I walked over to my woodpile to pick out a few pieces for a small job. I
had some 2x6 PT stacked on the ground - these pieces had been there about 3
years. I turn them over and ....... riddled with termite damage to the
point they had zero value.

Kind of reminds me of the last time I was in Lowes. I looked at their PT
lumber and it had mold growing on it. No kidding. Anyone else seeing
serious deterioration of building materials?

wrote:
I walked over to my woodpile to pick out a few pieces for a small
job. I had some 2x6 PT stacked on the ground - these pieces had been
there about 3 years. I turn them over and ....... riddled with
termite damage to the point they had zero value.

Kind of reminds me of the last time I was in Lowes. I looked at
their PT lumber and it had mold growing on it. No kidding. Anyone
else seeing serious deterioration of building materials?

Under government orders the wood people have removed chemicals toxic to
kids, small animals, and baby insects.

It's for the children.

On Sep 29, 6:51*pm, wrote:
I walked over to my woodpile to pick out a few pieces for a small job. *I
had some 2x6 PT stacked on the ground - these pieces had been there about 3
years. *I turn them over and ....... riddled with termite damage to the
point they had zero value.

Kind of reminds me of the last time I was in Lowes. *I looked at their PT
lumber and it had mold growing on it. *No kidding. *Anyone else seeing
serious deterioration of building materials?

I had the same thing happen to me with PT 4x4's from Lowes (top
choice). I carried them back to Lowes and complained. The department
manager said the warranty was from the supplier and not Lowes so they
wouldn't do anything. I asked for the store manager. He said to get
replacements off the pile out front, but he wasn't happy about it.

The problem is that the treatment does not penetrate all the way
through the wood. It leaves an untreated center. As the wood cracks
& splits as it normally does, it leaves an opening for termites to
enter and eat out the untreated portions. You then end up with a
hollow shell of wood.

On 9/29/2010 10:52 PM, KC wrote:
On Sep 29, 6:51 wrote:
I walked over to my woodpile to pick out a few pieces for a small job. I
had some 2x6 PT stacked on the ground - these pieces had been there about 3
years. I turn them over and ....... riddled with termite damage to the
point they had zero value.

Kind of reminds me of the last time I was in Lowes. I looked at their PT
lumber and it had mold growing on it. No kidding. Anyone else seeing
serious deterioration of building materials?

I had the same thing happen to me with PT 4x4's from Lowes (top
choice). I carried them back to Lowes and complained. The department
manager said the warranty was from the supplier and not Lowes so they
wouldn't do anything. I asked for the store manager. He said to get
replacements off the pile out front, but he wasn't happy about it.

The problem is that the treatment does not penetrate all the way
through the wood. It leaves an untreated center. As the wood cracks
& splits as it normally does, it leaves an opening for termites to
enter and eat out the untreated portions. You then end up with a
hollow shell of wood.


Where's good old creosote when you need it? We once had stuff that
killed termites, prevented wood rot, toilets that flushed, no bed
bugs and shower heads that would blow you out of the shower. I think
our technology is devolving. 8-)

TDD

In ,
The Daring Dufas spewed forth:
On 9/29/2010 10:52 PM, KC wrote:
On Sep 29, 6:51 wrote:
I walked over to my woodpile to pick out a few pieces for a small
job. I had some 2x6 PT stacked on the ground - these pieces had
been there about 3 years. I turn them over and ....... riddled
with termite damage to the point they had zero value.

Kind of reminds me of the last time I was in Lowes. I looked at
their PT lumber and it had mold growing on it. No kidding. Anyone
else seeing serious deterioration of building materials?

I had the same thing happen to me with PT 4x4's from Lowes (top
choice). I carried them back to Lowes and complained. The
department manager said the warranty was from the supplier and not
Lowes so they wouldn't do anything. I asked for the store manager. He
said to get replacements off the pile out front, but he wasn't
happy about it. The problem is that the treatment does not penetrate all
the way
through the wood. It leaves an untreated center. As the wood cracks
& splits as it normally does, it leaves an opening for termites to
enter and eat out the untreated portions. You then end up with a
hollow shell of wood.


Where's good old creosote when you need it? We once had stuff that
killed termites, prevented wood rot, toilets that flushed, no bed
bugs and shower heads that would blow you out of the shower. I think
our technology is devolving. 8-)

TDD

butz you gitz ta feelz good fer da chillrens

On Sep 29, 9:35*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
wrote:
I walked over to my woodpile to pick out a few pieces for a small
job. *I had some 2x6 PT stacked on the ground - these pieces had been
there about 3 years. *I turn them over and ....... riddled with
termite damage to the point they had zero value.

Kind of reminds me of the last time I was in Lowes. *I looked at
their PT lumber and it had mold growing on it. *No kidding. *Anyone
else seeing serious deterioration of building materials?

Under government orders the wood people have removed chemicals toxic to
kids, small animals, and baby insects.

It's for the children.

Same reason I'm battling ants in the kitchen in recent years and NYC
is becoming riddled with bed bugs.
EPA banned chemicals that worked in the past.

ChairMan wrote:


butz you gitz ta feelz good fer da chillrens



Lol. So true.

On Sep 30, 7:15*am, Frank wrote:


Same reason I'm battling ants in the kitchen in recent years and NYC
is becoming riddled with bed bugs.
EPA banned chemicals that worked in the past.

No they didn't ban it, they just put it in a 'restricted use'
category. Which means you have to get a permit to use it. Which
means you have to take a test showing that you have some common sense
for using pesticides. Which means you can't buy the good stuff over-
the-counter but you can still buy it if you have a permit. Which
means EPA is trying to keep the potent/good stuff out of the hands of
dumb-asses while still allowing it's use for those who know how to use
it properly.

On Sep 29, 11:24*pm, The Daring Dufas
wrote:


Where's good old creosote when you need it? We once had stuff that
killed termites, prevented wood rot, toilets that flushed, no bed
bugs and shower heads that would blow you out of the shower. I think
our technology is devolving. 8-)


AMEN, bro!

On Sep 30, 9:46*am, KC wrote:
On Sep 29, 11:24*pm, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

Where's good old creosote when you need it? We once had stuff that
killed termites, prevented wood rot, toilets that flushed, no bed
bugs and shower heads that would blow you out of the shower. I think
our technology is devolving. 8-)

AMEN, bro!

It's not the epa. PT wood has always had penetration issues. They
want to cycle the wood through the pressure chamber as fast as they
can. And they don't want to make sure the wood is properly dried
before hand. So it's almost impossible to get saturation all the way
through. Any cracks or end cuts expose what is basically untreated
wood.

I used that tree cut repair tar to coat pt wood in situations where
I'm going to bury it and it's critical that it not rot.

jamesgangnc wrote:
On Sep 30, 9:46 am, KC wrote:
On Sep 29, 11:24 pm, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

Where's good old creosote when you need it? We once had stuff that
killed termites, prevented wood rot, toilets that flushed, no bed
bugs and shower heads that would blow you out of the shower. I think
our technology is devolving. 8-)
AMEN, bro!

It's not the epa. PT wood has always had penetration issues. They
want to cycle the wood through the pressure chamber as fast as they
can. And they don't want to make sure the wood is properly dried
before hand. So it's almost impossible to get saturation all the way
through. Any cracks or end cuts expose what is basically untreated
wood.

I used that tree cut repair tar to coat pt wood in situations where
I'm going to bury it and it's critical that it not rot.

Well, it certainly is EPA that has banned many of the earlier products
and it isn't at all clear the replacements are as good (and in some
instances it's pretty clear they're not). Whether it's an overall win
is probably debatable in some instances (I'm yet to be convinced there
was any real significant issue in the PT case that needed to be fixed)
but otoh, DDT clearly had some significant unintended consequences used
as widely as it was initially.

--

On Sep 30, 10:26*am, dpb wrote:
jamesgangnc wrote:
On Sep 30, 9:46 am, KC wrote:
On Sep 29, 11:24 pm, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

Where's good old creosote when you need it? We once had stuff that
killed termites, prevented wood rot, toilets that flushed, no bed
bugs and shower heads that would blow you out of the shower. I think
our technology is devolving. 8-)
AMEN, bro!

It's not the epa. *PT wood has always had penetration issues. *They
want to cycle the wood through the pressure chamber as fast as they
can. *And they don't want to make sure the wood is properly dried
before hand. *So it's almost impossible to get saturation all the way
through. *Any cracks or end cuts expose what is basically untreated
wood.

I used that tree cut repair tar to coat pt wood in situations where
I'm going to bury it and it's critical that it not rot.

Well, it certainly is EPA that has banned many of the earlier products
and it isn't at all clear the replacements are as good (and in some
instances it's pretty clear they're not). *Whether it's an overall win
is probably debatable in some instances (I'm yet to be convinced there
was any real significant issue in the PT case that needed to be fixed)
but otoh, DDT clearly had some significant unintended consequences used
as widely as it was initially.

--- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Nope, I've seen the same problem with pt wood that was made 20 years
ago. It's not the compounds used, it's the lack of penetration. If
you want permanent ground contact you need to get .40 or .60. And do
not cut it where it will contact the ground.

Frank wrote:
On Sep 29, 9:35 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
wrote:
I walked over to my woodpile to pick out a few pieces for a small
job. I had some 2x6 PT stacked on the ground - these pieces had been
there about 3 years. I turn them over and ....... riddled with
termite damage to the point they had zero value.
Kind of reminds me of the last time I was in Lowes. I looked at
their PT lumber and it had mold growing on it. No kidding. Anyone
else seeing serious deterioration of building materials?
Under government orders the wood people have removed chemicals toxic to
kids, small animals, and baby insects.

It's for the children.

Same reason I'm battling ants in the kitchen in recent years and NYC
is becoming riddled with bed bugs.
EPA banned chemicals that worked in the past.

What EPA-banned chemical kept the ants out of your kitchen in the past?
That problem has pretty simple solutions, beginning with sealing
entries and eliminating food sources. Hornets have been bugging me
lately outdoors, but it's getting cold and I have a winter coat )
They seem to become more pesty during severe dry spells....just looking
for a drink.

KC wrote:
On Sep 30, 7:15 am, Frank wrote:

Same reason I'm battling ants in the kitchen in recent years and NYC
is becoming riddled with bed bugs.
EPA banned chemicals that worked in the past.

No they didn't ban it, they just put it in a 'restricted use'
category. Which means you have to get a permit to use it. Which
means you have to take a test showing that you have some common sense
for using pesticides. Which means you can't buy the good stuff over-
the-counter but you can still buy it if you have a permit. Which
means EPA is trying to keep the potent/good stuff out of the hands of
dumb-asses while still allowing it's use for those who know how to use
it properly.

The solution to ants in the kitchen for lots of folks is to smother the
yard with poison, often applied during inappropriate conditions. Some
of my neighbors, who have never read a label, use a 50# bag of poison to
CRUSH the bugs to death....

KC wrote:
On Sep 29, 6:51 pm, wrote:
I walked over to my woodpile to pick out a few pieces for a small job. I
had some 2x6 PT stacked on the ground - these pieces had been there about 3
years. I turn them over and ....... riddled with termite damage to the
point they had zero value.

Kind of reminds me of the last time I was in Lowes. I looked at their PT
lumber and it had mold growing on it. No kidding. Anyone else seeing
serious deterioration of building materials?

I had the same thing happen to me with PT 4x4's from Lowes (top
choice). I carried them back to Lowes and complained. The department
manager said the warranty was from the supplier and not Lowes so they
wouldn't do anything. I asked for the store manager. He said to get
replacements off the pile out front, but he wasn't happy about it.

The problem is that the treatment does not penetrate all the way
through the wood. It leaves an untreated center. As the wood cracks
& splits as it normally does, it leaves an opening for termites to
enter and eat out the untreated portions. You then end up with a
hollow shell of wood.


Same old problem of too much of a good thing. PT used to be for fence
posts, until everyone on the planet built a deck and a play yard...

So many prescription drugs are disposed of that they show up in water
supplies and in our body tissues....there are probably very sensible
solutions to that problem, too, but too many conflicting money issues.

In article ,
" wrote:



What EPA-banned chemical kept the ants out of your kitchen in the past?

I'm not the one to whom you directed your query, but Diazinon works
great for me.

That problem has pretty simple solutions, beginning with sealing
entries and eliminating food sources.

You seal up ant-sized cracks? Damn I hate presbyopia.

In news Smitty Two spewed forth:
In article ,
" wrote:



What EPA-banned chemical kept the ants out of your kitchen in the
past?

I'm not the one to whom you directed your query, but Diazinon works
great for me.


Dursban, too


That problem has pretty simple solutions, beginning with sealing
entries and eliminating food sources.

You seal up ant-sized cracks? Damn I hate presbyopia.

I use a tiny chaulking gung

On Sep 30, 12:42*pm, "ChairMan" wrote:
Innews Smitty Two spewed forth:

In article ,
" wrote:

What EPA-banned chemical kept the ants out of your kitchen in the
past?

I'm not the one to whom you directed your query, but Diazinon works
great for me.

Dursban, too



* That problem has pretty simple solutions, beginning with sealing
entries and eliminating food sources.

You seal up ant-sized cracks? Damn I hate presbyopia.

I use a tiny chaulking gung

I've found this works great for tiny ants.

http://www.livingwithbugs.com/ant_bait.html

On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 23:24:07 -0500, The Daring Dufas wrote:
Where's good old creosote when you need it?

I've heard of folk making something similar by thinning down waste engine
oil. Won't penetrate as much as PT, but it's easy to DIY every few years
(and I seem to recall my dad talking me into creosoting fences every few
years when I was a kid too - nobody ever thought of it as bad, they just
knew to keep the stuff off their skin)

re. PT lumber, there's a real mixture out there - some of the stuff that
the big stores sell is junk, some of it not too bad. There doesn't seem
to be any consistency, or knowing what you're going to get (same's true
with non-PT lumber, too). I usually stockpile a few good bits when I see
them, if I happen to know I'll need them for a project a few months down
the line.

We once had stuff that
killed termites, prevented wood rot, toilets that flushed, no bed bugs
and shower heads that would blow you out of the shower. I think our
technology is devolving. 8-)

Yeah, that and there are so many darn people on the planet that things
which used to be good in moderation are now considered bad :-)

cheers

Jules

Smitty Two wrote:
In article ,
" wrote:


What EPA-banned chemical kept the ants out of your kitchen in the past?

I'm not the one to whom you directed your query, but Diazinon works
great for me.

That problem has pretty simple solutions, beginning with sealing
entries and eliminating food sources.

You seal up ant-sized cracks? Damn I hate presbyopia.

Yeh...I crawl around the kitchen using a microscope to peer under the
baseboards ) OTOH, caulk around inside along baseboard makes them
look a little harder. Keeping food spills, sweet or greasy food (pet
food, etc.) off the floor makes the place less attractive to ants.

dpb wrote:

Well, it certainly is EPA that has banned many of the earlier products
and it isn't at all clear the replacements are as good (and in some
instances it's pretty clear they're not). Whether it's an overall win
is probably debatable in some instances (I'm yet to be convinced there
was any real significant issue in the PT case that needed to be fixed)
but otoh, DDT clearly had some significant unintended consequences
used as widely as it was initially.

And exactly what was the deleterious unintended consequence of using DDT?

KC wrote in
:

On Sep 29, 6:51*pm, wrote:
I walked over to my woodpile to pick out a few pieces for a small
job.
*I
had some 2x6 PT stacked on the ground - these pieces had been there
about
3
years. *I turn them over and ....... riddled with termite damage to
the point they had zero value.

Kind of reminds me of the last time I was in Lowes. *I looked at
their
PT
lumber and it had mold growing on it. *No kidding. *Anyone else seein
g
serious deterioration of building materials?

I had the same thing happen to me with PT 4x4's from Lowes (top
choice). I carried them back to Lowes and complained. The department
manager said the warranty was from the supplier and not Lowes so they
wouldn't do anything. I asked for the store manager. He said to get
replacements off the pile out front, but he wasn't happy about it.

The problem is that the treatment does not penetrate all the way
through the wood. It leaves an untreated center. As the wood cracks
& splits as it normally does, it leaves an opening for termites to
enter and eat out the untreated portions. You then end up with a
hollow shell of wood.



As the wood cracks
& splits as it normally does,

Wadda ya mean? How about the fact that so many peices of PT are not used
full size. Ya gotta make a cut. [Yea, I know. posts are whacked off the
top]

wrote in
:

On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 15:40:11 -0500, "HeyBub"
wrote:

dpb wrote:

Well, it certainly is EPA that has banned many of the earlier
products and it isn't at all clear the replacements are as good (and
in some instances it's pretty clear they're not). Whether it's an
overall win is probably debatable in some instances (I'm yet to be
convinced there was any real significant issue in the PT case that
needed to be fixed) but otoh, DDT clearly had some significant
unintended consequences used as widely as it was initially.

And exactly what was the deleterious unintended consequence of using
DDT?


Dead birds, mostly. DDT was instrumental to the decline in the big
raptors because the DDT propagated up the food chain. It was basically
just because we used DDT indiscriminately with absolutely zero control
of where, how much or what we were trying to kill.
I doubt DDT is any worse than any other chemical if we were more
careful in how we used it.



the decline in the big
raptors

So THAT'S what happened to the dinosaurs! All that BS about a meteor...

wrote:
On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 15:40:11 -0500, "HeyBub"
wrote:

dpb wrote:
Well, it certainly is EPA that has banned many of the earlier products
and it isn't at all clear the replacements are as good (and in some
instances it's pretty clear they're not). Whether it's an overall win
is probably debatable in some instances (I'm yet to be convinced there
was any real significant issue in the PT case that needed to be fixed)
but otoh, DDT clearly had some significant unintended consequences
used as widely as it was initially.
And exactly what was the deleterious unintended consequence of using DDT?


Dead birds, mostly. DDT was instrumental to the decline in the big
raptors because the DDT propagated up the food chain. It was basically
just because we used DDT indiscriminately with absolutely zero control
of where, how much or what we were trying to kill.
I doubt DDT is any worse than any other chemical if we were more
careful in how we used it.

DDT persists in the environment without breaking down. Stores in fat
tissue in humans and showed up in human breast milk. Genetic changes, too?

On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 06:40:54 -0700 (PDT), KC
wrote:

On Sep 30, 7:15Â*am, Frank wrote:


Same reason I'm battling ants in the kitchen in recent years and NYC
is becoming riddled with bed bugs.
EPA banned chemicals that worked in the past.

No they didn't ban it, they just put it in a 'restricted use'
category. Which means you have to get a permit to use it. Which
means you have to take a test showing that you have some common sense
for using pesticides. Which means you can't buy the good stuff over-
the-counter but you can still buy it if you have a permit. Which
means EPA is trying to keep the potent/good stuff out of the hands of
dumb-asses while still allowing it's use for those who know how to use
it properly.
They have outright BANNED a lot of it -and if the EPA in the USA
hasn't, Canada - and in particular Ontario has. NO "cosmetic
pesticides" on lawns - which includes herbicides.

The cinch bugs and dandelions will be totally taking over in a few
years. If they had the vote they'd take over the government at the
next election!!

"dpb" wrote in message
...

Well, it certainly is EPA that has banned many of the earlier products and
it isn't at all clear the replacements are as good (and in some instances
it's pretty clear they're not). Whether it's an overall win is probably
debatable in some instances (I'm yet to be convinced there was any real
significant issue in the PT case that needed to be fixed) but otoh, DDT
clearly had some significant unintended consequences used as widely as it
was initially.

--




After the government's behavior in the Gulf of Mexico, I've got *zero*
interest in anything these people have to say.

wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 15:40:11 -0500, "HeyBub"
wrote:

dpb wrote:
Well, it certainly is EPA that has banned many of the earlier
products and it isn't at all clear the replacements are as good
(and in some instances it's pretty clear they're not). Whether
it's an overall win is probably debatable in some instances (I'm
yet to be convinced there was any real significant issue in the PT
case that needed to be fixed) but otoh, DDT clearly had some
significant unintended consequences used as widely as it was
initially.
And exactly what was the deleterious unintended consequence of
using DDT?

Dead birds, mostly. DDT was instrumental to the decline in the big
raptors because the DDT propagated up the food chain. It was
basically just because we used DDT indiscriminately with absolutely
zero control of where, how much or what we were trying to kill.
I doubt DDT is any worse than any other chemical if we were more
careful in how we used it.

DDT persists in the environment without breaking down. Stores in fat
tissue in humans and showed up in human breast milk.

Okay, I'll play. This is a problem because...

Genetic changes, too?

I don't know. And evidently neither you nor anyone else does either.

wrote:

Dead birds, mostly. DDT was instrumental to the decline in the big
raptors because the DDT propagated up the food chain.

I'll play. By what mechanism did DDT in the food chain kill birds?

The administrative law judge, after hearings at the EPA, after seven months
of testimony, concluded: "DDT is not a carcinogenic hazard to man... DDT is
not a mutagenic or teratogenic hazard to man... The use of DDT under the
regulations involved here do not have a deleterious effect on freshwater
fish, estuarine organisms, wild birds or other wildlife."

Nevertheless, the head of the EPA, on his on authority, banned DDT. The head
of the EPA that banned DDT was also a member of the Environmental Defense
Fund.

Anyway, if you have some alternative information, I'd be glad to hear it.

It was basically
just because we used DDT indiscriminately with absolutely zero control
of where, how much or what we were trying to kill.
I doubt DDT is any worse than any other chemical if we were more
careful in how we used it.

Nah. Like Arsenic in the water supply, ANY amount is too much for some.

On Sep 30, 10:22*pm, wrote:
On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 20:59:26 -0500, "HeyBub"
wrote:

wrote:

Dead birds, mostly. DDT was instrumental to the decline in the big
raptors because the DDT propagated up the food chain.

I'll play. By what mechanism did DDT in the food chain kill birds?

The DDT causes the shells on the eggs to be thinner and they break
before the embryo develops into a chick.





The administrative law judge, after hearings at the EPA, after seven months
of testimony, concluded: "DDT is not a carcinogenic hazard to man... DDT is
not a mutagenic or teratogenic hazard to man... The use of DDT under the
regulations involved here do not have a deleterious effect on freshwater
fish, estuarine organisms, wild birds or other wildlife."

Nevertheless, the head of the EPA, on his on authority, banned DDT. The head
of the EPA that banned DDT was also a member of the Environmental Defense
Fund.

Anyway, if you have some alternative information, I'd be glad to hear it..

It was basically
just because we used DDT indiscriminately with absolutely zero control
of where, how much or what we were trying to kill.
I doubt DDT is any worse than any other chemical if we were more
careful in how we used it.

Nah. Like Arsenic in the water supply, ANY amount is too much for some.

I tend to agree people are taking this "chemical menace " thing to
far, mostly the lawyers.
Lead and asbestos are two prime examples.
If you ever touched a brake shoe, there are ambulance chasers who will
coach you in how to become a victim and they will take your case to
court.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

There's never been evidence that ddt was harmful to humans. But it
did not ever breakdown. Selective use would still be appropriate and
is still available in other countries. But newer insecticides and
herbicides that have a short cycle before breaking down is really not
a bad idea. It took years to figure out what the effect of ddt was.
And it's not really possible to test or anticipate every effect of a
complex manufactured chemical on the entire environment. If it breaks
down in a few weeks then by nature it is safer. How is that a bad
thing?

wrote:

I'll play. By what mechanism did DDT in the food chain kill birds?

The DDT causes the shells on the eggs to be thinner and they break
before the embryo develops into a chick.


I don't think so. This conclusion - eggshell thinning - was reached on the
basis of two articles in 1967 and 1968. Both researchers measured eggshells
collected currently with those collected before 1947. The researchers
concluded DDT & DDE were to blame and rejected other possibilities (food
supply, radioactivity, oil, lead, mercury, stress, temperature, etc.).

Many other researchers said "Hmm, let's see," and began experimentation.

See:
#39 Many experiments on caged-birds demonstrate that DDT and its metabolites
(DDD and DDE) do not cause serious egg shell thinning, even at levels many
hundreds of times greater than wild birds would ever accumulate.

#40 Experiments associating DDT with egg shell thinning involve doses much
higher than would ever be encountered in the wild.

#41 Laboratory egg shell thinning required massive doses of DDE far in
excess of anything expected in nature, and massive laboratory doses produce
much less thinning than is seen in many of the thin-shelled eggs collected
in the wild.

#42 Years of carefully controlled feeding experiments involving levels of
DDT as high as present in most wild birds resulted in no tremors, mortality,
thinning of egg shells nor reproductive interference.

#43 Egg shell thinning is not correlated with pesticide residues.

#44 Among brown pelican egg shells examined there was no correlation between
DDT residue and shell thickness.

#45 Egg shells of red-tailed hawks were reported to be six percent thicker
during years of heavy DDT usage than just before DDT use began. Golden eagle
egg shells were 5 percent thicker than those produced before DDT use.

http://www.junkscience.com/ddtfaq.html#ref6

The most widely-read web article is he
http://www.stanford.edu/group/stanfo...and_Birds.html

in which the eggshell-thinning claim is asserted without proof. You'll note
that the article was written by Paul Ehrlich, a 1980's prophet of doom who
wrote several books claiming a third to one-half of humanity would die of
starvation within a decade or two.*

In my community, Ehrlich is most famous for the 1980 "Simon-Ehrlich" wager
in which an economist, Julian Simon, called Ehrlich's bluff. Simon proposed
a wager. Ehrlich was to pick five commodities and Simon would wager that
each would be cheaper in ten years. Ehrlich agreed and chose copper,
chromium, nickle, tin, and tungsten.

Ehrlich lost and paid off in 1990.

Point is, if Ehrlich was wrong about mass starvation, commodity prices, and
other assorted prophecies, there's an excellent chance he was wrong about
eggshells.

---------
* Books by Paul Ehrlich

"The Population Bomb"
"The End of Affluence"
"The Race Bomb"
"The Population Explosion"
"One With Nineveh: Politics, Consumption, and the Human Future
"Healing the Planet: Strategies for Solving the Environmental Crisis"
"Betrayal of Science and Reason: How Anti-Environmental Rhetoric Threatens
Our Future"

A recent conversation, discussing wasp killer spray, that seems more
like a shower and rinse.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"The Daring Dufas" wrote in message
...

Where's good old creosote when you need it? We once had stuff that
killed termites, prevented wood rot, toilets that flushed, no bed
bugs and shower heads that would blow you out of the shower. I think
our technology is devolving. 8-)

TDD

Not much. Some of it showed up in higher animals, but little damage
was done.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...

And exactly what was the deleterious unintended consequence of using
DDT?

A few dead birds is a small price to pay for reducing malaria, and
other insect bourne diseases.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


wrote in message
...



And exactly what was the deleterious unintended consequence of using
DDT?


Dead birds, mostly. DDT was instrumental to the decline in the big
raptors because the DDT propagated up the food chain. It was basically
just because we used DDT indiscriminately with absolutely zero control
of where, how much or what we were trying to kill.
I doubt DDT is any worse than any other chemical if we were more
careful in how we used it.

wrote:
I walked over to my woodpile to pick out a few pieces for a small
job. I had some 2x6 PT stacked on the ground - these pieces had been
there about 3 years. I turn them over and ....... riddled with
termite damage to the point they had zero value.

If one lives in a termite zone, is it not rather stupid to "store" lumber
in direct contact with the ground for a month, let alone three years?

--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

On 10/1/2010 9:42 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
A few dead birds is a small price to pay for reducing malaria, and
other insect bourne diseases.

Bourne diseases? Are those the ones that don't know why people are
trying to wipe them out, but can nonchalantly waste hundreds of people
and not get a scratch on themselves?

--
aem sends...

On Sep 30, 8:59*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:


The administrative law judge, after hearings at the EPA, after seven months
of testimony, concluded: "DDT is not a carcinogenic hazard to man... DDT is
not a mutagenic or teratogenic hazard to man... The use of DDT under the
regulations involved here do not have a deleterious effect on freshwater
fish, estuarine organisms, wild birds or other wildlife."


And that rationale continues today. EPA has removed Dursban and
Diazinon from over-the-counter sales for the same reason: detrimental
to birds and fish. Nowhere does it mention that it is harmful to
man. The homeowner cannot buy/use it unless they have a "restricted
use" permit. Yet farmers with a permit can broadcast it over
thousands of acres of crops. How is that protecting birds & fish?

wrote in message
m...
KC wrote:
On Sep 29, 6:51 pm, wrote:
I walked over to my woodpile to pick out a few pieces for a small job.
I
had some 2x6 PT stacked on the ground - these pieces had been there
about 3
years. I turn them over and ....... riddled with termite damage to the
point they had zero value.

Kind of reminds me of the last time I was in Lowes. I looked at their
PT
lumber and it had mold growing on it. No kidding. Anyone else seeing
serious deterioration of building materials?

I had the same thing happen to me with PT 4x4's from Lowes (top
choice). I carried them back to Lowes and complained. The department
manager said the warranty was from the supplier and not Lowes so they
wouldn't do anything. I asked for the store manager. He said to get
replacements off the pile out front, but he wasn't happy about it.

The problem is that the treatment does not penetrate all the way
through the wood. It leaves an untreated center. As the wood cracks
& splits as it normally does, it leaves an opening for termites to
enter and eat out the untreated portions. You then end up with a
hollow shell of wood.


Same old problem of too much of a good thing. PT used to be for fence
posts, until everyone on the planet built a deck and a play yard...

So many prescription drugs are disposed of that they show up in water
supplies and in our body tissues....there are probably very sensible
solutions to that problem, too, but too many conflicting money issues.



I think I read that the prescription drug thing was people peeing and not so
much about granny flushing her meds..

The only thing banning DDT did was kill untold millions of 3rd world people
due to malaria spread by mosquitoes...