———————-
Terror Will NEVER END
Unless You DO SOMETHING
… NOW !
Against the SCREECHING
Anti-Pesticide Lunatic-Monkeys
EXPRESS YOUR OUTRAGE
SEND LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN
———————
Cancer Society Calling For Ban On Cosmetic Pesticides [ ?!?! ]
April 11th, 2012
Re : Sanela Begic ( Canadian Cancer Society )
News Talk 980 CJME
Regina, Saskatchewan
Article re : Begic ( links )
http://cjme.com/story/cancer-society-calling-ban-cosmetic-pesticides/51910
Send a Letter to the Editor ( e-mail )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
None
Send a Letter to the Editor ( web-sites )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
http://cjme.com/webform/iwitness
http://cjme.com/webform/kristy-werner
http://cjme.com/webform/murray-wood
http://cjme.com/webform/karen-brownlee
Response to Begic by NORAHG ( links )
Response to Begic by NORAHG ( text )
PESTICIDES DO NOT CAUSE CANCER
Pest control products are SCIENTIFICALLY SAFE, and NO HARM WILL OCCUR when they are used according to label directions.
Nevertheless, HIRED GUN LOBBYIST Sanela Begic CONSPIRES to IMPOSE a PROHIBITION against the use of pest control products under the PRETEXT of MOCK-CONCERNS regarding cancer.
Even Begic’s organization, Canadian Cancer Society, states on several of its web-sites that scientific research does NOT provide a conclusive link be-tween pesticides and human cancer.
For information about NO CONCLUSIVE LINK, go to …
Begic herself actually admits that the research on the link between cancer and pest control products is not entirely convincing, supposedly because it is early in the process and has only been a topic of interest for only 15 or 20 years.
Begic’s supposition is WRONG !
Pest control products like 2,4-D Herbicide have been used for the control of broad-leaved weeds in the Urban Landscape SINCE 1946.
2,4-D has a 65-YEAR UNBLEMISHED SAFETY RECORD regarding long-term risk to health.
65 years is FAR GREATER than Begic’s 15 to 20-year supposition.
INDISPUTABLE PROOF
There is INDISPUTABLE PROOF that pest control products ARE NOT known or probable carcinogens.
It is a MYTH to believe that pest control products somehow cause cancer.
Health Canada’s EXTENSIVE TOXICOLOGY DATABASE INDISPUTABLY PROVES that pest control products are SCIENTIFICALLY SAFE since they have been scrutinized and approved by the HUNDREDS of expert scientists at Health Canada !
Health Canada requires each new pest control product to go through about TWO-HUNDRED SEPARATE TESTS to examine health and environmental impacts as well as value, and costing about 250 MILLION DOLLARS.
There are THOUSANDS OF DEATHS per year from KNOWN CANCER-CAUSING SUBSTANCES such as cigarette smoke and alcohol.
There is NOT ONE KNOWN CANCER DEATH from the proper use of pest control products used in the Urban Landscape.
Conversely, Canadian Cancer Society has NOT SPENT A SINGLE PENNY to research pest control products.
Begic and her buddies NEVER conducted a serious scientific study … evidently because they are NOT COMPETENT OR MOTIVATED to do so.
Neither Begic, nor anyone else at Canadian Cancer Society, COULD EVEN BE BOTHERED to have used the EXTENSIVE TOXICOLOGY DATABASE that is available from Health Canada.
They are not only SCIENTIFICALLY IGNORANT, but also LAZY and OBTUSE.
In fact, according to American Cancer Society, cancer rates and deaths are actually DROPPING.
For information about DROPPING CANCER, go to …
For more information about THE MYTH OF CANCER, go to the following web-page …
A MERE 100 UNDISCLOSED STUDIES
Begic and Canadian Cancer Society have NO CREDIBLE EXPERTISE.
According to Begic ―
« The research is very suggestive ― we have over [ undisclosed ] 106 studies now in the last decade alone, suggesting that the link is growing between certain types of cancer and cosmetic pesticides. » [ ?!?! ]
Begic and Canadian Cancer Society ALLEGE having A MERE 106 UNDISCLOSED, NON-EXISTENT AND UNVERIFIABLE SECRET EVIDENCE about the safety of pest control products.
Canadian Cancer Society is a FUND-RAISING, PROFIT-SEEKING, and LOBBYING organization, and NOT a science, research, or health organization.
How could this Anti-Pesticide Organization obtain studies that have somehow been withheld from the entire world ?
Moreover, pest control products like 2,4-D Herbicide have been the subject of over 40,000 STUDIES.
40,000 !
Furthermore, since 1988, The Industry Task Force II on 2,4-D Research Data has submitted to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency over 250 studies concerning mammalian and environmental toxicology, environmental fate and residues.
2,4-D is probably THE MOST studied and best understood of ANY chemical … not just pesticide … in existence.
For more information regarding 2,4-D HERBICIDE, go to the following link …
CHILDREN ARE NOT AT RISK
Begic is DESPICABLE in her use of CHILDREN as WEAPONS OF COERCION and ULTIMATE TERROR in order to promote Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION ―
« Kids are rolling in their school yards in the grass, putting their fingers in their mouth without washing their hands in between. » [ ?!?! ]
Begic is WRONG !
The safety assessments of pest control products by Pest Management Regulatory Agency of Heath Canada ( PMRA ) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ) DO take children into consideration.
These assessments DO consider children’s physiology, behaviours, and habits while playing on treated grass.
Moreover, there are NO valid reports of pest control product problems with children.
For more information about CHILDREN ARE NOT AT RISK, go to the following web-page …
USING CIGARETTES IS RIDICULOUS AND STUPID
Begic claims that Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION will somehow serve as a pre-emptive strike, comparing the situation to CIGARETTES.
Again, Begic is WRONG !
Any comparison of cigarettes to pest control products is PITIFULLY RIDICULOUS, as well as LAUGHABLY STUPID !
Cigarettes have NOTHING IN COMMON with conventional pest control products.
Begic uses this NONSENSICAL COMPARISON purely as a means of COERCING and INFLUENCING the public into believing that it is necessary to PROHIBIT pest control products, despite the fact that they are GOVERNMENT-APPROVED, FEDERALLY-REGULATED, SCIENTIFICALLY-SAFE, PRACTICALLY-NON-TOXIC, and CAUSE NO HARM.
There is NO FEDERAL REGISTRATION of tobacco products.
By comparison, there IS a FEDERAL REGISTRATION of pest control products.
There is NO agency that regulates tobacco, except perhaps for restricting access to young people.
By comparison, there ARE agencies that REGULATE pest control products ― Health Canada.
Moreover, cigarettes are ABOVE THE LAW because our governments have chosen to shield them from the regulatory process.
This is NOT the case with pest control products.
Our governments have chosen to HEAVILY REGULATE pest control products.
Pest control products are STRINGENTLY TESTED and REGULATED in order to ensure that they are SCIENTIFICALLY SAFE and CAUSE NO HARM.
For more information about CIGARETTES, go to the following links …
PUBLIC DOES NOT WANT PROHIBITION
Begic ALLEGES that the public somehow wants Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION.
Begic is WRONG !
A recent POLL conducted by Canadian Consumer Specialty Products Association ( CCSPA ) showed that the VAST MAJORITY of residents in British Columbia are OPPOSED to the PROHIBITION of conventional pest control products, and they actually FAVOUR the continued use of these products around their homes and in public green spaces.
For more information about BRITISH COLUMBIA POLL, please go to the following web-page …
Additionally, according to another recent Ontario poll, MORE THAN HALF of Ontario residents believe that the provincial government DID NOT DO THE RIGHT THING by implementing Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION.
Ontario residents WOULD RATHER HAVE THE BAN SCRAPPED OR MODIFIED.
For more information about ONTARIO POLL, please go to the following web-page …
BOGUS GREEN ALTERNATIVES
According to Begic ―
« If a ban does go through, people will still have NATURAL OPTIONS to keep lawns green from organic corn gluten which prevents dandelions and vinegar formulas that burn down weeds. For insects you can use things like garden sulphur and even broken up sea-shells to name a few. » [ ?!?! ]
Begic is WRONG !
It is IMPOSSIBLE for home-owners or professionals to keep their properties beautiful by using so-called Natural Options or Green Alternative Pesticides.
There are NO viable, efficacious, economical, or low-risk alternatives to replace conventional pest control products.
Green Alternative Pesticides ( a.k.a. Natural Options ) are BOGUS and DISMAL FAILURES ― they DO NOT WORK.
A well-maintained conventional lawn and landscape can ONLY BE ACHIEVED WITH CONVENTIONAL pest control products and fertilizers.
Fortunately, CONVENTIONAL pest control products are SAFE, EFFECTIVE, ECONOMICAL, and LOW-RISK.
For more information about GREEN ALTERNATIVES, go to the following web-page …
AGRICULTURE – TARGETED BY ANTI-PESTICIDE ACTIVISTS
Begic attempts to DECEIVE THE PUBLIC by claiming that she is not asking for a ban on ALL pest control products ―
« We're not actually talking about all pesticides in the province, we're only talking about cosmetic, non-essential, beautification-purpose only type pesticides. » [ ?!?! ]
Begic and her buddies have clearly shown that they fully intend to have products BANNED in the Agriculture Industry.
For more information concerning AGRICULTURE INDUSTRY being TARGETED by Canadian Cancer Society, go to …
CANADIAN CANCER SOCIETY’S WASTEFUL CONSPIRACY
Canadian Cancer Society is WASTING ITS MONEY AND RESOURCES in its CONSPIRACY AGAINST pest control products.
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS that could be used to care for those STRICKEN WITH CANCER are being DIVERTED to CAMPAIGNS to ban products that have been deemed SCIENTIFICALLY SAFE by Health Canada.
It is common-knowledge that THE MAJORITY OF ITS DONATION MONEY DOES NOT GO INTO RESEARCH.
The MAJORITY OF DONATION MONEY goes to paying for HIRED GUN LOBBYISTS like Sanela Begic, as well as clerical employees.
By early 2012, Canadian Cancer Society SQUANDERED between 2,500,000 and 5,000,000 DOLLARS on SUBVERSIVE Anti-Pesticide CONSPIRACIES.
Perhaps if Canadian Cancer Society were to prioritize its DONATION MONEY to the primary causes of cancer, such as life-style choices, LIVES WOULD BE SAVED.
For more information about CANADIAN CANCER SOCIETY SQUANDERING & ALARMISM, go to the following links …
BOTTOM LINE
ALLEGATIONS from Sanela Begic about the IMAGINARY DANGER of pest control products are TOTALLY FALSE, and are UNTRUE MIS-REPRESENTATIONS designed to alarm and enrage the public and enhance the BUSINESS, CASH-FLOW and PROFIT of Canadian Cancer Society.
Begic has NO SCIENTIFIC PROOF that pest control products cause cancer.
There is NOT ONE KNOWN ILLNESS or DEATH from the proper use of pest control products used in the Urban Landscape.
There is NO direct link between pest control products and cancer.
Pest control products CAUSE NO HARM, including chronic effects such as CANCER.
Any PROHIBITION against pest control products is NOT JUSTIFIED.
Sanela Begic should Get Off Our grASS !
NORAHG has archived even more information on The Pesticide Truths Web-Site …
CANADIAN CANCER SOCIETY
CANADIAN CANCER SOCIETY – REFERENCES FOR LITIGATION
CATASTROPHIC CARNAGE CAUSED BY ANTI-PESTICIDE PROHIBITION
FAILURE OF ORGANIC PESTICIDE-FREE MAINTENANCE
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR / LETTERS OF COMPLAINT
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR – RESPONDING TO BELL-FORMAN-KAMINSKY-CCS
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR – RESPONDING TO SCREECHING MONKEYS
PROVINCE OF SASKATCHEWAN
THE MYTHS ABOUT ANTI-PESTICIDE PROHIBITION
THE COMPLETE LIBRARY OF REPORTS & REFERENCES
———————
Letter Draws A Response [ ?!?! ]
April 5th, 2012
Ghost-Writer using the name Cottam ( a.k.a. Gideon Forman )
Vernon Morning Star
Nanaimo, British Columbia
Letter to the Editor by Cottam Ghost-Writer ( link )
http://www.vernonmorningstar.com/opinion/letters/146331685.html
Send a Letter to the Editor ( e-mails )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
Send a Letter to the Editor ( web-site )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
Response to Cottam Ghost-Writer by NORAHG ( links )
Response to Cottam Ghost-Writer by NORAHG ( text )
PESTICIDES ARE 100 PER CENT SAFE
The people at Cottam have had their wish GRANTED.
There IS 100 PER CENT PROOF that pest control products CAUSE NO HARM.
Why are pest control products SO SAFE ?
Health Canada requires each new pest control product to go through a comprehensive set of over TWO-HUNDRED SEPARATE TESTS and a REVIEW of all scientifically credible studies that exist to ensure that the product will NOT CAUSE HARM TO PEOPLE, ANIMALS OR THE ENVIRONMENT.
Ultimately, the cost to manufacturers to get a pest control product ASSESSED FOR SAFETY and brought to market is about 250 MILLION DOLLARS.
Only those pest control products that pose NO UNACCEPTABLE RISK to health and environment become HEALTH-CANADA-APPROVED and FEDERALLY-LEGAL.
Pest control products are SCIENTIFICALLY SAFE, and NO HARM WILL OCCUR when they are used according to label directions.
Overall, when pest control products are used properly, there are NO harmful irreversible effects to health and the environment !
Furthermore, there is NOT ONE KNOWN ILLNESS or DEATH from the proper use of pest control products used in the Urban Landscape.
NORAHG has archived information on The Pesticide Truths Web-Site …
2,4-D HERBICIDE – EVALUATIONS AND ASSESSMENTS
MYTHS ABOUT BEES
Anti-Pesticide Activists like Cottam also EXPLOIT THE MYTH of Bee Colony Collapse Disorder to somehow prove that pest control products must be PROHIBITED !
Overall, « links » and « causes » between Bee Colony Collapse Disorder and the insecticide are Enviro-Lunatic MYTHS !
Greedy and avaricious Anti-Pesticide Activists have concocted all sorts of « causes » for this phenomenon, hoping to attract profits from cash donations, illicit businesses, unqualified employment, and grants, quite often without paying a single penny in taxes.
NORAHG has archived information on The Pesticide Truths Web-Site …
BEE COLONY COLLAPSE DISORDER
COTTAM GHOST-WRITERS
THE COMPLETE LIBRARY OF REPORTS & REFERENCES
Pest control products are GOVERNMENT-APPROVED, FEDERALLY-LEGAL, SCIENTIFICALLY-SAFE, PRACTICALLY-NON-TOXIC, and CAUSE NO HARM.
———————
Pesticide Require Precautions [ ?!?! ]
February 23rd, 2012
Lee Harding
Coquitlam Now – The Now
Coquitlam, Port Moody, Port Coquitlam, Balcara, and Anmore, British Columbia
Article by Lee Harding ( link )
http://www.thenownews.com/story_print.html?id=6202771&sponsor=
Send a Letter to the Editor ( e-mails )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
Send a Letter to the Editor ( web-site )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
http://www.thenownews.com/send-us-your-news/index.html
Response to Harding by NORAHG ( links )
Response to Harding by NORAHG ( text )
BEWARE OF SELF-PROCLAIMED NON-EXPERT SCREECHING MONKEYS WITH INADEQUATE CREDENTIALS, SUSPECT OPINION, AND MYTHICAL STORIES
Anti-Pesticide Activist Lee Harding is a former administrator and scientist for Environment Canada and Canadian Wildlife Service, but left his government position in 1997.
His work consisted of studies of caribou, grizzly bears, mink, and muskrats.
Harding has produced NO scientific literature pertaining to the use of pest control products in the Urban Landscape.
In fact, he has NO recognized training, experience, or background with these products.
Anti-Pesticide Activists like Harding are NOT CREDIBLE experts on pest control products.
Harding is also CLOSELY ATTACHED to Anti-Pesticide Organizations like Wildsight and Port Moody Ecological Society, which also make his opinion COMPLETELY SUSPECT.
Ostensibly, Harding wants the Government of British Columbia to IMPLEMENT a NEEDLESS, SENSELESS, and MALICIOUS PROHIBITION of pest control products used in the Urban Landscape.
Furthermore, Harding has a VESTED INTEREST in PROMOTING Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION since he has been operating a FOR-PROFIT environmental consulting business named SciWrite since 1984.
However, Harding is CORRECT in saying that there is a HUGE BODY SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE regarding pest control products.
Scientific research shows, as reported through Health Canada’s VAST TOXICOLOGY DATABASE, that NO harm will occur when pest control products are used according to label directions.
The ASSESSMENT of pest control products is COMPREHENSIVE and EXPENSIVE, and Canada has some of the HIGHEST STANDARDS IN THE WORLD for the ASSESSMENT of these products.
The tests required by Health Canada to determine the safety of pest control products are based on INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS.
Health Canada requires each new pest control product to go through a comprehensive set of over TWO-HUNDRED SEPARATE TESTS and a REVIEW of all scientifically credible studies that exist to ensure that the product will NOT CAUSE HARM TO PEOPLE, ANIMALS OR THE ENVIRONMENT.
Not surprisingly, Harding HAS NEVER conducted a serious scientific study on pest control products … evidently because he is NOT COMPETENT OR MOTIVATED to do so.
Nonetheless, Harding COULD NOT EVEN BE BOTHERED to have used the EXTENSIVE TOXICOLOGY DATABASE that is available from either Health Canada or U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Evidently, Harding prefers to attempt PROFITING from Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION with his environmental consulting business, at the expense of the Professional Lawn Care Industry.
Harding ALLEGES that « some people and pets are more sensitive than average, and can become sick even when a pesticide is used as directed ».
We say … SHOW US THE BODIES.
More specifically, medical records, medical records, medical records.
We say … SHOW US PROOF that medical records are being somehow withheld from the ENTIRE WORLD.
Who are, or were, those people ALLEGEDLY harmed by pest control products ?
Where are the medical records ?
Anti-Pesticide Activists like Harding MUST STOP using « mythical sensitive people » who DO NOT EXIST.
They MUST STOP using TOTALLY FALSE and UNTRUE MIS-REPRESENTATIONS designed to alarm and enrage the public and enhance their BUSINESS, CASH-FLOW, PROFIT, or CELEBRITY.
———————
Coquitlam Pesticide Ban Is Necessary [ ?!?! ]
Can it Be ? The Final Chapter Coquitlam’s Pesticide Ban [ ?!?! ]
February 23rd, 2012
Coquitlam City Council
Enews Park Forest
Park Forest, Illinois, U.S.A.
The Tri-City News
Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, and Port Moody, British Columbia
Articles re : Coquitlam City Council ( links )
Enews Park Forest
The Tri-City News
http://www.tricitynews.com/opinion/140164733.html
Send a Letter to the Editor ( e-mails )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
Enews Park Forest
None
The Tri-City News
Send a Letter to the Editor ( web-sites )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
EPark News
http://www.enewspf.com/contact-us/88888964-contact/1-gary-kopycinski.html
The Tri-City News
Response to Coquitlam City Council by NORAHG ( links )
https://pesticidetruths.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Force-Of-Nature-Letter-to-the-Editor-2012-02-21-Council-Robinson-Tenacity-Profit-Coquitlam-BC-RESPONSE-pdf7.pdfhttps://pesticidetruths.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Force-Of-Nature-Letter-to-the-Editor-2012-02-23-Council-Recuse-Anti-Pesticide-Officials-Coquitlam-BC-RESPONSE-pdf1.pdf
Response to Coquitlam City Council by NORAHG ( text )
ANTI-PESTICIDE GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS MUST BE RECUSED
ALL PESTICIDE BANS are 100 per cent Politically-Based and 0 per cent Science-Based.
And, for some activists, the INCENTIVE is 100 per cent GREED and AVARICE.
Too many Anti-Pesticide Activists always want some more MONEY for LYING and TERRORIZING !
Cases of ABUSE with ENVIRO-PROFIT have been repeatedly documented.
The more activists CONCOCT IMAGINARY DANGERS, the MORE THEY BECOME RICH !
Canadian Cancer Society actually has PAY-OFF PROGRAMS to REWARD those who CONSPIRE to PROHIBIT pest control products.
This Anti-Pesticide Organization is a mere FUND-RAISING, LOBBYING, and PROFIT-ACCUMULATING organization that has NO expertise in science or research, but has VAST EXPERTISE in providing INCENTIVES for activists.
Moreover, Canadian Cancer Society actually doles out AWARDS for « BEST Environmental Terrorists of the Year » which has led to a DEAFENING OUTRAGE from within the Green Space Industry.
Canadian Cancer Society is also known for its generosity in REWARDING those activists who have served them well, even when they are not directly employed.
Oddly enough, Canadian Cancer Society’s own web-site states that scientific research does NOT provide a conclusive link between pesticides and human cancer.
With other Anti-Pesticide Organizations, like THE ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR, there is a well-documented FINANCIAL REWARDS obtained by activists from City of Oshawa, Ontario.
The largest ever exchange of REWARDS was provided by GOVERNMENT OF ONTARIO, through THE ONTARIO TRILLIUM FOUNDATION, to activists who CONSPIRED to PROHIBIT pest control products in the Urban Landscape.
It is highly likely that some Coquitlam Government Officials are BENEFITING from REWARDS also, through PAY-OFF PROGRAMS provided by organizations like Canadian Cancer Society.
DEMANDS are being made for Coquitlam’s Anti-Pesticide Officials to release their TAX-RECORDS for the last three years, which covers the period of time that they would have been operating as LOBBYISTS for Canadian Cancer Society.
Moreover, BUSINESS, FUND-RAISING, GOVERNMENT, and TAXATION AGENCIES should be contacted to VERIFY whether these officials are actually declaring their income or gifts as LOBBYISTS for Canadian Cancer Society.
There are several COMPLAINT CHANNELS that can be used, either by Coquitlam City Council, or even concerned citizens.
Furthermore, Coquitlam’s Anti-Pesticide Officials must be RECUSED from anything to do about pest control products, and all of their inputs in council meetings should be INVALIDATED.
Until these officials are FULLY INVESTIGATED, it would be prudent for Coquitlam City Council to put any proposed Anti-Pesticide legislation ON HOLD INDEFINITELY.
Besides, ANY PROHIBITION of pest control products is NOT supported by health and policy experts, and, according to polling, is not supported by local residents.
Scientific research shows, as reported through Health Canada’s vast toxicology database, that NO harm will occur when pest control products are used according to label directions.
If/when Coquitlam IMPOSES Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION, it will have done so in DEFIANCE of Health Canada’s ASSESSMENTS proving that pest control products are SCIENTIFICALLY-SAFE … a process that can take up to TEN YEARS and COST HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.
City of Coquitlam DID NOT SPEND ANY MONEY on the ASSESSMENT of pest control products.
Health Canada has THE ESSENTIAL EXPERTISE on the subject of pest control products.
NOT Coquitlam, and NOT Anti-Pesticide City Councillors.
It is even a MYTH to believe that SALMON STREAMS are somehow be affected by the use of pest control products in the Urban Landscape.
This allegation is FALSE, MISLEADING, and CONTRADICTS OVER TWENTY-FIVE YEARS OF RESEARCH.
For even more information about CITY OF COQUITLAM, go to the following web-page …
———————
Pesticide Ban A Reality For Coquitlam [ ?!?! ]
Can it Be ? The Final Chapter Coquitlam’s Pesticide Ban [ ?!?! ]
February 21th and 22nd, 2012
Coquitlam City Council – Selina Robinson
BCLocalNews.com
British Columbia
Burnaby Now
Burnaby, British Columbia
Coquitlam Now – The Now
Coquitlam, Port Moody, Port Coquitlam, Balcara, and Anmore, British Columbia
Selina Robinson Blog
The Tri-City News
Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, and Port Moody, British Columbia
Articles re : Coquitlam City Council – Selina Robinson ( links )
Burnaby Now
http://www.burnabynow.com/technology/Coquitlam+endorses+pesticide+bylaw/6189559/story.html
Coquitlam Now – The Now
http://www.thenownews.com/technology/Coquitlam+endorses+pesticide+bylaw/6189559/story.html
Selina Robinson Blog
http://selinarobinson.wordpress.com/2012/02/22/can-it-be-the-final-chapter-coquitlams-pesticide-ban/
The Tri-City News
http://www.tricitynews.com/news/139875853.html?c=y&curSection=/&curTitle=BC+News&bc09=true
Send a Letter to the Editor ( e-mails )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
BCLocalNews.com
Burnaby Now
Coquitlam Now – The Now
The Tri-City News
Send a Letter to the Editor ( web-sites )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
BCLocal News
Coquitlam Now – The Now
http://www.thenownews.com/send-us-your-news/index.html
The Tri-City News
Response to Coquitlam City Council by NORAHG ( links )
https://pesticidetruths.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Force-Of-Nature-Letter-to-the-Editor-2012-02-21-Council-Robinson-Tenacity-Profit-Coquitlam-BC-RESPONSE-pdf7.pdfhttps://pesticidetruths.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Force-Of-Nature-Letter-to-the-Editor-2012-02-21-Council-Robinson-Tenacity-Profit-Coquitlam-BC-RESPONSE-pdf7.pdf
Response to Coquitlam City Council by NORAHG ( text )
PROHIBITION IS NOT NECESSARY
City of Coquitlam is moving towards the NEEDLESS, SENSELESS, and MALICIOUS PROHIBITION against pest control products used in the Urban Landscape.
In fact, pest control products that are HEALTH-CANADA-APPROVED, FEDERALLY-LEGAL, SCIENTIFICALLY-SAFE, and PRACTICALLY-NON-TOXIC.
Anti-Pesticide Councillor and Therapist Selina Robinson, and her buddies, have been PERPATUATING NOTHING BUT MYTHS regarding the need for PROHIBITION.
For more information concerning MYTHS ABOUT PROHIBITION, go to the following link …
ANY PROHIBITION of pest control products is NOT supported by health and policy experts, and is not supported by local residents.
Scientific research shows, as reported through Health Canada’s vast toxicology database, that NO harm will occur when pesticides are used according to label directions.
If/when Coquitlam IMPOSES Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION, it will have done so in DEFIANCE of Health Canada's ASSESSMENTS proving that pest control products are SCIENTIFICALLY-SAFE … a process that can take up to TEN YEARS and COST HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.
City of Coquitlam DID NOT SPEND ANY MONEY on the ASSESSMENT of pest control products.
Health Canada, and NOT Coquitlam, and NOT Anti-Pesticide Activists like Robinson, has THE ESSENTIAL EXPERTISE on the subject of pest control products.
Overall, when pest control products are used properly, there are NO harmful irreversible effects to health and the environment !
There is NOT ONE KNOWN ILLNESS or DEATH from the proper use of pest control products used in the Urban Landscape.
According to Dr. Leonard Ritter, the nation’s LEADING EXPERT in the field of toxicology and pesticide safety, pest control products DO NOT CAUSE CANCER, and there is NO increase in cancer deaths in Canada when you consider that the population is aging and increasing.
For more information about CANCER, go to the following link …
The Fraser Institute, one of the top 25 leading think-tanks in the world, has said that the proposed bans ILL-CONCEIVED, and do NOT accurately reflect the current state of scientific knowledge.
For more information about THE FRASER INSTITUTE, go to the following link …
A recent poll conducted by Canadian Consumer Specialty Products Association showed that the vast majority of residents are OPPOSED to PROHIBITION, and they actually favour the continued use of these products around their homes and in public green spaces.
For more information about CANADIAN CONSUMER SPECIALTY PRODUCTS ASSOCIATION, go to the following link …
Moreover, Canadian Cancer Society’s own web-site states that scientific research does NOT provide a conclusive link between pesticides and human cancer.
EXCEPTION STATUS
If/when Coquitlam IMPOSES Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION, it may wish to consider providing an EXCEPTION STATUS to ALL CERTIFIED APPLICATORS, including those in the Professional Lawn Care Industry.
EXCEPTION STATUSES have been adopted in jurisdictions like Kamloops, Kelowna, and Salmon Arm, where Government Officials have left pest control products in the hands of professionally-trained applicators.
Without EXCEPTION STATUSES, Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION has led to CATASTROPHIC CARNAGE for businesses operating in the Professional Lawn Care Industry.
For more information about CARNAGE, go to the following link …
« ENGAGING » COLLEAGUES
According to Anti-Pesticide Councillor and Therapist Selina Robinson, her TENACITY on the issue of PROHIBITION was achieved by « engaging my colleagues in discussion ».
AUDIO RECORDINGS of presentations made by Robinson, and her buddies, paint a picture of SCREECHING MONKEYS who will SAY ANYTHING TO GET THEIR WAY.
Robinson’s strategy of « engaging » her colleagues on City Council basically amounted to COERCION, INTIMIDATION, SCREECHING, and TERRORIZING.
Selina Robinson, and her buddies Mae Burrows and Ashley Duyker, are Non-Expert Anti-Pesticide Activists who are SUPPORTED, FINANCIALLY OR OTHERWISE, by Canadian Cancer Society and Toxic Free Canada.
These organizations are FUND-RAISING, LOBBYING, and PROFIT-ACCUMULATING organizations that have NO expertise in science or research.
Robinson and her buddies could DO NOTHING ELSE but MIS-INFORM Coquitlam City Council since NONE OF THEM are COMPETENT to talk about pest control products.
For more information about AUDIO RECORDINGS, go to the following link, and look under the title PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA, COQUITLAM, CITY OF …
For more information about SCREECHING MONKEYS, go to the following link …
TENACITY AND PROFIT
On the issue of PROHIBITION, the TENACITY of Anti-Pesticide Councillor and Therapist Selina Robinson was most likely achieved through PROFIT.
The ultimate winners of this debacle in Coquitlam are the Anti-Pesticide Activists themselves, who BENEFIT from PAY-OFF PROGRAMS provided by Canadian Cancer Society.
Activists operating with Canadian Cancer Society receive PAY-OFFS in the form of an INCENTIVE OF 2,000 DOLLARS by for the ORGANIZATION of EVERY Anti-Pesticide Forum.
Anti-Pesticide Activists also receive PAY-OFFS in the form of BONUS OF 1,000 DOLLARS by Canadian Cancer Society FOR EVERY PRESENTATION MADE TO EACH MUNICIPAL TOWN COUNCIL.
Ultimately, they will be given a BOUNTY OF 5,000 DOLLARS by Canadian Cancer Society upon SUCCESSFUL PROHIBITION LEGISLATION by City of Coquitlam.
For more information about CANADIAN CANCER SOCIETY, go to the following links …
IT IS TIME TO INVESTIGATE ROBINSON
Perhaps it is time for Coquitlam City Council to DEMAND copies of Selina Robinson’s TAX-RECORDS for the last three years, which covers the period of time that she was operating as a LOBBYIST for Canadian Cancer Society.
Moreover, taxation agencies should be contacted to VERIFY whether Robinson is declaring her income as a LOBBYIST for Canadian Cancer Society.
For more information about COMPLAINT CHANNELS and TAXATION AGENCIES, go to the following link …
WARNING TO ACTIVISTS
Anti-Pesticide Activists and Government Officials are advised that all names, statements, activities, and affiliations have been ARCHIVED for eventual CRIMINAL CHARGES.
When criminal charges for FRAUD and CONSPIRACY are laid, legal experts say that there is sufficient information to lead to a SUCCESSFUL PROSECUTION !
——————–
New Pesticide Legislation On Its Way [ ?!?! ]
February 20th, 2012
Re : Terry Lake – B.C. Environment Minister
BCLocalNews.com
British Columbia
KamloopsThisWeek.com
Kamloops, British Columbia
Articles re : Lake ( links )
BCLocalNews.com
http://www.bclocalnews.com/news/139747463.html
KamloopsThisWeek.com
http://www.pulvermedia.com/fullstory/8b7bhhbflac6d36ae288d
Send a Letter to the Editor ( e-mails )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
BCLocalNews.com
KamloopsThisWeek.com
publisher@kamloopsthisweek.com
Send a Letter to the Editor ( web-sites )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
BCLocalNews.com
KamloopsThisWeek.com
Response to Lake by NORAHG ( links )
Response to Lake by NORAHG ( text ) ― 1
B.C. & ONTARIO POLLS SAY NO PESTICIDE BAN
Environment Minister Terry Lake is WRONG !
The ONLY people who want Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION in British Columbia ( B.C. ) are a SMALL GROUP of activists with VESTED INTERESTS defended by the IMAGINARY DANGER of pest control products.
A recent POLL conducted by Canadian Consumer Specialty Products Association ( CCSPA ) showed that the VAST MAJORITY of residents in British Columbia are OPPOSED to the PROHIBITION of conventional pest control products, and they actually FAVOUR the continued use of these products around their homes and in public green spaces.
For more information about BRITISH COLUMBIA POLL, please go to the following web-page …
According to another recent Ontario poll, MORE THAN HALF of Ontario home-owners believe that the provincial government DID NOT DO THE RIGHT THING by implementing Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION.
Ontario home-owners WOULD RATHER HAVE THE BAN SCRAPPED OR MODIFIED.
For more information about ONTARIO POLL, please go to the following web-page …
Not surprisingly, Kamloops Councillor Cavers NEVER conducted a serious scientific study on pest control products … evidently because he is NOT COMPETENT OR MOTIVATED to do so.
Let’s keep in mind that Cavers operates an Organic Food business that would clearly PROFIT from Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION.
Nonetheless, Cavers COULD NOT EVEN BE BOTHERED to have used the EXTENSIVE TOXICOLOGY DATABASE that is available from both Environmental Protection Agency and Health Canada.
Cavers prefers to attempt PROFITING from Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION, at the expense of the Professional Lawn Care Industry.
For more information about CAVERS, go to the following web-page …
Any PROHIBITION of pest control products is NOT JUSTIFIED because STRICT REGULATIONS based on scientific research already PROTECT our health and our environment.
Scientific research shows that, as reported through Health Canada’s VAST TOXICOLOGY DATABASE, NO HARM WILL OCCUR when pest control products are used according to label directions.
The RISK ASSESSMENT of pest control products indicates that they are PRACTICALLY-NON-TOXIC.
Consequently, it is a fact that pest control products CAUSE NO HARM, including chronic effects such as CANCER.
For more on the MYTHS ABOUT ANTI-PESTICIDE PROHIBITION, go to the following web-page …
The Fraser Institute, one of the Top 25 leading THINK-TANKS in the world, has said that the proposed B.C. ban is ILL-CONCEIVED, and DOES NOT accurately reflect the current state of scientific knowledge.
For more information about THE FRASER INSTITUTE, go to the following web-page …
For even more information about BRITISH COLUMBIA, go to …
Terry Lake … Stay Off Our grASS !
Response to Lake by NORAHG ( text ) ― 2
COMMISSION RECEIVING RECORD NUMBER OF SUBMISSIONS ?!?!
Predictably, Anti-Pesticide Activists, such as those in Canadian Cancer Society, DELUGED the government with THOUSANDS, YES THOUSANDS, of submissions with COMMENTS that can only be described as LIES and MIS-INFORMATION.
The issue here is CREDIBILITY of the source of information, since the VAST MAJORITY of the COMMENTS were ORCHESTRATED, through a coast-to-coast CAMPAIGN, using NON-EXPERT VOLUNTEERS with Canadian Cancer Society.
Incredibly, NOT A SINGLE Anti-Pesticide Activist has ANY recognized expertise, training or back-ground in matters concerning pest control products!
Any PROHIBITION of pest control products is NOT JUSTIFIED because STRICT REGULATIONS based on scientific research already PROTECT British Columbian health and environment.
If ( or when ) British Columbia IMPOSES PROHIBITION, it will be 100 per cent Politically-Based and 0 per cent Science-Based.
If ( or when ) British Columbia IMPOSES NEEDLESS, SENSELESS, and MALICIOUS PROHIBITION against pest control products used in the Urban Landscape, there will be NO RECOURSE but LITIGATION against Anti-Pesticide Activists and Government Officials.
Moreover, demands will continue for the CANCELLATION of GOVERNMENT GRANTS and REVOCATION of the TAX EXEMPT STATUS of Anti-Pesticide Organizations like Canadian Cancer Society.
Anti-Pesticide Activists and Government Officials are advised that all names, statements, activities, and affiliations have been ARCHIVED for eventual CRIMINAL CHARGES.
When criminal charges for FRAUD and CONSPIRACY are laid, legal experts say that there is sufficient information to lead to a SUCCESSFUL PROSECUTION!
The Government of British Columbia may wish to consider providing an EXCEPTION STATUS to ALL CERTIFIED APPLICATORS, including those in the Professional Lawn Care Industry.
EXCEPTION STATUSES have been adopted in jurisdictions like Kamloops and Salmon Arm, where Government Officials have left pest control products in the hands of professionally-trained applicators.
For more on the MYTHS ABOUT ANTI-PESTICIDE PROHIBITION, go to the following web-page …
For more information about CANCER, go to the following web-page …
For even more information about BRITISH COLUMBIA, go to …
———————
Cavers Stands Up for Health [ ?!?! ]
February 16th, 2012
Karen Montgomery
KamloopsThisWeek.com
Kamloops, British Columbia
Letter to the Editor by Montgomery ( link )
http://www.kamloopsthisweek.com/opinion/letters/139456193.html
Send a Letter to the Editor ( e-mails )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
publisher@kamloopsthisweek.com
Send a Letter to the Editor ( web-site )
Response to Montgomery by NORAHG ( link )
None
Response to Montgomery by NORAHG ( text )
According to Anti-Pesticide Activist Karen Montgomery, we need to somehow stand up against illnesses and diseases over which we do have control, such as respiratory attacks brought on by pesticide use.
We say … show us which illnesses and which diseases ?!?!?!
We say … show us who had a respiratory attack ?!?!?!
We say … SHOW US THE BODIES.
More specifically, MEDICAL RECORDS.
Who are, or were, those people ALLEGEDLY harmed by pest control products ?
Where are the medical records ?
Unfortunately, Anti-Pesticide Activists like Montgomery are UNABLE to provide bodies, bodies, bodies.
Bodies of REAL evidence.
The public must be warned that the issues concerning pest control products are CONTROVERSIAL only because they were CONCOCTED by Anti-Pesticide Activists like Montgomery.
Anti-Pesticide Activists like Montgomery MUST STOP using TOTALLY FALSE and UNTRUE MIS-REPRESENTATIONS designed to alarm and enrage the public and enhance their BUSINESS, CASH-FLOW, PROFIT, or CELEBRITY.
It is a MYTH to believe that, without Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION, there will be serious medical problems.
For more information concerning THE MYTHS ABOUT ANTI-PESTICIDE PROHIBITION, go to the following web-page …
———————
Pesticides Ban [ ?!?! ]
February 16th, 2012
Allan S. Taylor
The Leader-Post
Regina, Saskatchewan
Letter to the Editor by Taylor ( link )
http://www.leaderpost.com/opinion/pesticides/6160024/story.html
Send Letters to the Editor ( e-mails )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
Send a Letter to the Editor ( web-site )
None
Response to Taylor by Simon E. Taylor ( links )
Response to Taylor by Simon E. Taylor ( text )
Spring approaches, and, again, Allan Taylor trots out his NONSENSE.
In 2008, Health Canada assessed what’s used on lawns and concluded …
« Products containing 2,4-D DO NOT POSE UNACCEPTABLE RISKS to human health or the environment. »
Quebec was the first province to assert products containing 2,4-D might be carcinogenic.
On that basis, municipalities banned its use on lawns.
Others followed, but stopped short of declaring it a carcinogen.
Activists INVENTED other reasons, but the JUNK SCIENCE CANCER SCARE always lurked in the background.
Laws against lawn products therefore remain, but NOT BECAUSE THEY POSE REAL RISK.
Under a recent North America Free Trade Agreement ( NAFTA ) with Dow ( manufacturer of 2,4-D ) …
« The Government of Quebec agrees that products containing 2,4-D DO NOT POSE AN UNACCEPTABLE RISK to human health or the environment. »
This is consistent with Health Canada and regulators in the U.S. and Europe.
What this means in Canada is that WE HAVE BANS IN EXISTENCE BASED ON JUNK SCIENCE SCARES PERPETRATED BY ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIV-ISTS.
No pest control product can be sold or used until Health Canada’s scientists have determined whether the product meets health and safety requirements.
Non-Expert Anti-Pesticide Activists [ like Allan S. Taylor ] are the LEAST QUALIFIED TO PROVIDE ADVICE concerning pest-control products.
Allan Taylor has NO expertise or recognized training in matters concerning turfgrass management and pest control products.
Health Canada has that essential expertise.
Conventional pest control products are SCIENTIFICALLY SAFE.
I leave these decisions to Health Canada.
Allan Taylor WILL CONTINUE TO HARASS OFFICIALS UNTIL HE HEARS THE ANSWER HE WANTS.
———————
Cavers Wants Total City Pesticide Ban [ ?!?! ]
Council to Debate Pesticide Ban [ ?!?! ]
Cavers Pulls Planned Pesticide Motion [ Yay ! ]
February 12th & 14th, 2012
Re : Donovan Cavers
BCLocalNews.com
CFJC TV7
KamloopsThisWeek.com
The Daily News – Kamloops
Kamloops, British Columbia
Articles ( links )
http://www.bclocalnews.com/news/139256973.html
http://www.bclocalnews.com/news/139328038.html
http://cfjctv.com/story.php?id=7170
http://www.kamloopsthisweek.com/news/139256973.html
http://www.kamloopsthisweek.com/news/139328038.html
Send a Letter to the Editor ( e-mail )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
BCLocalNews.com
KamloopsThisWeek.com
publisher@kamloopsthisweek.com
The Daily News
Send a Letter to the Editor ( web-site )
CJFC TV7
KamloopsThisWeek.com
The Daily News
http://www.kamloopsnews.ca/section/kamloops0303&template=letter
Response by EnviroEd ( text ) – 1
Cavers does not seem to understand the issue. The city can put a ban in place but with products still for sale what would be the point. The only thing he would succeed in doing would be to take the trained professionals out of the equation. Maybe that is his agenda? The province has a committee in place and they have been looking at this for several months. One can only hope that they use a science based approach and not a political one. Based on comments made by Terry Lake it looks like they may choose the later. Public policy should not be made based on public surveys, as the majority are not well versed on the subject and therefore cannot make an informed discussion. All they know is what is presented in the media and that has not been a balanced view, but rather a view from vocal groups like CCS and David Suzuki Foundation which have no expertise in pesticide toxicology and are using the issue as a cash cow. These products have a purpose they are not “cosmetic” they are used to keep our green spaces healthy. They are safe to use, Health Canada ensures that. We have wasted enough time and money on this issue, enough already!
Response by EnviroEd ( text ) – 2
You don't have to go the reserve, these products are for sale at any retail outlet in Kamloops like Canadian Tire and Walmart. The City cannot ban the sale only the use. That is why Cavers suggestion is so silly. If the province chooses to impose a ban, then the products with be removed from store shelves.
Response by Mary Morrison
CURRENT PESTICIDE BYLAW IS FINE AS IS
I am concerned with the campaign by city councillor Donvan Cavers to ban the use of what are called cosmetic pesticides.
The anti-pesticide crusaders are saying that, as a homeowner, I don’t read labels, nor am I able to follow directions on those labels.
They are saying I am stupid.
Well, I do read labels and I am able to follow directions.
The pesticides/herbicides available at Walmart or Canadian Tire ARE VERY DILUTED PRODUCTS SPECIFICALLY MADE FOR THE HOMEOWNER.
If you go to the Health Canada website and read how these products are registered, you will see that safety factors are built in, from 100 times to as high as 1,000 times above the safe dose shown.
These products are SAFE TO USE.
Homeowners I have spoken to are not so worried about a few dandelions in their yard.
They are concerned about clover and black medic ( to name a couple ) that will take over your lawn if not controlled.
Believe me, you cannot just pull these weeds out as you can a dandelion.
There are also turf diseases and insects we need to be able to control.
I do not have the perfect lawn, nor do I strive for that.
My lawn has some weeds and is not level, nor is it the greenest lawn in town, but I do take pride in trying to keep my lawn and property neat and tidy.
I do not want my grass overrun with weeds.
I am confident the SMALL AMOUNT OF HERBICIDE applied to my lawn to keep it healthy is applied safely and my lawn is a safe place for me, my grandchildren and my pets to enjoy.
All I am asking is that people do their homework, check the Health Canada website and listen to the scientists who specialize in pesticide toxicology and research.
I have.
The decisions made about the use of pesticides should not be based on junk science provided by uninformed individuals and groups with no scientific expertise on the subject.
The City of Kamloops already has a bylaw regulating the use of pesticides.
We DO NOT NEED further restrictions on pesticides.
Response by NORAHG ( links )
Response by NORAHG ( text )
It is DISTURBING that Donovan Cavers has attempted to ADD PROFIT TO HIS VESTED INTERESTS … AT THE EXPENSE OF the jobs he intends to DESTROY in the Professional Lawn Care Industry.
Cavers is a HIGH-RANKING OFFICIAL with Green Party of Canada, with ties to Canadian Cancer Society and Pesticide Free BC … all three are Anti-Pesticide Organizations that IMPOSE LIFE-STYLE CHOICES by using FRAUD and CONSPIRACY in order to create a so-called healthy society.
Cavers also comes from a family of PROMINENT CAREER ACTIVISTS with Green Party of Canada.
He has been known to IMPOSE his LIFE-STYLE CHOICES, even with students, when he OPPOSED BALANCED INFORMATION in the school curriculum on so-called Global Warming, a theory that is now DEBUNKED.
Now, as an Elected Government Official with the City of Kamloops, he continues to IMPOSE his LIFE-STYLE CHOICES, as well as ADD PROFIT TO HIS VESTED INTERESTS, by CONSPIRING to PROHIBIT pest control products.
In other jurisdictions, Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION has ANNIHILATED the Professional Lawn Care Industry.
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/carnage-caused-by-anti-pesticide-prohibition/
Fortunately, Cavers has NO SUPPORT within City Council, and NO SIGNIFICANT SUPPORT within the community.
Cavers has also expressed MOCK-CONCERN about PUBLIC HEALTH ―
« I think that we as a council [ with the City of Kamloops ] … have the ability to make sure that everyone across the province has a really good [ anti-pesticide ] by-law and, therefore, have their HEALTH PROTECTED. » [ ?!?! ]
In fact, Cavers has already been granted his wish … according to Dr. Leonard Ritter, the nation’s LEADING EXPERT in the field of toxicology and pesticide safety, HEALTH CANADA IS A GOOD SYSTEM that is very thorough before it approves any pest control products.
According to Dr. Ritter ―
« There are lots of UNQUALIFIED people out there trying to undermine the efforts of the PMRA. »
Moreover, Donovan Cavers is part of an INFINITELY SMALL number of residents who say « no » to the use of pest control products.
A recent POLL conducted by Canadian Consumer Specialty Products Association ( CCSPA ) showed that the VAST MAJORITY of residents are OPPOSED to the PROHIBITION of conventional pest control products, and they actually FAVOUR the continued use of these products around their homes and in public green spaces.
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/the-wisdom-of-canadian-consumer-specialty-products-association/
Not surprisingly, Cavers HAS NEVER conducted a serious scientific study on pest control products … evidently because he is NOT COMPETENT OR MOTIVATED to do so.
Let’s keep in mind that Cavers operates an Organic Food business that would clearly PROFIT from Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION.
Nonetheless, Cavers COULD NOT EVEN BE BOTHERED to have used the EXTENSIVE TOXICOLOGY DATABASE that is available from both Environmental Protection Agency and Health Canada.
Cavers prefers to attempt PROFITING from Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION, at the expense of the Professional Lawn Care Industry.
And he is not only SCIENTIFICALLY IGNORANT, but also LAZY and OBTUSE.
For more information about DONOVAN CAVER, go to …
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/cavers-donovan/
For more information about the MYTHS OF PROHIBITION, go to …
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/myth-busting-prohibition/
———————
Back To The Drawing Board On Pesticides [ ?!?! ]
February 12th, 2012
Elizabeth Beaubien
The Edmonton Journal
Edmonton, Alberta
Letter to the Editor by Beaubien ( link )
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/story_print.html?id=6140481&sponsor=
Send Letters to the Editor ( e-mails )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
Send a Letter to the Editor ( web-site )
None
Response to Beaubien by NORAHG ( link )
Response to Beaubien by NORAHG ( text )
For more than a decade, Anti-Pesticide Activist Elisabeth Beaubien has been COERCING, INTIMIDATING, and TERRORIZING Edmonton Government Officials with her stories of IMAGINARY DANGER of pest control products.
Beaubien cycles and walks around the City of Edmonton LOOKING FOR TROUBLE ― in the form of HAPLESS Professional Lawn Care employees who are PROTECTING LANDSCAPES from damaging pests.
A few months ago, NORAHG strongly urged employees NOT to RESPOND to her VERBAL HARASSMENTS, and NOT to answer ANY of her questions.
Beaubien’s only true weapon is HARASSMENT since she is WRONG on so many levels.
Pest control products are SCIENTIFICALLY SAFE …
… and Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITIONS are IRREFUTABLY INVALIDATED, in Edmonton, in Quebec, and across Canada.
NO court decision ever upheld Town of Hudson’s decision to PROHIBIT pest control products … the courts upheld its right to enact this form of by-law.
Subsequently, in 2004, the Province of Quebec became the first province to ARBITRARILY IMPOSE the PROHIBITION of pest control products like 2,4-D.
On May 25th, 2011, Dow AgroSciences, the manufacturer of the pest control product 2,4-D, SETTLED THE NAFTA CHALLENGE CASE with the Canadian government.
The North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA, is an agreement signed by the governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United States, creating a tri-lateral trade block in North America.
2,4-D has been used for the control of broad-leaved weeds in the Urban Landscape SINCE 1946.
2,4-D has a 65-YEAR UNBLEMISHED SAFETY RECORD regarding long-term risk to health.
As part of the agreement, a VICTORY for the company, the GOVERNMENT OF QUEBEC was HUMILIATED into making a STATEMENT saying that …
« 2,4-D DOES NOT POSE AN UNACCEPTABLE RISK to human health or the environment. »
Quebec was the first province to declare weed control products containing 2,4-D as POSSIBLY carcinogenic, which has now been DEEMED AS FALSE.
On that basis, municipalities in Quebec instituted NEEDLESS, SENSELESS, and MALICIOUS PROHIBITIONS of 2,4-D use as a lawn pest control product.
Other jurisdictions outside of Quebec also CONSPIRED to IMPOSE the Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITIONS of 2,4-D under the PRETEXT that it was a so-called carcinogen.
In fact, ABSOLUTELY NO regulatory body in the world classifies 2,4-D as a human carcinogen ― 2,4-D is probably the MOST STUDIED and BEST UNDERSTOOD of ANY chemical ― not just pesticide ― in existence.
2,4-D DOES NOT POSE AN UNACCEPTABLE RISK to human health or the environment.
2,4-D is SCIENTIFICALLY SAFE and will CAUSE NO HARM.
Beaubien is WRONG when she ALLEGES that there is a so-called HIDDEN LOBBY … this is MERE UNVERIFIABLE CONSPIRACY THEORY.
Beaubien is part of an INFINITELY SMALL MINORITY that DEMAND PROHIBITION.
A recent POLL conducted by Canadian Consumer Specialty Products Association ( CCSPA ) showed that the VAST MAJORITY of residents are OPPOSED to the PROHIBITION of conventional pest control products, and they actually FAVOUR the continued use of these products around their homes and in public green spaces.
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/the-wisdom-of-canadian-consumer-specialty-products-association/
Beaubien expresses MOCK-OURAGE that she had wasted her time LOBBYING to IMPOSE PROHIBITION, when, in fact, it is Beaubien who represents a WASTE OF TIME for Government Officials.
Anti-Pesticide Activists like Beaubien HAVE NEVER conducted a serious scientific study on pest control products … evidently because they are NOT COMPETENT OR MOTIVATED to do so.
Beaubien COULD NOT EVEN BE BOTHERED to have used the EXTENSIVE TOXICOLOGY DATABASE that is available from both the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Health Canada.
She is not only SCIENTIFICALLY IGNORANT, but also LAZY and OBTUSE.
However, Edmonton Government Officials MUST BE CONGRATULATED FOR THEIR COURAGE and INTELLIGENCE, and putting up with Beaubien’s NONSENSE.
For more information, please go to the following web-pages …
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/myth-busting-prohibition/
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/letters-to-the-editor-responding-to-lunatic-jihadists/
———————
Risk From Pesticides Is Very Real To All Of Us [ Wrong ! ]
February 9th, 2012
Ghost-Writer using the name Cottam
Nanaimo Daily News
Nanaimo, British Columbia
Letter to the Editor by Cottam Ghost-Writer ( link )
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/story.html?id=3f9d4770-c68e-4a5d-b135-af1e53179c83
Send a Letter to the Editor ( e-mails )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
circulation@nanaimodailynews.com
Send a Letter to the Editor ( web-site )
None
Send a Letter to the Editor ( web-site )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
Response to Cottam Ghost-Writer by NORAHG ( links )
https://pesticidetruths.com/2012/02/13/12917/
Response to Cottam Ghost-Writer by NORAHG ( text )
MISGUIDED WRITING ABOUT IMAGINARY DANGER
Cottam’s ASSERTIONS and MISGUIDED WRITING about the IMAGINARY DANGER of pest control products entering the body via inhalation or the skin are RIDICULOUS.
Pest control products used in the Urban Landscape are ROUTINELY EXCRETED THROUGH THE URINARY TRACT IN AN UN-REACTED FORM.
TOXICOLOGY DATABASE
Cottam COULD NOT EVEN BE BOTHERED to have used the EXTENSIVE TOXICOLOGY DATABASE that is available from Health Canada.
This makes Cottam not only SCIENTIFICALLY IGNORANT, but also LAZY and OBTUSE.
Health Canada’s EXTENSIVE TOXICOLOGY DATABASE CLEARLY PROVES that pest control products are SCIENTIFICALLY SAFE since they have been scrutinized and approved by the HUNDREDS of expert scientists at Health Canada !
Health Canada requires each new pest control product to go through about TWO-HUNDRED SEPARATE TESTS to examine health and environmental impacts as well as value, and costing about 250 MILLION DOLLARS.
Consequently, when pest control products are used properly, there are NO harmful irreversible effects to health and the environment !
CHILDREN ARE NOT AT RISK
Contrary to Cottam’s ALLEGATIONS, there are NO valid reports of problems with CHILDREN, and there is NOT ONE KNOWN ILLNESS or DEATH from the proper use of pest control products used in the Urban Landscape.
Children across Canada, even in those jurisdictions with NO pesticide bans, are all protected since these products are applied at VERY LOW DOSES and represent NO THREAT TO CHILDREN.
The SAFETY ASSESSMENT of pest control products by Heath Canada takes into consideration CHILDREN’s physiology, behaviours, and habits WHILE PLAYING ON TREATED GRASS.
For more information about CHILDREN, go to the following web-page …
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/children-are-not-at-risk/
EXPOSURE TO PEST CONTROL PRODUCTS
Cottam’s MOCK-CONCERNS about EXPOSURE to RESIDUES of pest control products are PREPOSTEROUS.
This concern CONTRADICTS Professor Bruce Nathan Ames, Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at the University of California, Berkeley, and a Senior Scientist at Children's Hospital Oakland Research Institute.
Ames has stated that IN ONE WEEK, an average person digests MORE NATURAL CHEMICALS on a diet of vegetables than IN A LIFE-TIME of EXPOSURE to pest control products.
Ames found that people eat about 1.5 grams of NATURAL PESTICIDES per person per day, which is about 10,000 times more than they eat of SYNTHETIC PESTICIDE RESIDUES.
RESIDUES OF PEST CONTROL PRODUCTS
Cottam’s MOCK-CONCERNS about RESIDUES remaining in the Urban Landscape are LUDICROUS.
This issue has been addressed by Doctor Solomon.
Doctor Keith R. Solomon, Ph.D., is a Professor in the Department of Environmental Biology at the University of Guelph.
Solomon is also Director of the Centre for Toxicology.
According to Solomon, pest control products used in the Urban Landscape DEGRADE RAPIDLY, and DO NOT BUILD UP RESIDUES during the length of the season.
There is NO accumulation of pest control products in the environment.
In fact, pests come back fairly quickly, within a few short weeks.
For example, 2,4-D Herbicide must be applied AT LEAST TWICE PER SEASON, otherwise the weeds come back.
The half-life of 2,4-D in soils is a matter of weeks.
Another herbicide, glyphosate ( a.k.a. Roundup ) is no longer biologically active WITHIN HOURS of being sprayed on soil.
Pest control products are known to DISSIPATE EXTREMELY RAPIDLY.
Overall, there is no accumulation over time of pest control products, and NO RESIDUES to be concerned about.
For more information about SOLOMON, go to the following web-page …
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/the-wisdom-of-the-solomons/
ORGANIC FARMING
There is NO significantly rising number of so-called Organic Food Growers.
Organic Food has been a DISMALLY BOGUS FAILURE.
ALLEGATIONS by Cottam that Organic Pesticide-Free Food will someday replace conventional food are LUDICROUS.
Even MORE LUDICROUS is the expectation that pest control products will someday and somehow no longer be necessary for agriculture.
According to Dr. Norman Borlaug … ANY RESTRICTION on the use of pest control products would result in a SUBSTANTIAL REDUCTION IN HARVESTS and a related SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN FOOD COSTS, LACK OF AFFORDABLE FOOD, HUGE INCREASES IN STARVATION, and tens of thousands of additional DEATHS among the poor of the world.
Even if you could use all the organic material that you have ( i.e. the animal manures, the human waste, the plant residues ), and get them back on the soil, YOU COULD NOT FEED MORE THAN FOUR BILLION PEOPLE.
If all agriculture were organic, you would have to INCREASE CROP-LAND AREA DRAMATICALLY, spreading out into marginal areas and cutting down millions of acres of forests.
Organic farming, with no use of conventional pest control products, CANNOT MATCH THE PRODUCTION OF CONVENTIONAL FARMING.
Organic farming is INCAPABLE of feeding the entire world.
Dr. Norman Borlaug ( 1914 – 2009 ) was a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate and the man credited with saving millions of lives through his development of the Green Revolution.
For more information about ORGANIC FOOD, go to the following page …
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/organic-food-dismally-bogus/
WHO IS COTTAM ?
COTTAM is actually a designation for a group of Anti-Pesticide Ghost-Writers designed to DECEIVE the public ANONYMOUSLY.
This group DECEIVES THE PUBLIC about the COTTAM name, just as they DECEIVE THE PUBLIC about the IMAGINARY DANGER of pest control products.
The REAL Cottam is an 82-year-old divorced chronologically-gifted computer-challenged non-expert ostracized octogenarian.
With her advanced years, her basic skills are severely limited, to a point where she has complained having problems opening pdf documents.
Sadly, because of her age and diminished capacity, ANONYMOUS Anti-Pesticide Activists have been using the COTTAM name as a SHIELD AGAINST IMMINENT LEGAL REPRISALS FOR FRAUD AND CONSPIRACY.
Using the COTTAM name rather than their own allows them to LIE and MIS-INFORM with IMPUNITY, just like SCREECHING MONKEYS.
For more information about COTTAM, go to the following links …
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/cottam-ghost-writers/
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/letters-to-the-editor-responding-to-screeching-monkeys/
———————
Regulated But Not Safe [ ?!?! ]
February 11th, 2012
Don Spady
The Edmonton Journal
Edmonton, Alberta
Letter to the Editor from Spady ( link )
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/Regulated+safe/6138005/story.html
Send Letters to the Editor ( e-mails )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
Send a Letter to the Editor ( web-site )
None
Response to Spady by NORAHG ( link )
None
Response to Spady by NORAHG ( text )
According to Anti-Pesticide Activist Don Spady, pest control products somehow « do unwarranted and unnecessary harm and sometimes irreversible harm ».
Spady’s statement is categorically WRONG !
Scientific research shows that, as reported through Health Canada’s VAST TOXICOLOGY DATABASE, NO HARM WILL OCCUR when pest control products are used according to label directions.
The RISK ASSESSMENT of pest control products indicates that they are PRACTICALLY-NON-TOXIC.
Consequently, it is a fact that pest control products cause NO HARM, including chronic effects such as CANCER.
Overall, when pest control products are used properly, there are NO harmful irreversible effects to health and the environment !
The ASSESSMENT proving that pest control products are SCIENTIFICALLY-SAFE is a process that can take up to TEN YEARS and COST HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.
The cost to manufacturers to get EVERY pest control product from the lab to store shelves is about 250 MILLION DOLLARS.
There is NOT ONE KNOWN ILLNESS or DEATH from the proper use of pest control products used in the Urban Landscape.
Spady should avail himself of the EXTENSIVE TOXICOLOGY DATABASE that is available from Health Canada instead of repeating Anti-Pesticide and SCIENTIFICALLY-IGNORANT RANTS.
Pest control products are regulated AND safe.
———————
City Ignores Pesticide Science [ ?!?! ]
February 10th, 2012
Greg Goss
The Edmonton Journal
Edmonton, Alberta
Letter to the Editor from Goss ( link )
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/technology/City+ignores+pesticide+science/6131454/story.html
Send Letters to the Editor ( e-mails )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
Send a Letter to the Editor ( web-site )
None
Response to Goss by NORAHG ( link )
None
Response to Goss by NORAHG ( text )
Unfortunately, Goss COULD NOT BE BOTHERED to have used the EXTENSIVE TOXICOLOGY DATABASE that is available from Health Canada.
He is not only SCIENTIFICALLY IGNORANT, but also LAZY and OBTUSE.
It is a MYTH to believe that pest control products somehow cause cancer.
Health Canada’s EXTENSIVE TOXICOLOGY DATABASE CLEARLY PROVES that pest control products are SCIENTIFICALLY SAFE since they have been scrutinized and approved by the HUNDREDS of expert scientists at Health
Canada !
Moreover, Goss is GROSSLY WRONG about Green Alternative Pesticides, and should have done his HOMEWORK here too.
There are NO viable, efficacious, economical, or low-risk alternatives to replace conventional pest control products.
Overall, Green Alternative Pesticides are INEFFECTIVE, INADEQUATE, HIGHRISK, MORE TOXIC, and STUNNINGLY EXPENSIVE !
Green Alternative Pesticides are BOGUS and DISMAL FAILURES … they DO NOT WORK and they are NOT INNOVATIVE products.
Goss also expresses MOCK-CONCERN concerning pest control products not being around for a long enough time.
No problem.
One of the most prominently used ingredients for the control of broad-leaved weeds is 2,4-D.
2,4-D has been used for the control of broad-leaved weeds in the Urban Landscape SINCE 1946.
2,4-D has a 65-YEAR UNBLEMISHED SAFETY RECORD regarding long-term risk to health.
Goss is essentially reduced to an AGENT OF MIS-INFORMATION.
Pest control products CAUSE NO HARM, including chronic effects such as CANCER.
Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION IS NOT NECESSARY.
For more information, go to the following web-pages …
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/cancer/
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/green-alternatives-bogus-dismal-failures/
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/carnage-caused-by-anti-pesticide-prohibition/
———————
Is A Perfect Lawn Really Worth The Risk ? [ What Risk ?!?! ]
February 10th, 2012
Steve Sanders
The Nelson Daily
Nelson, British Columbia
Letter to the editor from Sanders ( link )
Send a Letter to the Editor ( e-mail )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
Send a Letter to the Editor ( web-site )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
http://thenelsondaily.com/nd-contact
Response to Sanders by NORAHG ( link )
None
Response to Sanders by NORAHG ( text )
It is truly amazing how Anti-Pesticide Activists like Steve Sanders CONCOCT IMAGINARY DANGER with conventional pest control products.
Sanders is merely INVENTING UNVERIFIABLE CONSPIRACY THEORIES … and he knows it.
Sanders also SCAMS and DECEIVES the public by blurting out HOLLOW and DESPICABLY-ALARMIST expressions like « Agent Orange » and « DDT » !
This is WRONG !
The issues concerning Agent Orange are IRRELEVANT, except for those activists like Sanders who wish to SPREAD FEAR AND TERROR !
The most infamous herbicide combination used in the Vietnam War ( 1955-1975 ) was Herbicide Orange, otherwise known as Agent Orange.
This product contained a 50 : 50 mixture of n-butyl esters of 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T.
Herbicide Orange was NEVER a registered product in either the United States or Canada.
The controversy surrounding the use of Herbicide Orange was associated with a contaminant in the 2,4,5-T component, and NOT 2,4-D.
2,4-D has been used for the control of broad-leaved weeds in the Urban Landscape SINCE 1946.
2,4-D has a 65-YEAR UNBLEMISHED SAFETY RECORD regarding long-term risk to health.
In 2007, the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the Pest Management Regulatory Agency of Health Canada issued a ruling that 2,4-D IS NOT CANCER-CAUSING IN HUMANS.
2,4-D is probably THE MOST studied and best understood of ANY chemical … not just pesticide … in existence.
2,4-D has been the subject of over 40,000 studies.
2,4-D Herbicide DOES NOT contain harmful dioxins.
2,4-D is NOT Herbicide Orange.
2,4-D is SCIENTIFICALLY SAFE !
What studies does Sanders have ?!?!?
SQUAT ! He only has CONSPIRACY THEORIES and HEARSAY !
For more information, go to the following links …
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/24-d/
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/ddt-and-our-world-politicized-science/
———————
Councillor Pushes Pesticide Ban [ ?!?! ]
February 9th, 2012
Donovan Cavers
The Daily News
Kamloops, British Columbia
Article re: Caver ( link )
Send a Letter to the Editor ( e-mails )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
Send a Letter to the Editor ( web-site )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
None
Response to Cavers by NORAHG ( link )
Response to Cavers by NORAHG ( text )
Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION is NOT NECESSARY !
How do Anti-Pesticide Activists, like Donovan Cavers, arrive at the conclusion that products used in Professional Lawn Care somehow have some kind of IMAGINARY DANGER ?!?!
Was their ASSESSMENT based upon a vast scientific knowledge of pest control products ?!?! [ No ! ]
Do Anti-Pesticide Activists like Cavers ASSESS these products after spending time and money carefully studying their effects on health and environment ?!?! [ No ! ]
Are Anti-Pesticide Activists, who have VESTED INTERESTS AS FUND-RAISERS for Charity Organizations like Green Party, COMPETENT to give ANY advice concerning these issues ?!?! [ No ! ]
In fact, Cavers and his gang are WRONG and CANNOT BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY.
Pest control products are SCIENTIFICALLY-SAFE.
Not surprisingly, NONE of the Anti-Pesticide Activists, especially Cavers, have ANY recognized background, training, or experience in matters concerning pest control products, making their opinions FLAWED, DISTORTED, VALUELESS and WORTHLESS.
These activists have NOT SPENT A SINGLE PENNY to research pest control products.
Anti-Pesticide Activists like Cavers DID NOT conduct a serious scientific study … evidently because they are NOT COMPETENT OR MOTIVATED to do so.
Cavers and his gang COULD NOT EVEN BE BOTHERED to have used the EXTENSIVE TOXICOLOGY DATABASE that is available from Health Canada.
They are not only SCIENTIFICALLY IGNORANT, but also LAZY and OBTUSE.
It is a MYTH to believe that pest control products somehow cause cancer.
Health Canada’s EXTENSIVE TOXICOLOGY DATABASE CLEARLY PROVES that pest control products are SCIENTIFICALLY SAFE since they have been scrutinized and approved by the HUNDREDS of expert scientists at Health Canada !
Health Canada requires each new pest control product to go through about TWO-HUNDRED SEPARATE TESTS to examine health and environmental impacts as well as value, and costing about 250 MILLION DOLLARS.
Consequently, when pest control products are used properly, there are NO harmful irreversible effects to health and the environment !
Pest control products are, in fact, HEALTH-CANADA-APPROVED, FEDERALLY-LEGAL, SCIENTIFICALLY-SAFE, and PRACTICALLY-NON-TOXIC.
ALLEGATIONS from Activists like Cavers about the IMAGINARY DANGER of pest control products are TOTALLY FALSE, and are UNTRUE MIS-REPRESENTATIONS designed to alarm and enrage the public and enhance the BUSINESS, CASH-FLOW and PROFIT of their organizations.
Cavers and his buddies have NO SCIENTIFIC PROOF that pest control products cause cancer.
There is NOT ONE KNOWN ILLNESS or DEATH from the proper use of pest control products used in the Urban Landscape.
There is NO direct link between pest control products and cancer.
Pest control products CAUSE NO HARM, including chronic effects such as CANCER.
For more information, go to the following web-pages …
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/cancer/
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/myth-busting-prohibition/
———————
Why Ban Lawn Pesticides ? The List Of Reasons Keeps Growing [ ?!?! ]
February 7th, 2012
Paul Tukey
Enews Park Forest
Park Forest, Illinois, U.S.A.
Article by Tukey ( link )
Send a Letter to the Editor ( web-site )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
http://www.enewspf.com/contact-us/88888964-contact/1-gary-kopycinski.html
Send a Letter to the Editor ( e-mail )
None
Response to Tukey by NORAHG ( link )
Response to Tukey by NORAHG ( text )
Neither Tukey nor any of his buddies have SPENT A SINGLE PENNY to research pest control products.
Anti-Pesticide Activists like Tukey DID NOT conduct a serious scientific study … evidently because they are NOT COMPETENT OR MOTIVATED to do so.
Anti-Pesticide Activists COULD NOT EVEN BE BOTHERED to have used the EXTENSIVE TOXICOLOGY DATABASE that is available from both Environmental Protection Agency and Health Canada.
They are not only SCIENTIFICALLY IGNORANT, but also LAZY and OBTUSE.
It is a MYTH to believe that pest control products somehow cause cancer.
LEGITIMATE TOXICOLOGY DATABASES CLEARLY PROVE that pest control products are SCIENTIFICALLY SAFE.
Citing NON-EXPERT organizations in Canada is RIDICULOUS.
Ontario College of Family Physicians is a DISCREDITED Anti-Pesticide Organization.
Canadian Cancer Society and Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment are MERE FUND-RAISING Organizations with NO expertise in science or research.
Moreover, Canadian Cancer Society PAYS-FOR-PROFIT Tukey as a NON-REGISTERED LOBBYIST operating ILLEGALLY in Canada.
Demands continue to be made to have Tukey BANNED from entry into Canada because of his attempts to SUBVERT the Canadian justice and Legislative System, as well as TAX EVASION.
For more information, please go to the following web-pages …
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/myth-busting-prohibition/
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/cancer/
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/ontario-college-of-family-physicians/
———————
Health Organizations Launch Anti-Pesticide Campaign [ ?!?! ]
February 5th, 2012
Kathryn Seely ( with Gideon Forman )
The Boundary Sentinel
Kettle River Valley Region, British Columbia
The Castlegar Source
Castlegar, British Columbia
The Rossland Telegraph
Rossland, British Columbia
Articles by Seely ( links )
The Boundary Sentinel
http://boundarysentinel.com/news/health-organizations-launch-anti-pesticide-campaign-16584
The Castlegar Source
http://castlegarsource.com/news/health-organizations-launch-anti-pesticide-campaign-16584
The Rossland Telegraph
http://rosslandtelegraph.com/news/health-organizations-launch-anti-pesticide-campaign-16584
Send a Letter to the Editor ( e-mails )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
The Boundary Sentinel
info.boundarysentinel.com ?
The Rossland Telegraph
Send a Letter to the Editor ( web-site )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
The Castlegar Source
http://castlegarsource.com/cs-contact
The Boundary Sentinel
http://boundarysentinel.com/bs-contact
The Rossland Telegraph
http://rosslandtelegraph.com/rt-contact
Response to Seely by NORAHG ( links )
Response to Seely by NORAHG ( text )
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS that could be used to care for those STRICKEN WITH CANCER are being DIVERTED to CAMPAIGNS to ban products that have been deemed SCIENTIFICALLY SAFE by Health Canada.
The Canadian Cancer Society’s 8-week Anti-Pesticide ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN in newspapers across British Columbia, costing HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS, is yet another example of the MISAPPROPRIATION and SQUANDERING of donations that could, otherwise, be used to SAVE LIVES and CARE FOR THOSE STRICKEN WITH CANCER.
According to Kathryn Seely of Canadian Cancer Society …
« Respected Canadian HEALTH ORGANIZATIONS have come together in an unprecedented campaign to prohibit TOXIC lawn products. » [ ?!?! ]
Which HEALTH ORGANIZATIONS ?!?!
Canadian Cancer Society is NOT a health, science, or research organization.
Canadian Cancer Society is a mere FUND-RAISING ORGANIZATION.
How did Seely arrive at the conclusion that products used in Professional Lawn Care are somehow « toxic » ?!?!
Was her ASSESSMENT based upon her vast scientific knowledge of pest control products ?!?! [ No ! ]
Did Seely ASSESS these products after spending time and money carefully studying their effects on health and environment ?!?! [ No ! ]
Is Seely, who is a MERE FUND-RAISER for an Anti-Pesticide Organization, COMPETENT to give ANY advice concerning these issues ?!?! [ No ! ]
In fact, Seely is WRONG and CANNOT BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY.
Pest control products are SCIENTIFICALLY-SAFE.
Also, according to Kathryn Seely …
« HEALTH EXPERTS are hopeful that British Columbia can follow Eastern Canada’s suit with a province-wide pesticide ban. » [ ?!?! ]
Which HEALTH EXPERTS ?!?!
There is NOT A SINGLE LEGITIMATE HEALTH EXPERT who demands Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION.
Not surprisingly, NO ONE at Canadian Cancer Society, including Seely, has ANY recognized background, training, or experience in matters concerning pest control products, making their opinions FLAWED, DISTORTED, VALUELESS and WORTHLESS.
Canadian Cancer Society has NOT SPENT A SINGLE PENNY to research pest control products.
Seely and her buddies DID NOT conduct a serious scientific study … evidently because they are NOT COMPETENT OR MOTIVATED to do so.
Neither Seely, nor anyone else at Canadian Cancer Society, COULD EVEN BE BOTHERED to have used the EXTENSIVE TOXICOLOGY DATABASE that is available from Health Canada.
They are not only SCIENTIFICALLY IGNORANT, but also LAZY and OBTUSE.
It is a MYTH to believe that pest control products somehow cause cancer.
Health Canada’s EXTENSIVE TOXICOLOGY DATABASE CLEARLY PROVES that pest control products are SCIENTIFICALLY SAFE since they have been scrutinized and approved by the HUNDREDS of expert scientists at Health Canada !
Health Canada requires each new pest control product to go through about TWO-HUNDRED SEPARATE TESTS to examine health and environmental impacts as well as value, and costing about 250 MILLION DOLLARS.
Consequently, when pest control products are used properly, there are NO harmful irreversible effects to health and the environment !
Canadian Cancer Society is WASTING ITS MONEY AND RESOURCES because pest control products are, in fact, HEALTH-CANADA-APPROVED, FEDERALLY-LEGAL, SCIENTIFICALLY-SAFE, and PRACTICALLY-NON-TOXIC.
For some SELF-SERVING REASON, Canadian Cancer Society has SPENT OVER 2,500,000 DOLLARS on SUBVERSIVE Anti-Pesticide CONSPIRACIES.
ALLEGATIONS from Kathryn Seely about the IMAGINARY DANGER of pest control products are TOTALLY FALSE, and are UNTRUE MIS-REPRESENTATIONS designed to alarm and enrage the public and enhance the BUSINESS, CASH-FLOW and PROFIT of Canadian Cancer Society.
Seely has NO SCIENTIFIC PROOF that pest control products cause cancer.
There is NOT ONE KNOWN ILLNESS or DEATH from the proper use of pest control products used in the Urban Landscape.
There is NO direct link between pest control products and cancer.
Pest control products CAUSE NO HARM, including chronic effects such as CANCER.
For more information, go to the following web-pages …
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/cancer/
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/canadian-cancer-society/
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/seely-kathryn/
———————
Wrong-Headed Attitude On Pesticides [ Wrong ! ]
February 6th, 2012
Ghost-Writer using the name Cottam
kelownacapnews.com
Kelowna, British Columbia
Article by Cottam Ghost-Writer ( link )
http://www.kelownacapnews.com/opinion/letters/138817169.html
Send a Letter to the Editor ( e-mails )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
Send a Letter to the Editor ( web-site )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
Response to Cottam Ghost-Writer by NORAHG ( links )
Response to Cottam Ghost-Writer by NORAHG ( text )
Dr. Leonard Ritter is Chair Professor Emeritus of Toxicology, School of Environmental Sciences, University of Guelph, and Executive Director, Canadian Network of Toxicology Centres, with 35 years of experience in the field of toxicology and pesticide safety.
Doctor Leonard Ritter is the nation’s GREATEST EXPERT in the field of toxicology and pesticide safety
According to Doctor Ritter …
● Pesticides DO NOT Cause Cancer !
● 30 to 40 per cent of all cancers are due to the use of TOBACCO.
● 50 per cent are caused by CHRONIC DISEASE.
● Obesity, sunlight, and tobacco smoke are FAR MORE SERIOUS CONCERNS than the use of pest control products.
● Health Canada is a good system that is very thorough before it approves any pest control products.
● The 2009 U.S. President’s Two-Person Panel on Cancer about pest control products, water pollution, and agricultural exposures HAS BEEN REFUTED BY THIRTY YEARS OF RESEARCH.
● There are lots of UNQUALIFIED people out there trying to undermine the efforts of the PMRA.
● There is NO INCREASE in cancer deaths in Canada when you consider that the population is aging and increasing.
The ANTICS of Anti-Pesticide Activists like COTTAM remind us of the antics in the film Horse Feathers.
In the opening act, Wagstaff and a group of college professors SING AND DANCE in full academic robes and mortar-board hats ―
« I don’t care what you have to say. It makes no difference anyway. Whatever it is, I’m against it ! »
Anti-Pesticide Activists have the VERY SAME SONG AND DANCE.
Anti-Pesticide Activists are AGAINST pest control products.
NON-EXPERT Anti-Pesticide Activists who LIE and MIS-INFORM about pest control products seek only a hysterical rush to adopt new PROHIBITIONS.
COTTAM is actually a designation for a group of Anti-Pesticide Ghost-Writers designed to DECEIVE the public ANONYMOUSLY.
This group DECEIVES THE PUBLIC about the COTTAM name, just as they DECEIVE THE PUBLIC about the IMAGINARY DANGER of pest control products.
Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION has led to CATASTROPHIC CARNAGE for businesses operating in the Professional Lawn Care Industry.
The 9|11 Era of Anti-Pesticide Terrorism is a HORROR created by the CONSPIRACY of ENVIRONMENTAL EVIL that has ANNIHILATED the Modern Professional Lawn Care Industry.
Anti-Pesticide Activists, like COTTAM, CONSPIRE to PROHIBIT pest control products that are, in fact, HEALTH-CANADA-APPROVED, FEDERALLY-LEGAL, SCIENTIFICALLY-SAFE, and PRACTICALLY-NON-TOXIC.
Anti-Pesticide Activists like COTTAM CONSPIRE to IMPOSE ideas that are INTELLECTUALLY DECREPIT, DEPRAVED, DESPICABLE, and DEVOID OF ANY SOUND SCIENCE.
Nieszczęśliwy stary podstępny suka wkrótce będzie martwy, i będzie smażyć się w piekle z szatanem na całą wieczność
For more information, go to the following web-pages …
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/cancer/
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/cottam-ghost-writers/
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/letters-to-the-editor-responding-to-screeching-monkeys/
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/heroes-speaking-out-against-anti-pesticide-terror/
———————
Pesticide Ban Needs Evidence [ !!!! ]
February 4th, 2012
Editorial
Winnipeg Free Press
Winnipeg, Manitoba
Article by Editor ( link )
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/editorials/pesticide-ban-needs-evidence-138701479.html
Send a Letter to the Editor ( e-mail )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
Send a Letter to the Editor ( web-site )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/send_a_letter/
Response to Editor by NORAHG ( links )
Response to Editor by NORAHG ( text )
There should be NO accolades for Sheila Basrur.
Basrur, who served as the Medical Officer of Health in Toronto, was neither a scientist nor a researcher, and certainly had ABSOLUTELY NO EXPERTISE in matters concerning pest control products.
Her opinion on this subject was VALUELESS and WORTHLESS.
Nonetheless, Basrur’s NON-EXPERT REPORTS have somehow served a PRETEXT in the IMPOSITION of Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITIONS in Canada that NEEDLESSLY DESTROYED BUSINESSES and UNEMPLOYED THOUSANDS.
Unfortunately, Basrur DID NOT conduct a serious scientific study … she conducted a MERE LITERATURE REVIEW, and CHERRY-PICKED only those reports found in the OPEN PUBLIC LITERATURE.
Basrur COULD NOT EVEN BE BOTHERED to have used the EXTENSIVE TOXICOLOGY DATABASE that was/is available from Health Canada.
Basrur was not only SCIENTIFICALLY IGNORANT, she was LAZY and STUPID.
In fact, Basrur could only conclude that « most epidemiological studies are UNABLE TO ASCERTAIN the degree to which specific lawn and garden pesticides are linked with the health effects under study ».
Instead, she ARBITRARILY decided to avail herself upon the CO-OPTED ANTI-PESTICIDE VERSION of the PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE, which has been INVALIDATED by TRUE EXPERTS like Doctor Keith Solomon.
Basrur has left a LEGACY of FALSE INFORMATION, DESTROYED ECONOMIES, LOST JOBS AND HARDSHIP FOR PEOPLE, and WEAKENED COMMUNITIES.
For more information, go to the following web-pages …
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/precautionary-principle/
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/ontario-living-in-environmental-infamy/
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/carnage-caused-by-anti-pesticide-prohibition/
———————
Assertion on Regulation of Pesticides is Disputed [ ?!?! ]
January 28th, 2012
Liz Fox ( Lantzville, British Columbia )
The Daily News – Post Media News
Don Mills, Ontario
Article by Fox ( link )
http://www.canada.com/Assertion+regulation+pesticides+disputed/6066946/story.html
Send a Letter to the Editor ( e-mail )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
Response to Fox by NORAHG ( links )
https://pesticidetruths.com/2012/01/29/pesticides-are-well-regulated-and-scientifically-safe/
Response to Fox by NORAHG ( text )
Anti-Pesticide Activist Liz Fox claims to be unsatisfied with the current regulatory decisions concerning pest control products.
Fox uses a report from The Expert Panel on the Integrated Testing of Pesticides, a non-governmental group of academics, to back up her implication that pest control products are poorly regulated.
The Expert Panel on the Integrated Testing of Pesticides is led by DOCTOR LEONARD RITTER, who is Chair Professor Emeritus of Toxicology, School of Environmental Sciences, University of Guelph, and Executive Director, Canadian Network of Toxicology Centres, with 35 years of experience in the field of toxicology and pesticide safety.
During her superficial research, Fox failed to notice that on January 26th, 2012, DOCTOR RITTER defended Canada’s system of approving pest control products for the market, by noting that Health Canada’s Pesticide Management Regulatory Agency ( PMRA ) is a GOOD SYSTEM THAT IS VERY THOROUGH before it approves any pest control products for use in this country.
Doctor Ritter further commented that …
« There are lots of UNQUALIFIED people out there trying to undermine the efforts of the PMRA. »
UNQUALIFIED people especially include Non-Expert Anti-Pesticide Activists like LIZ FOX.
Fox is NO expert on pest control products.
Fox has ABSOLUTELY NO background, training, or experience concerning pest control products, making her opinions FLAWED, DISTORTED, VALUELESS, and WORTHLESS.
The problem with Fox reflects the overall larger problem with ALL Anti-Pesticide Activists.
There are NO Anti-Pesticide Activists who are qualified as scientists or researchers with credentials in the field of pest control products.
NONE !
Consequently, Anti-Pesticide Activists, like Fox, are THE LEAST QUALIFIED TO PROVIDE ANY ADVICE concerning pest control products.
Since Fox is SCIENTIFICALLY ILLITERATE, she merely CHERRY-PICKS documents RANDOMLY FOUND ON THE INTERNET on a subject that she knows nothing about, and recklessly converts her findings into an ARBITRARILY negative report regarding pest control products.
What does Fox have as reference sources ?
GOOGLE and WIKIPEDIA. Big Whoop ! … Fox has SQUAT !
There are LEADING AUTHORITIES that SUPPORT or VALIDATE the concept that pest control products are WELL-REGULATED and SCIENTIFICALLY-SAFE …
● American Chemical Society ● American Council for Science and Health ● American Cancer Society ● CropLife Canada ● Health Canada ● Institute of Public Affairs ● International Agency for Research on Cancer ● Ontario Pesticides Advisory Committee ● The Fraser Institute ● U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ● World Health Organization.
These AUTHORITIES are certainly MORE CREDIBLE than GOOGLE and WIKIPEDIA.
———————
No Amount of Pesticide Safe If Use Is Cosmetic [ Wrong ! ]
January 24th, 2012
Ghost-Writer using the name Cottam
The Daily News – Post Media News
Don Mills, Ontario
Article by Cottam Ghost-Writer ( link )
http://www.canada.com/amount+pesticide+safe+cosmetic/6041662/story.html
Send a Letter to the Editor ( e-mail )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
Response to Cottam Ghost-Writer by NORAHG ( links )
Response to Cottam Ghost-Writer by NORAHG ( text )
CHILDREN ARE NOT AT RISK
According to Anti-Pesticide Activist Cottam …
« The risk to children is being handled by the PMRA by arbitrarily multiplying the perceived risk to adult humans, which is pure guesswork, in my opinion. » [ ?!?! ]
Pest control products are NO THREAT TO CHILDREN.
Anti-Pesticide Activists like Cottam use this form of TERROR-TALK that is designed to alarm and enrage the public into PROHIBITING pest control products
Ostensibly, Cottam wants the NEEDLESS, SENSELESS, and MALICIOUS PROHIBITION of pest control products used in the Urban Landscape.
There is NO problem with children playing on a dried treated surface after a pest control application.
Pest control products are applied at VERY LOW DOSES, and DO NOT PRESENT A CONCERN TO CHILDREN … and even people.
After a pest control product DRIES ON THE LEAF, it is difficult, if not impossible, to dislodge residues off the leaf surface.
It is apparent that a NON-EXPERT like Cottam who uses TERROR-TALK about children has NO expertise, training, or background in matters concerning pest control products.
ASSESSMENTS PROTECT CHILDREN
Pest control products DO NOT HARM CHILDREN !
The ASSESSMENT of pest control products by Heath Canada takes into consideration sensitive groups, such as CHILDREN, as well as INFANTS and PREGNANT WOMEN.
CHILDREN’s physiology, behaviours, and habits WHILE PLAYING ON TREATED GRASS are CONSIDERED when determining the safety of pest control products.
EXTRA SAFETY FACTORS are applied by Health Canada to protect CHILDREN, as well as INFANTS and PREGNANT WOMEN.
Pest control products cause NO HARM TO CHILDREN.
Pest control products cause NO HARM, including chronic effects such as CANCER.
For more information about CHILDREN, go to the following link …
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/children-are-not-at-risk/
NO NEED FOR HEALTH CANADA LABORATORIES
Cottam expresses MOCK-DISMAY about the fact that Health Canada does NOT have its own laboratories ―
« Health Canada’s 350 toxicologists have NO LABS of their own and fully depend on data supplied by pesticide manufacturers for their pesticide evaluations. » [ ?!?! ]
Non-Expert Cottam is evidently UNFAMILIAR with the ASSESSMENT of pest control products.
In order to ensure the ACCURACY of ASSESSMENTS of pest control products, Health Canada DOES NOT NEED ITS OWN LABORATORIES, and neither does any other regulatory agency in the world.
GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE allows Health Canada to be IMPARTIAL and RIGOROUS.
The ACCURACY of ASSESSMENTS of pest control products is ENSURED since Health Canada follows a set of guidelines and principles developed by the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development ( OECD ).
The 30 OECD member countries include Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, Sweden, and Japan.
The ASSESSMENTS of ALL pest control products must be conducted under these guidelines which adhere to principles of the internationally-accredited GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE.
ALL ASSESSMENTS used for the APPROVAL of pest control products must be completed by laboratories sanctioned by GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE ( GLP ), and using ONLY GLP practices.
Instead, Health Canada follows the internationally-accredited GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE for ASSESSING THE SAFETY of pest control products.
Ultimately, the cost to manufacturers to get a pest control product ASSESSED FOR SAFETY and brought to market is about 250 MILLION DOLLARS.
Only those pest control products that pose NO UNACCEPTABLE RISK to health and environment become HEALTH-CANADA-APPROVED and FEDERALLY-LEGAL.
There is NO NEED for Health Canada laboratories.
WHERE ARE THE BODIES ?!?!
Cottam further ALLEGES that « data can be withheld by these pesticide manufacturers from Health Canada ». [ ?!?! ]
This IMPLIES that ASSESSMENTS are somehow being withheld by manufacturers from EVERY regulatory agency in the world.
This is LUDICROUS !
WHERE ARE THE BODIES ?!?!
Cottam is UNABLE TO PROVIDE BODIES, BODIES, BODIES.
Bodies of REAL evidence.
Cottam should make any evidence available for public review.
The fact is … Cottam is UNABLE TO PROVIDE BODIES, BODIES, BODIES.
SCIENTIFICALLY SAFE
Health Canada is NOT ALONE in its ASSESSMENT that pest control products are SCIENTIFICALLY SAFE.
Cottam CANNOT CONVENIENTLY IGNORE the expertise of ALL LEADING AUTHORITIES in matters concerning pest control products.
These LEADING AUTHORITIES are educational, regulatory, research, scientific, and trade agencies from around the world.
They have publicly stated that, or have validated the concept that, in one form or another, pest control products are SCIENTIFICALLY-SAFE.
These agencies are NOT unduly influenced by any stake-holder in those industries manufacturing and using pest control products.
The following educational, regulatory, research, scientific, and trade agencies have SUPPORTED or VALIDATED the concept that pest control products are SCIENTIFICALLY-SAFE ―
● American Chemical Society
● American Council for Science and Health
● American Cancer Society
● CropLife Canada
● Health Canada
● Institute of Public Affairs
● International Agency for Research on Cancer
● Ontario Pesticides Advisory Committee
● The Fraser Institute
● U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
● World Health Organization
AGRICULTURE IS THREATENED
According to Anti-Pesticide Activist Cottam …
« No pesticide BAN in AGRICULTURE is on the horizon. » [ ?!?! ]
This is FALSE !
For several years, CONSPIRACIES are being organized AGAINST the Agriculture Industry by Canadian Cancer Society, an Anti-Pesticide Organization.
Here is a 2008 statement from Canadian Cancer Society ―
« For years, the Canadian Cancer Society has argued in favour of BANS on the cosmetic use of pesticides around homes and gardens. But it has remained silent on the country’s biggest use of bug and weed killers ― ON FARMS. Now, the society is considering weighing in on whether THESE SPRAYS POSE A CANCER RISK TO FARMERS, other rural residents near them, and to the wider public from eating foods carrying pesticide residues. »
For more information about AGRICULTURE TARGETED BY ANTI-PESTICIDE ACTIVISTS, go to the following link …
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/agriculture-targeted-by-anti-pesticide-activists/
CONCLUSION
Overall, when pest control products are used properly, there are NO harmful irreversible effects to health and the environment !
There is NOT ONE KNOWN ILLNESS or DEATH from the proper use of pest control products used in the Urban Landscape.
P.S.
COTTAM is actually a designation for a group of Anti-Pesticide Ghost-Writers designed to DECEIVE THE PUBLIC ANONYMOUSLY.
This group DECEIVES THE PUBLIC about the COTTAM name, just as they DECEIVE THE PUBLIC about the IMAGINARY DANGER of pest control products.
Anti-Pesticide Activists have been using the COTTAM name as a SHIELD AGAINST IMMINENT LEGAL REPRISALS FOR FRAUD AND CONSPIRACY.
For more information about COTTAM, go to the following link …
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/cottam-ghost-writers/
———————
Questioning the Need for Pesticide Bans [ ?!?! ]
January 19th, 2012
Les Leyne
Times Colonist
Victoria, British Columbia
Article by Leyne ( link )
http://www.timescolonist.com/news/Questioning+need+pesticide+bans/6018747/story.html
Send a Letter to the Editor ( e-mail )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
bmckenzie@timescolonist.com
Response to Leyne by NORAHG ( links )
https://pesticidetruths.com/2012/01/22/pesticides-are-bad-british-columbia-ban-2012-01-19/
Response to Leyne by NORAHG ( text )
PESTICIDES ARE « BAD » [ ?!?! ]
According to Anti-Pesticide Activist Les Leyne …
« At first glance, it’s a no-brainer. Pesticides are bad. » [ ?!?! ]
Ostensibly, Leyne wants the Government of British Columbia to IMPLEMENT a NEEDLESS, SENSELESS, and MALICIOUS PROHIBITION of pest control products used in the Urban Landscape.
How did Leyne arrive at the conclusion that products used in Professional Lawn Care somehow are « bad » ?!?!
Was the his ASSESSMENT based upon his vast scientific knowledge of pest control products ?!?!
NO !
Did Leyne ASSESS these products after spending time and money carefully studying their effects on health and environment ?!?!
NO !
Are Anti-Pesticide Activists like Leyne COMPETENT to give ANY advice concerning pest control products ?!?!
NO !
In order to allow SOUND SCIENCE to be effectively practiced, it would be preferable that activists like Leyne leave the interpretation of scientific research about pest control products to those people who ARE competent to do it ― Health Canada.
Conventional pest control products are SCIENTIFICALLY SAFE since they have been scrutinized and approved by the HUNDREDS of expert scientists at Health Canada !
Overall, when they are used properly, there are NO harmful irreversible effects to health and the environment !
PUBLIC SUPPORT FOR PROHIBITION [ ?!?! ]
According to Anti-Pesticide Activist Les Leyne …
« The tide of public input is running strongly in favour of banning cosmetic pesticides in British Columbia. » [ ?!?! ]
This is FALSE.
Leyne is DECEIVING the public into believing the tide of public opinion is somehow strongly in favour of Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION in British Columbia.
According to a POLL conducted by Canadian Consumer Specialty Products Association ( CCSPA ) in 2011 …
● The VAST MAJORITY of residents are OPPOSED to the PROHIBITION of conventional pest control products
● The VAST MAJORITY of residents FAVOUR the continued use of pest control products around their homes and in public green spaces
● There is a MISPERCEPTION that most residents want the PROHIBITION of pest control products in the Urban Landscape
● 84 PER CENT of residents WANT INSECT CONTROL on their lawns if products are applied by a Professional Lawn Care company
● 70 PER CENT of residents WANT WEED CONTROL on their lawns if products are applied by a Professional Lawn Care company
● Only an INFINITELY SMALL number of residents say « no » to the use of pest control products
For more information about Canadian Consumer Specialty Products Association, please go to the following link …
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/the-wisdom-of-canadian-consumer-specialty-products-association/
THE CONSEQUENCES OF PROHIBITION
According to Anti-Pesticide Activist Les Leyne, the Premier of British Columbia has effectively promised Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION, regardless of what any committee recommends.
If ( or when ) British Columbia IMPOSES NEEDLESS, SENSELESS, and MALICIOUS PROHIBITION, there will be NO RECOURSE but LITIGATION against Anti-Pesticide Activists and Government Officials.
Anti-Pesticide Activists and Government Officials are advised that all names, statements, activities, and affiliations have been ARCHIVED for eventual CRIMINAL CHARGES.
The Government of British Columbia may wish to consider providing an EXCEPTION STATUS to ALL CERTIFIED APPLICATORS, including those in the Professional Lawn Care Industry.
EXCEPTION STATUSES have been adopted in jurisdictions like Kamloops and Salmon Arm, where Government Officials have left pest control products in the hands of professionally-trained applicators.
———————
Here's my wish list for a better Calgary [ ?!?! ]
January 5th, 2012
Paula Arab
Calgary Herald
Calgary, Alberta
Letter to the Editor by Arab ( link )
http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion/Here+wish+list+better+Calgary/5949101/story.html
Send a Letter to the Editor ( e-mails )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
Send a Letter to the Author ( e-mail )
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.
Response to Arab by NORAHG ( links )
Response to Forman by NORAHG ( text )
Anti-Pesticide Columnist Paula Arab has a « wish list for a better Calgary ».
Arab’s list includes the PROHIBITION of pest control products used in the Urban Landscape.
Non-Expert Arab ALLEGES that products used by the Professional Lawn Care Industry are « toxic lawn chemicals considered non-essential pesticides ».
How did Arab arrive at the conclusion that products used in Professional Lawn Care are somehow « toxic » ?!?!
Was her ASSESSMENT based upon her vast scientific knowledge of pest control products ?!?!
No !
Did Arab ASSESS these products after spending time and money carefully studying their effects on health and environment ?!?!
No !
Is Arab COMPETENT to give ANY advice concerning these issues ?!?!
No !
In fact, Arab is WRONG and CANNOT BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY.
Pest control products are SCIENTIFICALLY SAFE.
PEST CONTROL PRODUCTS ARE SCIENTIFICALLY-SAFE
The ASSESSMENT proving that pest control products are SCIENTIFICALLY-SAFE is a process that can take up to TEN YEARS and COST HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.
Only those pest control products that pose NO UNACCEPTABLE RISK to human health or the environment become HEALTH-CANADA-APPROVED and FEDERALLY-LEGAL.
Canada has one of the MOST STRINGENT REGULATORY APPROVAL SYSTEMS in the world.
What regulatory system did Paula Arab base HER assessments on ?!?!
Health Canada requires each new pest control product to go through about TWO-HUNDRED SEPARATE TESTS to examine health and environmental impacts as well as value.
This represents two-hundred MORE tests than Paula Arab EVER used to back up ANY of her statements AGAINST pest control products.
And the cost to manufacturers to get a pest control product from the lab to store shelves is about 250 MILLION DOLLARS.
This represents 250 million dollars MORE than what Paula Arab EVER paid to back up ANY of her Anti-Pesticide statements.
Consequently, Paula Arab CANNOT TAKEN SERIOUSLY.
It is NO SURPRISE that Calgary City Council is NOT LISTENING to Anti-Pesticide Activists like Arab.
Government Officials are no longer as easily coerced into agreeing with Anti-Pesticide Activists like Arab since they have been warned in advance !
Calgary City Council has seen what has been happening in Eastern Canada !
Calgary City Council is also aware that the Province of Alberta WILL NOT legislate Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION.
POSITION OF THE GOVERNMENT OF ALBERTA
On August 9th, 2011, the Government of Alberta stated that it STRONGLY SUPPORTS the use of SCIENCE-BASED EVIDENCE when assessing pest control products.
Moreover, the Government of Alberta WILL NOT CREATE RESTRICTIONS OR LAWS THAT CONFLICT WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, that is relied upon for health and safety assessments.
According the Government of Alberta, restricting access to products that are designed and approved to be used safely CONFLICTS with its assessment of the public’s need for access to all tools available for controlling a variety of pests.
The government has monitored Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITIONS over the past few years and the approaches taken by other jurisdictions, and has found THE BASIS FOR ACTION CONFUSING AND INCONSISTENT.
It has also monitored the sale and use of pest control products in the Major Urban Landscapes in Alberta, and has concluded that there is a CONTINUED NEED AND SUPPORT for such products, whether it is for weed, insect, or disease control.
Restricting access to products that are designed and approved to be used safely CONFLICTS WITH ALBERTA’S ASSESSMENT of the public’s need for access to all tools available for controlling a variety of pests.
ALBERTA ENVIRONMENT AND WATER is the agency of the Government of Alberta that is responsible for the provincial regulation of pest control products.
For more information about Alberta and its decision AGAINST Anti-Pesticide PROHIBITION, go to the following link …
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/province-of-alberta/
PROHIBITION IS NOT NECESSARY
PROHIBITION is NOT necessary because, overall, when pest control products are used properly, there are NO harmful irreversible effects to health and the environment !
In fact, pest control products used in the Urban Landscape are …
● Health-Canada-Approved
● Federally-Legal
● Safe For Children *
● Scientifically-Safe
● Practically-Non-Toxic
● Good for the Environment
* Except when stored improperly in the home.
Furthermore, pest control products used in the Urban Landscape …
● Cause No Harm
● Do Not Cause Cancer
● Do Not Run-Off Into Lakes and Streams
● Enhance the Urban Landscape
――――――――――――――――――――
Terror Will NEVER END
Unless You DO SOMETHING
… NOW !
Against the
SCREECHING MONKEYS
EXPRESS YOUR OUTRAGE
SEND LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN,
COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN
――――――――――――――――――――
NORAHG has archived information on The Pesticide Truths Web-Site …
The NORAHG Library of Web-Pages, Reports, and References
COMPLAINT CHANNELS Series
COMPLAINT CHANNELS – BUSINESS, FUND-RAISING, GOVERNMENT, & TAXATION AGENCIES ( Web-Page )
COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN
COMPLAINT CHANNELS – LETTERS TO THE EDITOR – MEDIA CONTACTS LIBRARY ( Web-Page )
COMPLAINT CHANNELS – HERE’S HOW TO SUE THE BASTERDS’ BRAINS OUT ! – LITIGATION AGAINST ANTI-PESTICIDE ACTIVISTS – 2012 01 28 ( Report )
The NORAHG Library of Web-Pages, Reports, and References
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Series
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR / LETTERS OF COMPLAINT – WE’RE NOT GONNA TAKE IT ANYMORE ( Web-Page )
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR – RESPONDING TO LUNATIC JIHADISTS & SCREECHING MONKEYS – RE-DIRECT LINKS ( Web-Page )
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR – RESPONDING TO LUNATIC JIHADISTS – WARREN BELL – GIDEON FORMAN – BARBARA KAMINSKY – CANADIAN CANCER SOCIETY – 2013 00 00 ( Web-Page )
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR – RESPONDING TO LUNATIC JIHADISTS – WARREN BELL – GIDEON FORMAN – BARBARA KAMINSKY – CANADIAN CANCER SOCIETY – 2012 00 00 ( Web-Page )
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR – RESPONDING TO LUNATIC JIHADISTS – WARREN BELL – GIDEON FORMAN – BARBARA KAMINSKY – CANADIAN CANCER SOCIETY – 2011 00 00 ( Web-Page )
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR – RESPONDING TO SCREECHING MONKEYS – 2012 00 00 ( Web-Page )
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR – RESPONDING TO SCREECHING MONKEYS – 2011 00 00 ( Web-Page )
The NORAHG Library of Web-Pages, Reports, and References
SPEAKING OUT
SPEAKING OUT AGAINST ANTI-PESTICIDE TERRORISM – HEROES ( Web-Page )
SPEAKING OUT – WHITE PAPER REPORT ON PESTICIDE BANS – THE MYTHS ABOUT BANNING PESTICIDES ( PART 2 ) – THE WISDOM OF REAL EXPERTS – HEROES SPEAKING OUT AGAINST ANTI-PESTICIDE TERRORISM – 2012 11 15 ( Reports )
WITH CAPS AND WITH REFERENCES
PESTICIDE TRUTHS REPORT
The NORAHG Library of Web-Pages, Reports, and References
STRIKING BACK Series
STRIKING BACK AGAINST ENVIRONMENTAL-TERRORISM ( Web-Page )
STRIKING BACK – FIGHTING PESTICIDE BANS IN COURT – STRIKING BACK AGAINST TERRORISM – 2012 05 25 ( Report )
The NORAHG Library of Web-Pages, Reports, and References
TERROR NEVER ENDS
TERROR NEVER ENDS ( Web-Page )
――――――――――――――――――――
2 thoughts on “LETTERS TO THE EDITOR – RESPONDING TO SCREECHING MONKEYS – 2012 00 00”