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

Re: E-M:/ fish consumption



Here's the link to The Center for Consumer Freedom on SourceWatch, which tracks money and contributors for these kinds of things.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Consumer_Freedom#Anti-PETA_and_pro-mercury

On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 9:06 AM, Timothy Caldwell <jtcaldwell@earthlink.net> wrote:
I suggest that before investing much time in countering the assertions made in the blog, that you try to find out who is behind "The Center for Consumer Freedom." Often these sites are sponsored by the corporations who are affected by regulations and health warnings, just as "Big Oil" (Exxon, etc.) has been behind the many efforts to disprove the facts that human activity is a major contributor to global warming. 

Tim 


On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 8:43 AM, Pat Crowley <pat@pat-crowley.com> wrote:

Dear Fellow E-Michers:

 

I came across this website on a Republican blog this morning and was hoping if someone more knowledgeable could critique it.

Eg, the facts, the source, and why was it in a political blog? 

I am hoping for serious discussion, not political blaming.

 

http://mercuryfacts.org/fMeltdown.cfm

 

I want people to be able to fish and eat the fish from our Michigan waterways.

I have read the Michigan advisories but do wonder at times how the benefits and risks really stack up.

 

Michigan needs to find ways for our people to make more connection with our waters, not less.

Is there any hope that our fish can become safer to eat in the future?

If many or most of our pollutants are from airborne contaminants, can we ever reclaim our fish as food sources?

Do we have serious plans to pursue ways of reducing pollutants from airborne sources so as to protect our waters?

Obviously, we can work on doing a better job of managing our water resources at the ground level, but will airborne contaminants negate our work?

 

Thanks,

Pat Crowley, Kalamazoo





--
Editor and owner
www.michiganliberal.com