Monday, January 24, 2000, 10:30:09 AM, you wrote:
LM> So, if I had all the animals in my herd vet-checked and certified
LM> free of brucellosis, and did not bring on board any other animals
LM> which were not first similarly screened, how large is the risk of
LM> contracting brucellosis from drinking the raw milk from such a
LM> Gee whiz, some people send hazardous substances through the mail,
LM> therefore we should discontinue postal service? Is this kind of
LM> thinking we really need to enshrine in our laws?
LM> I don't care for the "one size fits all" sort of assumptions
LM> embodied in having the government "protect" me. If the shoe does
LM> not fit, I do not want to be made to wear it! It hurts!
You are right. But the public health risk was considered in general
terms and in some places laws were established in accordance with what
hose law makers considered to be the over-riding public interest. This
is a legal / scientific matter and is not a closed book.
Interest parties can organize, do research and lobby. Good luck
(you'll need that and a lot of hard work. Blanket laws can find
support in uninformed legislators whose main concern is to avoid
taking any action that involves risks, including those to his or her
(I will be off line for a few days).
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:
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Feb 06 2000 - 12:00:25 EST