! Foundation,
  Box 39, Whaletown BC Canada V0P 1Z0
  Ph/fax: (250) 935-6992