Chemical Trespass is a term I first saw in either the book "Living
Downstream" by Sandra Steingraber. ISBN 0-201-48303-3 or the book "Our
Stolen Future" by Theo Colbourn et al. ISBN 0-0525-93982-2 They both raise
reasonable questions about your assertions below. I think you will find
these books provide the well reasonded arguments you ask for and do cast
some serious doubt about the safety of the even very low level of endocrine
distruptoring chemicals esp. during fetal development. Mike Miller
>> Apparently, the clear evidence of chemical trespass itself
>> is disregarded as being in the category of things we call
>> "a problem."
>"Chemical trespass" is just some term you made up. It has no legal meaning.
>And at the detection levels we are talking about, no biological meaning
>> By this reasoning, if a person breaks into my home by
>> picking the lock, but does not actually break the lock
>> in doing so, and proceeds to alarm my family, tells bad
>> jokes, has vile body odor, and sit on the furniture...
>I think you are setting up a straw-man argument here. These bad habits are
>not analogous to chemical residues in your foods, because the residues have
>no detectable effects.
>> I shall poll everyone I run across for the next 7 days...
>Obviously you see this as an ethical issue. Instead of an emotional appeal,
>I would like to see a well-reasoned ethical argument.
To Unsubscribe: Email email@example.com with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
To Subscribe to Digest: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at: