View Single Post
  #74   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
JoeSpareBedroom JoeSpareBedroom is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,901
Default Did they change treated lumber AGAIN?

"dpb" wrote in message ...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"dpb" wrote in message ...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"dpb" wrote in message ...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"dpb" wrote in message ...


Now, we're going to talk in circles because I'm going to ask you
again what would be required in order to show health problems as a
result of exposure.
That's what epidemiologists do for a living. They're prolific on
lead, etc., but for CCA common as hen's teeth.

--
You're insisting you're correct. I might agree with you. But first, I
need an answer to the question that frightens you, apparently.

Here's the question again:

In order to show that health problems were caused by arsenic
exposure, WHAT WOULD NEED TO HAPPEN?
I'm not insisting on anything other than pointing out that if there
were widespread health problems induced by use of CCA, there should be
a world of evidence. That evidence would be widespread reports of
problems which had as their underlying commonality some identified
connection to CCA usage. I have looked; can't find it. Can you?

I repeat--we had this same discussion only a few months ago. There
wasn't any evidence forthcoming then, and so far there's none now.
There WAS data showing increased arsenic levels in certain populations
of children.
...

Reference?


We're going in circles. ...


Yes we are and as I have earlier said repeating a previous thread almost
verbatim. Remember?

You want to add something, find some citable references and/or links. You
can do that however you choose; I have no preferences/requirement.

I will also repeat yet again I spent a fair amount of time looking and
came up empty. It was not, and was not intended to be, an exhaustive and
scholarly literature search. However, as noted before, if the hazards of
CCA were so egregious, it shouldn't take any effort at all to find a large
number of citations in the readily available literature. If that were the
case and I simply somehow made a bad effort, it shouldn't take someone
else more than about 30 seconds to counter the argument.

--


OK. Have a nice day.