I find this woman to be very annoying. Look at her “screw you, I’m bored with you” body language. Who does this bored posture in a Congressional hearing? Now this idiotic claim.
2
Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
I’d like to tie her up and slap her around a bit after a couple six packs in her trailer.
John, I don’t know why you even bother fanning the flames of hatred and violence in these stupid, stupid people when you certainly know, they are already fully supporting the wealthy and the powerful elite.
Cripes! After all of the years of this blog, it couldn’t be more blindingly obvious they are incapable of critical thought and changing their minds, so you’ve already got them in your camp.
So, what’s your point?
Intelligent people just don’t buy into blind hatred, so not only are you never going to convince them to hate, you just sadden them and make them feel sorry for you in your declining years.
I didn’t see the video but agree she appears to be unprofessional and boring at the least. Holding up your neck?
Unless she pulls a Sharon Stone move, she’s a short timer.
Since we do not know what causes autism, and we do have increasingly polluted water, you cannot say she is wrong. If the microscopic amount of mercury in vaccine preservatives are bad, what about the massive amounts of mercury in our water? I vividly remember as a kid people warning us about mercury in the water and how in 20 years we wouldn’t be able to eat fish in quantity any more. Were they wrong?
From the video and previous pictures I’ve seen of the honorable Ms. Jackson, I would say she was sick that day. She looks horrible in the video. I’m willing to cut a little slack on that.
As someone who worked 30 years for EPA, I can tell you that almost all environmental decisions are made on the basis of political concerns not scientific ones.
There is the site of a former chemical plant in Denver which during Republican administrations is considered a low enough risk that the material can be capped in place. However, when the Dems are in power the site is so dangerous the material needs to physically removed from the site and disposed of elsewhere. All justified with the very same data collected at the site.
Or how about a gold mine in southern Colorado which was permitted during the Reagan admin. It provided jobs for a few dozen people for several years. It now poses an existensial threat to an entire watershed and the farmers below which requires in perpetuo treatment and a multi billion dollar clean-up. That is the parts that can be cleaned up. It would never have received permits during a Dem admin.
But it is still providing jobs. Bureaucrats making environmental decisions are always under severe pressure to do what the folks at HQ and the politicos in Congress want done. In this case Colorado pols wanted gold mining jobs and probably the largess distributed during the permitting process.
Unfortunately, people in the environmental business do have a terrible tendency to cherry pick data and ignore everything which conflicts with their pre-conceived ideas. Usually it’s well intentioned but makes for very bad science. During 30 years I saw a lot of folks who wanted to collect data to “prove” what they already “knew”. This is why peer reviewed science has no substitute.
From the snippet of video, it appears Ms. Jackson was careless in answering a hypothetical question. I am not aware that anyone “knows” what causes autism even EPA. I personally am not convinced that autism is a single disease. It could easily be several diseases with similar symptoms. She could just as easily answered the question by asking the value of preventing a child’s death from water born e coli. That we do know can kill.
The question Ms Jackson addressed seems to be one of how do go about calculating the benefits from an environmental undertaking. What is the value of a prevented disease? How much are you justified in spending to acheive that goal? A pretty tough thing to do in the real world. But one that gov policies require EPA to attempt.
How much is a life worth? How much is it worth if it’s your life? How much if it’s the life of someone who has different political, economic and religious beliefs?
Guess it comes down to if you’re republican, how much of my money do I want to spend to save someone else’s life. Or if you’re a dem, how much of someone else’s money do I want to spend to save my life?
And the title Honorable just means she doesn’t have a PhD. Because if she did, you’d better believe the sign would have said Dr. Jackson.
#24 I fully agree that there are numerous legitimate problems that she could have used as an example, but as you mentioned yourself perfectly well, the public usually underestimates these threats based due to their ignorance. I have not seen the full session and don’t know what were the circumstances, but she is in the congress and probably playing the political game exactly due to that reason, use of Autism could be exactly to use the public’s awareness and the current hype to get what she wants…
But gain, look at the comment here (e.g. #29) the people are ignorant and proud of it, they don’t care about the science and reasons behind what many of the gov. agencies do, they appear to be more receptive for the batshit conspiracy ideas of G. Beck and the tea party… because its from the gov. it must be bad, and because she is educated and progressive she has to be a pompous jerk (not to mention being half-black).
For a rational observer, its mind baffling to see how much irrational and misguided opposition exist against thing which are there to protect the same public who oppose it.
Govs. all around the world are very imperfect institutions, but i would like them to have the power to for example stop things like “fracking” (hyd. fracturing) or to provide a basic universal healthcare system…
She’s not a doctor. For her to make this claim is a stretch. She sounds like one of those anti-vaccination tards and she needs to be booted out on her fat bureaucratic ass.
#40
Thank you very much for your judgment. Of course calling strangers “severely fucked up” is one of the hallmarks of a normal, well adjusted and mature personality.
So What
You are quite correct in pointing out how ignorant most folks are about their water supply. Operators are some of best folks I ever worked with, both ends of the pipe, potable and waste. Very dedicated people who do a great job with what they’re given to work with.
On lead pipe. It is not used in new installs and hasn’t been for some time. Believe it or not there are still some lead pipes in service in older parts of cities. Some of it is over 100 years old and still functioning. For all I know there may still be a few places with wood pipes left over from the early 1800s. Americans don’t realize how old much of our water infrastructure is here in the US.
Most of the lead concerns in water relate to lead based solder which was used until about 20 years ago. Still lots of that around.
If Hon (short for honey) Jackson would just stand on top of the table, take off her clothes, and spread her legs as wide as possible, she could then show her only true value to this world.
On which studies was she casing her conclusions?
None? Then I know what her opinion is worth: zip!
As for her looking bored and annoyed, I can sort of relate.
I’ve fallen to sleep in a few meetings and at a few hearings myself.
Its hell when you’re on the hot seat and can’t close your eyes and doze off for a minute or two.
#44: well said.
#46: How old are you, tough guy?
#42 Blind Stevie – Wooden water main pipes are used in Oregon. Lead solder was used for food cans up until the Clinton Administration. I still think those cans can be imported, though.
#44 Sagrilarus – Great point. Without seeing the text of the Executive Order referred to, the EPA director’s statement can be taken out of context.
There is a list of environmental hazards that have been considered at least at one time or another as contributing to autism. These hazards shouldn’t be in anybody’s drinking water like lead that was known to cause developmental problems before World War II. DDT was banned in the US in the early 1970s; in the late 1990s, it was still showing up in ground water samples. PCBs are being considered. If that gets into a woman’s body, it will be present for the next three generations of descendants.
I don’t find her attitude while speaking to be contemptuous or smug. Tired maybe. How long had the questioning gone on? How many of the questions were long, rambling opinion pieces pushing the legislator’s personal agenda? Record an hour or two of questioning and you have lots and lots of 50-second sound bites to choose from to make the subject look bad.
Consider the source: CNS, the Cybercast News Service, formerly the Conservative News Service, set up by Brent Bozell and his Media Research Center. Not exactly the paradigm of unbiased journalism.
Hey everybody, no need to listen to Pedro. He’s the reason animals eat their young.
42 Smallest town I ever worked for was about 1000 pe with about 450 drinking water connections. We did a five year DW line replacement plan, about every 4th service on the original cast mains was a lead service. The main was put in as a public works project during the depression, as was the wastewater system. We made a lot of fishing sinkers that year. I think it also explained the mentality of the city council. Unless the treatment facility is producing aggressively corrosive water, or as I have seen happen quite often people run their water softeners to zero hardness. The ability of lead to leach out of internal lines is very low. The EPA and Missouri action level are 15 ppb. Strangest house call I ever went to, the guys drinking water out of the tap was BRIGHT green, like antifreeze green. They had zero hardness and had begun leaching the copper out of his house plumbing. Best part he couldn’t figure out why he was replacing his water heater every year. Contrary to culligan you need some hardness in your water. While at work today I also checked with some folks no one to date has published a study linking lead to autism. There is however some evidence of a connection of aluminum and Alzheimers. the problem is that no one can answer as to whether high level of aluminum cause alzheimers or if alzheimers patients are prone to storing aluminum. Which came first the chicken or the egg. First you have to define what you mean by chicken. Oh and the wooden water lines, Had a town dig up a section last year. Somebody forgot to update the maps.
48 can manufactures can still use lead as the solder, provided the inside of the can is coated in plastic. Of course that brings up the potential leaching of Phthalates into the cans contents, and here we go down the road again.
Agreed there is a list of contaminants that should not be present in drinking water in any significant amounts. Lead is common in ground water simply because lead ore is common. On the upside lead is usually not prevalent because of its low solubility. DDT and PCB’s while not used in the US are still used in other countries so finding DDT is not that surprising. PCB’s are extremely hard to get rid of, usually through incineration of the contaminated material. Both these and others have been phased out over time. The problem with looking for a correlation is that levels of these contaminants decrease over time. But there is at least by the media’s reporting, an epidemic of autism. Even with editing I don’t like when people in “power” spout, off the cuff remarks like the one she made. Take a look at Jay nixon and the E.coli flap in the last two years in Missouri.
#52 So what – Around 2003, a scientist was noticing that PCBs were showing up on California mountain-top detectors. It was later determined that the origin of the PCBs was Chinese air pollution. Chinese air pollution was also the source for 50% of the particulate air pollution in Seattle and 25% in Los Angeles.
Old news story from 1980s: There were too many cases of autism in a particular group of children. Their parents had played together as children decades before in a river somewhere in Mass., I believe. They would notice pretty colors in the water and in winter, the river would not freeze. There was a factory upstream that was the source. I think it made Foster Grant sunglasses.
What were the pollutants?
Here’s an example that shows how stupidity is universal. You don’t have to be a guy to be a Dick. You don’t have to be a Republican to buy into outrageously bat-shit beliefs.
If there were intelligent life on earth, people everywhere would have been controlling their carbon emissions, their pollutants, their mineral resources and their molecules with great care. And belief systems would have died off centuries ago.
Googled and found the leominster MA article. Autism Research Review International 1992. The “cluster” approximately 100 cases does not appear to be from exposure to drinking water contaminants, but from working at the foster grant facility. The population of leominster is just above 40K. Given some anecdotal evidence that the US autism rate is around 1-100 or 150 depending upon the source is this “cluster” statistically significant? The CDC. EPA or NIH didn’t have anything available on leominster itself. The NIH did look into a cluster in Brick township with a rate of 1 in 500. which would be below the US rate of 1:100 or 150. But none of the research into the “clusters” link drinking water contamination. They show a somewhat potential plausible link to an environmental trigger, but they don’t specify that trigger. Unfortunately a lot of vague supposition without much real information. Here is a link to an old tripod page with some interesting material from NIH. http://tinyurl.com/4jp8bar The problem with both is that nothing else is available to show if the “clusters” are anecdotal or actual from a statistical point of view. Missouri ran into a similar issue involving cancer “clusters” in Cameron county. Although there was the appearance of a “cluster” and there was an attempt to link it to tannery sludge disposal. It was determined that the “cluster” did not actually exist. I would wonder if the attempt to prove a “cluster” from anecdotal information is actually an attempt to try and find a cause when it really comes down to bad thing happen to good people, and there has to be a reason. When the reality is that shit happens. Also in looking through different articles its interesting that most scientists agree that autism probably starts in uteri. If there is an environmental cause it would have to have been from an exposure to the mother-most likely- or the father. So Ms. Jacksons statement that a child could get autism from exposure to contaminated water should have actually been the child does not get autism from their parents exposure to contaminated water.
#55 OK that one I can’t argue with. One of my old math profs. made the comment that to a mathematical approximation there is no intelligent life on earth. It was something like that, but then it was an 8:00 am class that followed 25 cent beer night at the bar and it was a long long time ago so its kind of fuzzy.
This is what happens when the government is made up of illiterate skymonster-fearing anti-science Returdlicans.
I mean, how stupid do they have to be, to be unable to get it through their thick skulls that pollution is bad. America is screwed.
What a bunch of freaking sheeple !!! You hear a snippet of conversation and base your whole conclusion on that.
You don’t know what the Senator asked. You don’t know the rest of her answer. But you do know enough to start castigating her and criticizing her because of her “body language”.
Someone makes an observation from a biased video clip snippet and all the right wing nuts get their panties in a knot. Just like the proverbial lemmings heading for the cliff.
…
Second, the vast majority of responses so far indicate they didn’t even bother to listen, let alone hear what she said.
“Our science may be good, but I don’t know how you price the ability to try to forestall a child who may not get autism if they’re not exposed to contaminated water,”
Where in that comment does she state a child will get autism? It is called a hypothetical and is used to illustrate an answer. It is not conclusiveness.
Talk about the dumbing of America.
#51
Seems you are right… I wonder how he deals with adversities in his real life… makes me feel sorry for people around him.
His name calling is amusing thought, reminds me of primary school.
Pfft…everyone knows contaminated water is good for you. That is why it is called contaminated.
Here is the link to the hearing which is video archived. http://tinyurl.com/45othh8 180 exhilarating minutes of the government at work.
Sorry meant to add, the part in question is about 101 minutes in. But if you have the time watch the entire thing quite fascinating on both sides. Its like watching a city council meeting in slow motion, on acid.
“a child who may not get autism if they’re not exposed to contaminated water,” implicit in that statement is the converse, a child who is exposed to “contaminated” water may get autism. Yet no evidence appears to exists that there is a link between “contaminated” water and autism. That’s not a hypothetical, that’s an idiotic statement.
#67,
There is a huge difference between an implication and a statement. Read the headline and the comments and see how many posters aren’t claiming she said something she didn’t.
#68 I did not direct my comment at the headline or any other post. I directed my comment at your post, as well as what she said hence the quotation marks. She said and I quote again, “a child who may not get autism if they’re not exposed to contaminated water,” the logical converse of that statement is that a child may get autism if exposed to contaminated water. What she said is a bullshit statement. If she had simply said a child may not get any-insert any waterborne disease here-she would have made the point with a valid scenario backed with actual science. I expect better from the head of a Federal environmental agency, especially one with a degree in chemical engineering.