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

[Delores Broten <dbroten@rfu.org>]

  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
  
  http://www.rfu.org
  
  dbroten@rfu.org