On Mon, 02 Mar 2015 09:09:32 -0600, dpb wrote:

On 03/02/2015 7:14 AM, Frank wrote:
On 3/1/2015 9:04 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
Anyone watch 60 Minutes tonight? They has a segment about the laminate
flooring that Lumber Liquidators is having made at three plants in
China. It can be made 10% to 15% cheaper if you put in excessive
formaldehyde. It exceeds California limits as much as 20X.
...
I saw it too and question in my mind was that, while it fails California
standard, what about US standards?
...

CA was also just testing the boards where I would expect the EPA to
sample the indoor air.

I had it on, paid moderate attention...what I thought I heard was that
EPA implemented the CA standards in part, at least, altho didn't try to
get the details particularly.

I only heard about 3 words, but I consider 60 Minutes an alarmist
program, and untrustworthy. I know less about 20-20 and the other
networks' similar programs. But I think there are not really enough
terrible scandals to supply 156 or 208 a year for the 3 or maybe 4 such
shows.

And 60 Minutes makes do by using an ominous tone of voice.

It's been decades since I became suspicious. One of their stories was
about a guy suing a small city newspaper in Illiinois for libel and of
coursd the court papers referred to the newspaper's publishing the
libelous words. And 60 Minutes 2 or 3 times said that they had only
included the words in a letter, they hadn't published them in the
newspaper. Any law student who passed torts, a first year course,
knows that publishing does not require a newspaper. That writing a
letter IS publication. It's THE term for how one spreads libel, and
that includes a mere letter or anything written. And the words don't
have to be seen by everyone who reads a newspaper., if it the words are
false and the letter is read by someone who then costs the plaintiff
money**. If they didnt have an in-house lawyer look over the story,
they should have hired an outside lawyer for an hour, instead of
white-washing the newspaper.

**(Plus iirc one is entitled to a money judgment if the llibel accuses
one of a crime or a disgusting disease, whether the plaintfiff suffers
financial loss or not.)


They also talked about some emissions testing but as noted, that's so
variable based upon the specifics of any installation owing to
circulation, air leakage, etc., etc., etc., as to be of no meaning as a
general rule so didn't pay much attention at all to that part...

The one medical professional indicated in his opinion the higher levels
would definitely have enough outgassing over time in a confined space as
to be a longterm increased risk but again, as is always the case, he
noted there's no way to predict for any given individual a specific
outcome...I didn't hear any risk predictions on means, etc., even, I
presume owing to that they were either so low despite the comparison to
limits or variable or difficult to predict they weren't meaningful so
didn't make any worthwhile sensation factor to help the story--keeping
in mind that they have no story if it isn't sensational in the end...