–
Summary
PESTICIDES & CANCER
Pest Control Products Will Not Cause Cancer
–
People Are Killed By Real Carcinogens,
Such As Alcohol & Cigarettes, But Not Pesticides
Read the whole truth from an independent perspective …
SPEAKING-OUT AGAINST PESTICIDE-HATING FANATЖCISM ― Pesticides causing cancer is a MYTH. Denying that pest control products are devil products will win you few activist-friends. And, pest control products are NEVER allowed a free pass by these pesticide-hating fanatжcs. These fanatжcs operate in defiance of the indisputable and conclusive science-based research showing that, as reported through US Environmental Protection Agency’s and Health Canada’s confidential test data, NO harm will occur when pest control products are used according to label directions.
THE MYTH OF CANCER ― Contrary to what pesticide-hating fanatжcs LIE about, there are NO pest control products that are known or probable carcinogens. Pesticides causing cancer is a MYTH. Prohibiting these products will prevent virtually NO cancer-deaths. Pest control products are nowhere near a leading cause of cancer-deaths. There is NO chance that they will make you die of cancer. [ See later segments. ]
PESTICIDES DO NOT KILL PEOPLE ― Pest control products are scientifically-safe, will cause NO harm, and will NOT cause cancer. There is NOT ONE known cancer-death from the proper use of these products used in the urban landscape. Pesticides causing cancer is a MYTH. Pest control products DO NOT kill people, but prohibiting them has been FATAL, as seen in the province of Ontario. [ See later segment. ]
COMPARING PESTICIDES TO REAL CARCINOGENS LIKE ALCOHOL & CIGARETTES ― There are thousands of known cancer-deaths per year from known REAL carcinogens such as ― • ALCOHOL consumption • physical inactivity • excess body weight • CIGARETTES and second-hand smoke • solar ultra-violet ( UV ) radiation [ i.e. over-exposure to the sun ] • unhealthy diet • NOT pest control products. Pesticides causing cancer is a MYTH. The real big risk factors that are responsible for 12 per cent of global cancer incidence include ― • CIGARETTES [ i.e. tobacco ] • obesity • various pathogens • NOT pest control products. Pesticides causing cancer is a MYTH. Moreover, the key exposures that contribute the most to the burden of occupational cancer in Canada DO NOT include pest control products, according to Canadian Centre For Occupational Health And Safety ( CCOHS ) and Occupational Cancer Research Centre ( OCRC ). [ See later segments. ] Pesticides are nowhere near a leading cause of cancer-death.
AGENCIES ARE PROTECTING THE PUBLIC ― Our governments have chosen to stringently-test and heavily-regulate pest control products through their national regulatory agencies. US Environmental Protection Agency ( US EPA ) and Health Canada both protect the public by researching, assessing, and collaborating in the management of the health risks and safety hazards associated with pest control products. Both agencies employ hundreds and hundreds of doctorate-level experts and leading scientific experts on pest control products. US EPA and Health Canada both have the ESSENTIAL expertise on pest control products. They have shown that pesticides causing cancer is a MYTH.
PESTICIDES ARE SAFE ― Remember, pest control products are stringently-tested and heavily-regulated in order to ensure that they are scientifically-safe, will cause NO harm, and will NOT cause cancer. When used in the urban environment, the risk assessments of these products indicates that they are practically-non-toxic and will NOT cause cancer. Pesticides causing cancer is a MYTH.
CANCER IS INEVITABLE, BUT NOT BECAUSE OF PESTICIDES ― Nonetheless, given that cancer is the number 2 leading cause of death, there is a good chance that you are going to die of cancer no matter what you do. By contrast, pest control products are nowhere near a leading cause of cancer-death, and there is NO chance that they will make you die of cancer. Pesticides causing cancer is a MYTH. So chill-out and have a drink, and forget about prohibiting pest control products.
―――――――――――――――――――
–
–
―――――――――――――――――――
Nostalgia For The Anti-Alcohol Prohibition Era
January 15th, 2020
Dr Alex Berezow
American Council On Science And Health ( ACSH )
Selected And Adapted Excerpts
Reference –
Nostalgic For The Anti-Alcohol Prohibition Era
―――――――――――――――――――
Contrasts Between Alcohol & Pesticides
In a country where there is an interest group for everything, one of the BIGGEST PUBLIC-HEALTH THREATS [ i.e. ALCOHOL ] is largely allowed a free pass.
[ By contrast, PESTICIDES are NEVER allowed a free pass by pesticide-hating fanatжcs, despite causing NO HARM when used properly. ]
And there are deep historical and commercial reasons why.
―――――――――――――――――――
It is early [ January 15th, 2020 ], but The Atlantic magazine is already in the running for Worst Science Article Of The Year.
Using a combination of cherry-picked research and bizarre political advocacy, the magazine has published an article with the outrageous click-bait headline calling ALCOHOL « America’s Favorite Poison ».
It goes downhill from there, with one dubious, context-free claim after another.
Let’s go through them, one by one.
―――――――――――――――――――
Contrasts Between Alcohol & Pesticides
Today, warnings about the devil drink [ i.e. ALCOHOL ] will win you few friends.
[ By contrast, denying that PESTICIDES are devil products will win you few activist-friends. 🙂 PESTICIDES are nowhere near a leading cause of CANCER death, and there is NO chance that they will make you die of cancer. ]
―――――――――――――――――――
Contrasts Between Alcohol & Pesticides
√ True
The reason is because America is tired of scolds.
We have a culture in which « being offended » is a badge of honor.
Busy-bodies [ i.e. government officials ] ―
• police our language
• file frivolous lawsuits
• pass numerous laws meant to regulate private behavior
It is enough to drive somebody to start drinking. [ 🙂 ]
―――――――――――――――――――
Contrasts Between Alcohol & Pesticides
Ẋ False
Like donuts, ALCOHOL in and of itself IS NOT a health threat.
Consuming too much ALCOHOL ( or donuts ) IS a HEALTH THREAT.
And, the implication that Big Alcohol is the reason why Americans are NOT worried about ALCOHOL is a BIG STRETCH.
The Alcohol Industry, also known by anti-alcohol activists as Big Alcohol, is the industry that is involved with the manufacturing, the distribution, and the sale of alcoholic beverages.
Other Western cultures ( European and Australian come to mind ), have a very relaxed attitude toward ALCOHOL.
In Poland, a country I frequently visit, you can buy alcoholic drinks in coffee shops.
You cannot blame devious marketing by American Big Alcohol for THAT.
―――――――――――――――――――
As one major study recently put it ― « Our results show that the safest level of drinking [ of ALCOHOL ] is NONE ». ?!?!
[ See next segment. ]
―――――――――――――――――――
Contrasts Between Alcohol & Pesticides
Ѳ True But Misleading – 1 Of 2
Yes, a « major study » concluded THAT.
However, it was severely criticized by other members of the scientific community in letters to the editor, and its conclusion was NOT justified by its own data.
The data showed that there were NO SIGNIFICANT HEALTH RISKS from consuming one alcoholic beverage per day, yet the authors concluded otherwise.
In September 2019, I was invited to the 9th European Beer & Health Symposium in Brussels to debunk this paper.
―――――――――――――――――――
Contrasts Between Alcohol & Pesticides
ALCOHOL’s by-products wreak havoc on the cells, raising the risk of liver disease, heart failure, dementia, seven types of cancer, and fetal alcohol syndrome.
[ By contrast, PESTICIDES are scientifically-safe, will cause NO harm, and will NOT cause cancer. The risk assessment of these products indicates that they are PRACTICALLY-NON-TOXIC. Health Canada’s incident reports & re-entry intervals ensure pesticide safety. See next segment. ]
―――――――――――――――――――
Background Information
HEALTH CANADA PROTECTS THE PUBLIC
Incident Reports & Re-Entry Intervals
Ensure Pesticide Safety
Read the whole truth from an independent perspective …
Health Canada helps protect the Canadian public by researching, assessing and collaborating in the management of the health risks and safety hazards associated with the many consumer products that Canadians use every day. Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency ( PMRA ) regulates pest control products in Canada. PMRA requires thorough scientific reviews and safety assessments to ensure that pest control products meet strict health and environmental standards and are shown to have value. Pest control products are one of the most stringently regulated products in Canada. It employs over 350 doctorate-level experts and leading scientific experts on pest control products. Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency has the ESSENTIAL expertise on pest control products.
Health Canada has stated that it is confident that the pest control products that it approves for use in Canada can be used safely when label directions are followed. Incident Reports are monitored by Health Canada to identify any potential risks to health or the environment from the use of pest control products and to take corrective actions when necessary. The more serious individual Incident Reports may lead to an official evaluation and action.
Expert-scientists at US Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ) and Health Canada need to be convinced that NO HARM is going to result from the proper use of a product before it is approved. These expert-scientists are working to make sure that all pest control products made and sold CAN BE USED SAFELY. Hundreds of different scientific studies are evaluated to ensure that pest control products CAN BE USED SAFELY, and that human health and the environment WILL BE PROTECTED. Pest control products are NOT HARMING people or their families.
Re-Entry Intervals are necessary to ensure that any pest control product residues on the treated turfgrass surfaces DO NOT pose an unacceptable risk to human health. These intervals reflect the amount of time required for pest control product levels to dissipate to a level that is well below any point of concern. They are determined by Health Canada in order to protect people against potential harm from pest control products applied to turfgrasses. Typically, for ALL pest control products used for lawn care maintenance, the Health-Canada-approved labels state ― keep people off treated area until foliage is DRY.
Pest control products are nowhere near a leading cause of cancer death, and there is NO chance that they will make you die of cancer. There is NOT ONE KNOWN CANCER DEATH from the proper use of these products when used in the urban landscape. In comparison, there are THOUSANDS OF KNOWN DEATHS per year from KNOWN CANCER-CAUSING SUBSTANCES such as ― • alcohol consumption • physical inactivity • excess body weight • cigarettes & second-hand smoke • solar ultra-violet ( UV ) radiation [ i.e. over-exposure to the sun ] • unhealthy diet. [ See later segments. ] The REAL BIG RISK FACTORS that are responsible for 12 PER CENT OF GLOBAL CANCER INCIDENCE include ― • cigarettes [ i.e. tobacco ] • obesity • various pathogens • NOT pesticides. [ See later segments. ] Moreover, the key exposures that contribute the most to the burden of occupational cancer in Canada DO NOT INCLUDE PESTICIDES, according to Canadian Centre For Occupational Health & Safety ( CCOHS ) and Occupational Cancer Research Centre ( OCRC ). [ See later segments. ]
For every conventional pest control product, manufacturers spend 250 million dollars in order to satisfy Health Canada’s scientific Risk Assessments. Two-hundred separate Risk Assessments are performed by the 350 professional experts at Health Canada to ensure that these products are scientifically-safe, and will cause NO harm. Consequently, there is NOT ONE KNOWN Incident Report of harm from the proper use of conventional pest control products used in the urban landscape. Pest control products are scientifically-safe, and will NOT cause harm to people, animals, or the environment.
Explore the following links …
√ — Pesticide Incidents — LINK
https://pesticidetruths.com/2019/08/24/the-wisdom-of-health-canada-incident-reports-2019-08-24/
√ — Re-Entry Intervals For Applications On Turfgrasses — LINK
√ — Health Canada — Health-Related Video Gallery — LINK
Explore even more links …
√ — Products Evaluated As Acceptable For Continued Registration — LINK
√ — Products Removed Or Proposed For Removal — LINK
√ — Health-Canada-Approved Products — Audio Recording — LINK
https://pesticidetruths.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/dirtybit//LHansonPMRAottawaPesticideSafety.mp3
√ — Importing Unregistered Products — LINK
√ — Scientific Studies Using Dogs — LINK
√ — Management Actions On Product Safety — LINK
√ — Fertilizer-Pesticide Combinations — LINK
√ — Pesticide Incidents — Web-Page — LINK
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/incident-reports/
√ — Approved Product Labels — LINK
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/labels/
√ — Spray Drift In Residential Areas — LINK
https://pesticidetruths.com/2010/10/21/health-canada-faq-pesticide-spray-drift-in-residential-areas/
√ — The Wisdom Of REAL Experts Who Speak Out — LINK
―――――――――――――――――――
Contrasts Between Alcohol & Pesticides
Just this month, researchers reported that the number of ALCOHOL-related DEATHS in the United States more than doubled in two decades, going up to 73,000 in 2017.
As the journalist Stephanie Mencimer wrote in a 2018 Mother Jones article, ALCOHOL-related breast cancer KILLS more than twice as many American women as drunk drivers do.
[ By contrast, PESTICIDES DO NOT KILL people, but BANNING them has been FATAL. See next segment. ]
―――――――――――――――――――
Background Information
MAN DIES BECAUSE OF PROHIBITION
Pesticides Do Not Kill People, But
Banning Them Has Been Fatal
Read the whole truth from an independent perspective …
The government of Ontario has imposed its Cosmetic Pesticides Ban Act, which is considered as the most extreme BANNING ever. [ See links below. ]
This PROHIBITION was imposed IN DEFIANCE of the indisputable and conclusive science-based research showing that, as reported through Health Canada’s confidential test data, conventional pest control products are scientifically-safe and will cause NO harm.
Ontario’s Cosmetic Pesticides Ban Act was not necessary.
There is NOT ONE KNOWN CANCER DEATH from the proper use of pest control products used in the urban landscape.
Ontario’s Cosmetic Pesticides Ban Act was not necessary.
PESTICIDES are nowhere near a leading cause of CANCER death, and there is NO chance that they will make you die of cancer.
In comparison, there are THOUSANDS OF KNOWN DEATHS per year from KNOWN CANCER-CAUSING SUBSTANCES such as ― • ALCOHOL consumption • physical inactivity • excess body weight • CIGARETTES & second-hand smoke • solar ultra-violet ( UV ) radiation [ i.e. over-exposure to the sun ] • unhealthy diet. [ See later segments. ]
The REAL BIG RISK FACTORS that are responsible for 12 PER CENT OF GLOBAL CANCER INCIDENCE include ― • CIGARETTES [ i.e. tobacco ] • obesity • various pathogens • NOT pesticides. [ See later segments. ]
Moreover, the key exposures that contribute the most to the burden of occupational cancer in Canada DO NOT INCLUDE PESTICIDES, according to Canadian Centre For Occupational Health & Safety ( CCOHS ) and Occupational Cancer Research Centre ( OCRC ). [ See later segments. ]
Ontario’s Cosmetic Pesticides Ban Act was not necessary.
Moreover, the key exposures that contribute the most to the burden of occupational cancer in Canada DO NOT INCLUDE PESTICIDES, according to Canadian Centre For Occupational Health & Safety ( CCOHS ) and Occupational Cancer Research Centre ( OCRC ). [ See later segments. ]
Ontario’s Cosmetic Pesticides Ban Act was not necessary.
The Cosmetic Pesticides Ban Act has not only been HUGELY UNPOPULAR with Ontario home-owners, it has also proven to be FATAL.
An Ontario resident did not realize that hand-weeding a HIGHLY-TOXIC noxious weed on his property would contribute to his DEATH. [ See links below. ]
This Ontario resident was ultimately DOOMED by Ontario’s Cosmetic Pesticides Ban Act since the safest and most effective method of controlling HIGHLY-TOXIC noxious weeds was arbitrarily and needlessly prohibited by the province.
Skin contact with this HIGHLY-TOXIC noxious weed resulted in severe burns to his hands and arms, eventually forcing him to be hospitalized ― ultimately, he died.
Unfortunately, since the government IMPOSED its Cosmetic Pesticides Ban Act, THE DEATH WAS ONTARIO’S FAULT !
The hands of the prohibition merchants of death are soaked in blood.
Ontario’s Cosmetic Pesticides Ban Act was FATAL.
NO harm would have occurred if a conventional weed control product had been used according to label directions.
Conventional pest control products are scientifically-safe and will cause NO harm.
Explore the following links …
√ — Man Dies Because Of Prohibition In Ontario — LINKS
―――――――――――――――――――
Contrasts Between Alcohol & Pesticides
Ѳ True But Misleading – 2 Of 2
There are too many claims here to analyze each of them, so let’s just focus on one and show how it is MISLEADING.
It is absolutely true that ALCOHOL ― even in low to moderate amounts ― INCREASES THE RISKS OF SOME TYPES OF CANCER.
Aafje Sierksma, of the aforementioned 9th European Beer & Health Symposium in Brussels, told me ―
There is indeed a LINEAR RELATIONSHIP between ALCOHOL consumption and breast cancer.
So each drop of ALCOHOL INCREASES the risk.
However, it is also true that moderate ALCOHOL consumption is associated with LOWER MORTALITY.
This relationship is known as a J-shaped curve.
For reasons that are not understood, people who report consuming roughly one drink per day are LESS LIKELY TO DIE than those who do not drink.
This relationship holds even after excluding former drinkers ( who often do so for health reasons ).
So, while it very well could be true that any alcohol consumption INCREASES THE RISK OF DEATH FROM BREAST AND CERTAIN OTHER TYPES OF CANCER, it is also probably true that MODERATE DRINKING is associated with an overall LOWER RISK OF MORTALITY.
Therefore, logic dictates that the risks from OTHER POTENTIAL CAUSES OF DEATH are SLIGHTLY LOWERED by ALCOHOL.
Removing that context is intellectually dishonest.
―――――――――――――――――――
Contrasts Between Alcohol & Pesticides
Regardless of how much Americans love to drink, the country could be safer and healthier if we treated booze
[ i.e. ALCOHOL ] more like we treat CIGARETTES.
[ By contrast, pesticide-hating fanatжcs who compare CIGARETTES to PESTICIDES are pitifully ridiculous and laughably stupid. See next segment. ]
―――――――――――――――――――
Background Information
CIGARETTES & PESTICIDES
Comparing Cigarettes To Pesticides Is Pitifully
Ridiculous, As Well As Laughably Stupid
Read the whole truth from an independent perspective …
Pesticide-hating fanatжcs often use a COMPARISON TO CIGARETTES as a means to validate their conspiracy to PROHIBIT against pest control products.
The public must stop listening to these left-wing TERRЖR-talkers !
Comparing CIGARETTES to pesticides is PITIFULLY RIDICULOUS, as well as LAUGHABLY STUPID !
As we all know, GOVERNMENTS DON’T WANT PEOPLE TO SMOKE CIGARETTES, without doubt, a wise view.
And yet, while they have bombarded CIGARETTE packages with disturbing pictures of rotting teeth, oral cancer, mouth sores, and people breathing through tubes, THEY HAVE NOT BANNED CIGARETTES.
However, several jurisdictions have already RECKLESSLY & ARBITRARILY BANNED PESTICIDES.
Yet many of these BANNED PESTICIDES are APPROVED FOR USE BY HEALTH CANADA and the WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION.
They are also ALLOWED FOR USE IN AGRICULTURE.
Wherever these BANS occur, the government’s position is that it is UNSAFE TO WALK ON OR LIE ON GRASS that’s been sprayed with PESTICIDES, but safe to eat the FOOD it’s been treated with.
–
Unregulated CIGARETTES have NOTHING IN COMMON with regulated pest control products.
CIGARETTES have NOTHING IN COMMON with conventional pest control products.
Pesticide-hating fanatжcs use this NONSENSICAL COMPARISON purely as a means of ALARMING and ENRAGING 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 WILL CAUSE NO HARM.
There is NO FEDERAL REGULATION on tobacco products.
By comparison, there ARE national regulatory agencies that REGULATE pest control products ― Health Canada.
There is NO agency that regulates tobacco, except perhaps for restricting access to young people.
By comparison, there ARE national regulatory agencies that STRINGENTLY REGULATE pest control products ― US Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ) and Health Canada.
Moreover, CIGARETTES are ABOVE THE LAW because our governments have chosen to shield them from the regulatory process.
CIGARETTES are NOT BANNED by governments because, for all their health warnings, THEY PROVIDE A LUCRATIVE SOURCE OF TAX REVENUE.
Instead, governments force retailers to HIDE CIGARETTE PACKAGES FROM VIEW, even though everyone knows they are for sale in the store.
Otherwise, CIGARETTES ARE NOT REGULATED.
This is NOT the case with pest control products.
Our governments have chosen to HEAVILY REGULATE pest control products.
Fortunately, PESTICIDES are nowhere near a leading cause of CANCER death, and there is NO chance that they will make you die of cancer.
There is NOT ONE KNOWN CANCER DEATH from the proper use of pest control products used in the urban landscape.
In comparison, there are THOUSANDS OF KNOWN DEATHS per year from KNOWN CANCER-CAUSING SUBSTANCES such as ― • ALCOHOL consumption • physical inactivity • excess body weight • CIGARETTES & second-hand smoke • solar ultra-violet ( UV ) radiation [ i.e. over-exposure to the sun ] • unhealthy diet. [ See later segments. ]
The REAL BIG RISK FACTORS that are responsible for 12 PER CENT OF GLOBAL CANCER INCIDENCE include ― • CIGARETTES [ i.e. tobacco ] • obesity • various pathogens • NOT pesticides. [ See later segments. ]
Moreover, the key exposures that contribute the most to the burden of occupational cancer in Canada DO NOT INCLUDE PESTICIDES, according to Canadian Centre For Occupational Health & Safety ( CCOHS ) and Occupational Cancer Research Centre ( OCRC ). [ See later segments. ]
Pest control products are STRINGENTLY TESTED and REGULATED in order to ensure that they are SCIENTIFICALLY SAFE and WILL CAUSE NO HARM.
NO ONE should be listening to pesticide-hating fanatжcs and their left-wing TERRЖR-Talk.
Explore the following links …
√ — Cigarettes & Pest Control Products — Ontario — LINK
√ — Comparing Pesticides To Cigarettes — Canadian Cancer Society — LINK
√ — Demands For Municipal Prohibition Against Glyphosate In Chilliwack BC — LINK
√ — Terrжr-Talk — Weasel Words, Green Talk, & Phrases Used By Environmental-Terrжrists To Concoct Fear-Mongering, Fraudulent Lies, Misconceptions, Coercion, Threats, Deceptions, Terrжr, & Paranoid Conspiracies — LINK
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/terror-talk/
―――――――――――――――――――
Contrasts Between Alcohol & Pesticides
Pants On Fire
Oh good grief.
Moderate ALCOHOL consumption is a real thing.
But there is NO such thing as moderate smoking.
Lighting something on fire and inhaling the smoke directly into your lungs is bad for you, NO matter what.
Furthermore, the RISK OF ALCOHOL must be put into the CONTEXT of other risks.
Since everybody freaks out about cancer, let’s use that as an example.
The following graphic [ see card below ], from a report ( on page 26 ) by the American Association For Cancer Research, shows THE RELATIVE CONTRIBUTION TO CANCER INCIDENCE by various risk factors.
―――――――――――――――――――
―――――――――――――――――――
Contrasts Between Alcohol & Pesticides
Alcohol & Cancer
Yessiree, ALCOHOL contributes to cancer.
By contrast, pest control products are scientifically-safe, will cause NO harm, and will NOT cause cancer. Pesticides causing cancer is a MYTH !
But far bigger RISK FACTORS are responsible for 12 PER CENT OF GLOBAL CANCER INCIDENCE, including ―
• tobacco
• obesity
• various pathogens
[ • NOT pesticides ]
Moreover, the key exposures that contribute the most to the burden of occupational cancer in Canada DO NOT INCLUDE PESTICIDES, according to Canadian Centre For Occupational Health & Safety ( CCOHS ) and Occupational Cancer Research Centre ( OCRC ). [ See later segments. ]
Watching too much TV and eating too much ice cream and cookies ?
Yep, that causes cancer, too, more so than ALCOHOL.
Do you like to go outside ?
Sorry, the sun causes cancer.
Do you have an illness that requires medication ?
You got it. Cancer.
―――――――――――――――――――
Background Information
PESTICIDES CAUSE CANCER ?!?!
There Are No Pest Control Products That
Are Known Or Probable Carcinogens
Pest Control Products Will Not Cause Cancer
Read the whole truth from an independent perspective …
Contrary to what pesticide-hating fanatжcs LIE about, there are NO pest control products that are known or probable carcinogens.
In fact, pest control products are scientifically-safe, will cause NO harm, and will NOT cause cancer.
Scientific research shows that, as reported through US Environmental Protection Agency’s and Health Canada’s vast toxicology databases, NO harm will occur, when pest control products are applied properly.
The RISK ASSESSMENT of pest control products indicates that they are PRACTICALLY-NON-TOXIC.
There are NO pest control products that are known or probable carcinogens.
These products are nowhere near a leading cause of CANCER death, and there is NO chance that they will make you die of cancer.
Moreover, Canadian Cancer Society’s web-sites STATE REPEATEDLY that scientific research DOES NOT provide a conclusive link between pest control products and cancer. [ See link below. ]
There is NOT ONE KNOWN CANCER DEATH from the proper use of pest control products used in the urban landscape.
In comparison, there are THOUSANDS OF KNOWN DEATHS per year from KNOWN CANCER-CAUSING SUBSTANCES such as ― • ALCOHOL consumption • physical inactivity • excess body weight • CIGARETTES & second-hand smoke • solar ultra-violet ( UV ) radiation [ i.e. over-exposure to the sun ] • unhealthy diet. [ See later segments. ]
The REAL BIG RISK FACTORS that are responsible for 12 PER CENT OF GLOBAL CANCER INCIDENCE include ― • CIGARETTES [ i.e. tobacco ] • obesity • various pathogens • NOT pesticides. [ See later segments. ]
Moreover, the key exposures that contribute the most to the burden of occupational cancer in Canada DO NOT INCLUDE PESTICIDES, according to Canadian Centre For Occupational Health & Safety ( CCOHS ) and Occupational Cancer Research Centre ( OCRC ). [ See later segments. ]
Pest control products WILL NOT cause cancer.
Explore the following links …
√ — Pesticides Causing Cancer Is A Myth — LINK
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/cancer/
√ — Chemicals Are Evaluated For Carcinogenic Potential By Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ) — LINKS
√ — There Is No Direct Proof Pesticides Cause Cancer — Canadian Cancer Society — LINK
√ — Health-Related Video Gallery On The Safety Of PCPs — Health Canada — LINK
√ — Conflation Of Advocacy With Science — How Activism Distorts The Assessment Of Health Risks — International Agency For Research On Cancer ( IARC ) — Dr Geoffrey C Kabat — LINKS
√ — Pesticides Don’t Cause Cancer — Dr Leonard Ritter — LINK
√ — Cancer Rates Dropping In The U.S. — Dr Whelan & American Council On Science & Health ( ACSH ) — LINK
√ — Cancer Rates Declining — Dr Whelan & American Council On Science & Health ( ACSH ) — LINK
√ — Cancer Down, Chemophobia Up — Dr Whelan & American Council On Science & Health ( ACSH ) — LINK
―――――――――――――――――――
―――――――――――――――――――
Contrasts Between Alcohol & Pesticides
Completely BANNING ALCOHOL would only prevent about 3.5 per cent of cancer deaths.
[ By contrast, BANNING PESTICIDES will prevent virtually NO cancer deaths. ]
That, of course, means the other 96.5 per cent of fatal cancers are caused by things other than ALCOHOL [ which DOES NOT include PESTICIDES ].
―――――――――――――――――――
Contrasts Between Alcohol & Pesticides
Given that CANCER is the NUMBER 2 LEADING CAUSE OF DEATH in America, there is a good chance that you are going to die of cancer no matter what you do.
[ By contrast, PESTICIDES are nowhere near a leading cause of CANCER death, and there is NO chance that they will make you die of cancer. ]
So chill out and have a drink [ and forget about BANNING PESTICIDES ].
―――――――――――――――――――
Contrasts Between Alcohol & Pesticides
The Bottom Line
Given That Cancer Is The Number 2 Leading
Cause Of Death, There’s A Good Chance That You’re
Going To Die Of Cancer No Matter What You Do
Here’s ( literally ) the bottom line ―
You’re going to die.
I’m going to die.
Everybody you know and love is going to die, too.
The only outstanding questions are how and when.
Completely PROHIBITING ALCOHOL would only prevent about 3.5 PER CENT OF CANCER DEATHS, meaning that the other 96.5 per cent of fatal cancers are caused by things other than ALCOHOL.
In other words, given that CANCER IS THE NUMBER 2 LEADING CAUSE OF DEATH in America, there’s a good chance that you’re going to die of cancer NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO.
So chill out and have a drink.
By contrast, PESTICIDES are nowhere near a leading cause of CANCER death, and there is NO chance that they will make you die of cancer.
–
Pesticides causing cancer is a MYTH !
Moreover, the key exposures that contribute the most to the burden of occupational cancer in Canada DO NOT INCLUDE PESTICIDES, according to both Canadian Centre For Occupational Health & Safety ( CCOHS ) and Occupational Cancer Research Centre ( OCRC ).
Forget about BANNING PESTICIDES.
―――――――――――――――――――
―――――――――――――――――――
The Wisdom Of A REAL Expert
DR ALEX BEREZOW
Biography
Dr Berezow is a doctorate-level leading policy expert on the subject of regulatory affairs and pest control products at the American Council on Science and Health ( ACSH ).
ACSH is a non-profit organization, co-founded in 1978 by Dr Elizabeth M Whelan, that produces peer-reviewed reports on issues related to food, nutrition, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, life-style, the environment, and health.
( In June 2015, Mr Hank Campbell became the second President of the American Council on Science and Health, succeeding co-founder Dr Elizabeth M Whelan. )
Dr Berezow holds a PhD in Microbiology.
He joined the ACSH as Senior Fellow of Biomedical Science in May 2016.
Dr Berezow is among several highly-rated leading experts who have recognized expertise, training, and background in matters concerning pest control products, and who promote environmental realism and pesticide truths. http://wp.me/p1jq40-8DV
Dr Berezow is a prolific science writer whose work has appeared in multiple outlets, including The Wall Street Journal, CNN, BBC News, The Economist, and USA Today, where he serves as a member of the Board of Contributors.
In 2017, he published Little Black Book of Junk Science, and with Mr Hank Campbell in 2012, he co-authored Science Left Behind, which was an environmental policy best-seller.
Dr Berezow has spoken to a wide variety of audiences about science, from graduate school seminars and church congregations to national TV and radio programs.
Formerly, he was the founding editor of RealClearScience.
Dr Berezow speaks the truth ― and deserves congratulation.
Here are some examples of Dr Berezow’s wisdom …
√ — Berezow — Glyphosate — A Slow But Steady Vindication — LINK
√ — Berezow — Glyphosate-Gate — IARC’s Scientific Fraud — International Agency For Research On Cancer ( IARC ) — LINK
√ — Berezow — Glyphosate — Brazil Health Agency Says Glyphosate Does Not Cause Cancer — No Prohibition — LINK
√ — Berezow — Glyphosate — School Shootings Are Caused By Pesticides [ ?!?! ] — LINK
√ — Berezow — David Suzuki’s Academic Freak Show Conspiracy – Undeserved Honorary Degree Awarded Despite Hatefulness, Incompetency, Obstruction, Hypocrisy –– University Of Alberta — LINK
√ — American Council On Science & Health ( ACSH ) — Reports & Blogs — LINK
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/7556-2/
√ — American Council On Science & Health ( ACSH ) — References — LINK
https://pesticidetruths.com/toc/acsh-references/
√ — The Wisdom Of REAL Experts Who Speak Out Against The Conspiracy To Impose Reckless & Arbitrary Prohibition Against Conventional Pest Control Products — LINK
√ — The Era Of Trump — End Of EPA Reign Of Terrжr — LINK
―――――――――――――――――――
–
–
―――――――――――――――――――
Occupational Cancer
Take Action To Prevent Exposures
Common Work-Place Cancer Issues
January 2020
Canadian Centre For Occupational Health And Safety ( CCOHS )
Selected And Adapted Excerpts
Reference –
Occupational Cancer — Take Action to Prevent Exposures
―――――――――――――――――――
Common Work-Place Cancer Issues
Introduction
The Key Exposures That Contribute The Most To The Burden
Of Occupational Cancer In Canada Do Not Include Pesticides,
According To Occupational Cancer Research Centre ( OCRC )
Every day, millions of Canadians head out to work, may be not fully aware that in their job or place of work, they are being exposed to cancer-causing substances.
These CARCINOGENS can be ―
• viruses
• chemicals
• naturally occurring minerals
• solar radiation
[ • NOT pesticides ]
Moreover, the key exposures that contribute the most to the burden of occupational cancer in Canada DO NOT INCLUDE PESTICIDES, according to both Canadian Centre For Occupational Health & Safety ( CCOHS ) and Occupational Cancer Research Centre ( OCRC ). Pesticides causing cancer is a MYTH !
Recent statistics from the World Health Organization [ WHO ] show that CANCER KILLS an estimated 9.6 million people globally each year.
Approximately 3 to 6 per cent of these cancers are caused by EXPOSURES TO CARCINOGENS IN THE WORK-PLACE, according to research cited by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health ( NIOSH ).
These work-related cancers may be preventable if exposures to known or suspected CARCINOGENS are reduced or eliminated.
There are some occupations where cancer has been linked with exposure to specific substances.
Common occupational cancers include ―
• lung cancer ( exposure to arsenic, asbestos, benzo[a]pyrene, & several other chemicals )
• mesothelioma ( exposure to asbestos )
• bladder cancer ( exposure to aromatic amines & other chemicals )
For more examples, please see the CCOHS fact sheet on cancer sites associated with occupational exposures.
Common Work-Place Cancer Issues
CAREX Canada
CAREX Canada ( CARcinogen EXposure ) is a multi-institution team of researchers and specialists with expertise in epidemiology, risk assessment, toxicology, geographic information systems, and knowledge mobilization.
The purpose of CAREX Canada is to provide a body of knowledge about Canadians’ exposures to known and suspected CARCINOGENS, in order to support organizations in prioritizing exposures and in developing targeted exposure reduction policies and programs.
CAREX Canada is funded by the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer, and hosted at Simon Fraser University [ a nest of left-wing pesticide-hating fanatжcs ].
Common Work-Place Cancer Issues
Asbestos
Historically used in construction materials because of its heat resistant properties, tensile strength and insulating characteristics, Asbestos is a group of naturally-occurring fibrous minerals.
Asbestos has been PROHIBITED in Canada since 2018, but may still be encountered during remediation projects.
In Canada, there are approximately 1,900 cases of lung cancer and 430 cases of mesothelioma from work-place exposure diagnosed each year.
Because mesothelioma symptoms typically appear 20 to 50 years after exposure to Asbestos, there are still new cases being diagnosed every year.
CAREX Canada has identified that most Asbestos-related cancers occur among workers in the manufacturing and construction sectors.
Safely removing all existing Asbestos from buildings and work-places before the Asbestos deteriorates ( becomes airborne ) is the most common way to reduce exposure.
Common Work-Place Cancer Issues
Diesel Engine Exhaust
According to CAREX Canada, approximately 900,000 Canadians are exposed to Diesel Engine Exhaust at work.
Burning diesel fuel in engines produces Diesel Engine Exhaust, a complex mixture of gases and particulates.
This mixture can contain known and suspected CARCINOGENS, such as benzene, hydrocarbons, and metals.
Inhalation is the most common route of exposure and each year in Canada there are 560 lung cancers and 200 suspected bladder cancers associated with work-place Diesel Engine Exhaust exposure.
Sectors most affected are mining, oil and gas extraction, transportation and warehousing.
Strategies for reducing exposure include replacing old diesel engines with low-emission models, using diesel fuel alternatives, performing regular engine maintenance, implementing exhaust treatment systems, and using exhaust extraction systems in indoor work environments.
Common Work-Place Cancer Issues
Night Shift-Work
Night Shift-Work is work scheduled consistently outside of the standard daytime work hours.
Generally, when we are awake between the hours of 12 am and 5 am, Night Shift-Work disrupts circadian rhythms, or the internal biological « clock » that generates the sleep-wake cycle in humans.
As a result, it suppresses melatonin production, and disrupts sleep patterns and food digestion.
The International Agency For Research On Cancer [ IARC ] has classified Night Shift-Work as a probable CARCINOGENS.
Approximately 844,000 women perform regular night or rotating Shift-Work in Canada, based on 2006 labour data.
Each year in Canada, there are up to 1,200 new cases of suspected female breast cancers due to Shift-Work.
CAREX Canada reports that the health-care and social assistance sector accounts for 43 per cent of new cases, and accommodation and food services 18 per cent.
Completing work during standard, daylight hours is the best way to limit circadian rhythm disruption, however eliminating nights is NOT a practical option.
Night work is necessary to maintain essential services such as health-care and law enforcement.
Shift changes should be made in such a way that the worker can adapt easily to them.
« Rotating forward » ( morning – afternoon – night ) has been proven to be easier to adapt to than rotating backwards or having irregular shift changes.
Common Work-Place Cancer Issues
Long Latency Period
The Long Latency Period of cancer and the involvement of many factors in its development make it challenging to track and study occupational cancer.
The time between the initial exposure to a CARCINOGEN in the work-place and cancer diagnosis can be difficult to define.
For example, mesothelioma rarely appears less than 10 years from the time of the first exposure and it may only appear after 40 years.
Cancer risk is highest when you breathe in CARCINOGENS or absorb them through your skin.
The level of risk depends on how often and how long your body is exposed to the CARCINOGEN, the strength of the CARCINOGEN, whether you are exposed to other risk factors, and how prone you are to certain types of cancer.
Common Work-Place Cancer Issues
Occupational Cancer Is Preventable
The presence of a chemical agent or situation in the work environment DOES NOT automatically mean that workers are exposed to it.
There is NO risk of cancer unless an agent is incorporated into the body.
Eliminating the hazard is the most effective way to prevent exposure.
This control is followed by substituting products with less hazardous materials.
Other methods of controlling worker exposure include: engineering controls ( isolation; enclosure; local exhaust ventilation and process or equipment modification ); administrative controls ( good housekeeping, work practices, and hygiene practices ); and as a last resort, personal protective equipment.
Employee training and education is an essential component of hazard control programs.
Workers need to be knowledgeable about control measures as well as the adverse effects associated with exposures at their work-place.
Resources –
The Human & Economic Burden Of Occupational Cancer In Canada — OCRC
Occupational Cancer — National Institute For Occupational Safety & Health ( NIOSH )
Occupational Cancer Fact Sheet — CCOHS
Cancer & The Workplace — An Overview For Workers & Employers — Alberta Cancer Foundation
Cancer — World Health Organization ( WHO )
Cancer Statistics At A Glance — Canadian Cancer Society
Controlling Occupational Exposure To Carcinogens — OCRC
Prevent Occupational Disease — OHCOW
No Time to Lose — Institution Of Occupational Safety & Health ( IOSH )
Number Of Prevalent Cases & Prevalence Of Primary Cancer — Statistics Canada
―――――――――――――――――――
–
–
―――――――――――――――――――
Controlling Occupational Exposure To Carcinogens
January 2020
Occupational Cancer Research Centre ( OCRC )
Selected And Adapted Excerpts
Reference –
Controlling Occupational Exposure To Carcinogens
―――――――――――――――――――
Common Work-Place Cancer Issues
Introduction
The Key Exposures That Contribute The Most To The Burden Of Occupational Cancer In Canada Do Not Include Pesticides, According To Canadian Centre For Occupational Cancer Research Centre ( OCRC )
Controlling occupational exposure to CARCINOGENS is an important step towards reducing the burden of occupational cancer.
The Hierarchy Of Controls is often used as a guide for implementing exposure control strategies.
It ranks control strategies from most effective ( elimination or substitution ) to least effective ( personal protective equipment ).
An effective control program uses multiple controls from across the Hierarchy, and often includes monitoring to evaluate the effectiveness of the control program.
The sections below lay out some of the control strategies available for key exposures that contribute the most to the burden of occupational cancer in Canada ―
• asbestos
• diesel engine exhaust
• polycyclic aromatic hydro-carbons
• radon
• second-hand smoke
• shift-work
• silica
• solar UV radiation
• welding fumes
[ • NOT pesticides ]
Moreover, the key exposures that contribute the most to the burden of occupational cancer in Canada DO NOT INCLUDE PESTICIDES, according to both Canadian Centre For Occupational Health & Safety ( CCOHS ) and Occupational Cancer Research Centre ( OCRC ). Pesticides causing cancer is a MYTH !
Controlling Occupational Exposure To Carcinogens
Asbestos
The Canadian government PROHIBITED Asbestos in 2018.
These changes at the federal level include prohibiting the import, sale, and use of Asbestos and Asbestos-containing products ( with some exclusions ).
However, the PROHIBITION DOES NOT address the issue of exposure to Asbestos in existing materials, such as during the demolition, repair, or remediation of older buildings.
Provincial regulations set out the proper procedures to control exposure during work with Asbestos and Asbestos-containing materials, but the possibility of exposure to workers and the public will continue to exist as long as Asbestos is still present in older products and buildings.
There are a number of measures that can be adopted by work-places to reduce occupational exposure to Asbestos.
For example, Asbestos-containing materials in buildings can be safely removed ( following strictly regulated procedures ) where the likelihood of exposure to workers is high.
Handling or remediating Asbestos is highly regulated and controlled.
Only trained workers with appropriate personal protective equipment are allowed to perform these tasks.
Engineering and administrative controls can be implemented for people who must work near or with Asbestos.
Engineering controls include using a vacuum equipped with a high-efficiency particulate air ( i.e. HEPA ) filter and brush attachment, and using wet processes.
Administrative controls include prohibiting eating, drinking or smoking in areas where Asbestos is present, and providing showers, lockers, change rooms and laundering facilities at the work-site, which can also help reduce para-occupational ( take-home ) exposures among family members of Asbestos-exposed workers.
It is important to recognize that these exposure reduction strategies DO NOT completely eliminate occupational Asbestos exposure, a goal that can only be achieved over time through a comprehensive Asbestos PROHIBITION and eventual removal from all building components in the long term.
Controlling Occupational Exposure To Carcinogens
Diesel Engine Exhaust
Diesel Engine Exhaust is poorly regulated in Canada.
While some jurisdictions have occupational exposure limits for Diesel Engine Exhaust in the mining industry, these limits are out of date and DO NOT reflect the current evidence for Diesel Engine Exhaust and cancer.
As well, there are currently NO limits anywhere in Canada that apply outside of mining, although in 2018 a proposal was made in Ontario for a limit of 160 µg/m3 ( measured as total carbon ) for all industries.
Diesel Engine Exhaust is a complex mixture and elemental carbon has been identified as an appropriate surrogate for measuring exposure.
OCRC recommends adopting occupational exposure limits of 20 µg/m3 elemental carbon for the mining industry and 5 µg/m3 elemental carbon for other work-places, based on evidence of health effects at low levels and feasibility considerations.
Diesel emissions can be reduced by substitution with diesel fuel alternatives, such as natural gas, electricity and propane; replacing old engines with low-emission diesel engines or rebuilding old engines and performing regular engine maintenance; or using cleaner-burning diesel fuel.
Engineering controls that can be implemented include installing pipe exhaust extenders and using enclosed pressurized cabs equipped with HEPA filters to better isolate the worker from the exhaust; implementing exhaust treatment systems ( e.g., tail-pipe filters, oxidation catalytic converters ); and implementing technology to automatically turn off idling vehicles.
Indoor areas should be adequately ventilated and should use exhaust extraction devices to remove Diesel Engine Exhaust from the indoor work environment where possible ( e.g., tail pipe exhaust extraction systems used in fire halls ).
Finally, administrative controls include reducing engine idling, maintaining engines and vehicle bodies regularly; running engines outdoors; and scheduling work to minimize the number of workers near a diesel engine in operation.
Preventing and controlling occupational exposure to Diesel Engine Exhaust can also contribute to reducing environmental emissions that affect the general population.
Controlling Occupational Exposure To Carcinogens
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons
( PAHs )
There are a number of engineering and administrative measures that can be used to control occupational exposure to PAHs.
Engineering controls include implementing local exhaust ventilation systems, implementing systems to capture and remove PAHs from the air ( e.g. fume scrubbing systems ), and ensuring that workers are enclosed and separated from contaminated air ( e.g. via cabs on vehicles, or enclosed rooms that are pressurized and supplied with filtered air ) .
Examples of administrative controls are maintaining ventilation and other control systems, employing wet cleaning methods where appropriate, promoting good work-place hygiene practices, limiting exposure duration by adjusting workers’ schedules and limiting overtime hours.
Controlling Occupational Exposure To Carcinogens
Radon
Radon levels vary considerably based on a number of factors ( e.g., geographical location, above or below ground, building age, foundation, ventilation ).
For these reasons, it is DIFFICULT to predict whether Radon is present in the work-place.
As a result, reducing radon begins with monitoring occupational Radon levels as part of a work-place Radon surveillance program.
Personal monitors can be used when work-place levels are high.
Long-term measurements should be conducted to account for seasonal variation in Radon concentration.
The Federal Provincial Territorial Radiation Protection Committee has developed Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials ( NORM ) Guidelines.
These guidelines are applicable to workers engaging in NORM activities ( e.g., mining, water treatment facilities, tunneling and underground work ), as well as any work-place where workers are incidentally exposed ( i.e., as a result of the work-place being indoors ) .
NORM emphasizes reducing radon levels to less than 200 Bq/m3 in occupied areas.
However, the World Health Organization [ WHO ] recommends lowering levels in indoor residential spaces to less than an annual average concentration of 100 Bq/m3 based on evidence of elevated lung cancer risks at very low levels of exposure.
Some Canadian workers, such as those working in uranium mines and mills, are monitored for their annual Radon exposure through the National Dose Registry.
If Radon levels are high, possible steps include installing radon gas mitigation systems ( e.g., active soil depressurization ), installing or upgrading ventilation systems or changing ventilation patterns, and developing an exposure reduction program.
In cases where Radon is derived from NORM, such as materials processing, raw materials that are low in NORM can be selected.
Controlling Occupational Exposure To Carcinogens
Second-Hand Smoke ( SHS )
Significant progress has been made over past decades to reduce exposure to SHS in work-places through legislation, increased awareness of the health effects associated with SHS exposure, and population-wide changes in smoking behavior.
Smoking PROHIBITIONS have been evaluated as the most effective measure for reducing SHS exposure.
Current occupational exposure to SHS is substantially LESS than in the past, and in the future, the burden of associated cancers is expected to be lower than the present cancer burden.
However, according to the 2012 Canadian Tobacco Use Monitoring Survey, approximately 28 per cent of workers in Ontario report occupational exposure to SHS, and some report a lack of smoke-free policies in their work-places, despite current legislation ( e.g., sales and service workers, trades and transportation workers).
Further efforts must be taken to strengthen enforcement of smoke-free work-place legislation, especially in outdoor work-places, and to promote smoking cessation programs to workers in all sectors.
Controlling Occupational Exposure To Carcinogens
Shift-Work
Shift-Work that includes night work ( either rotating or night Shift-Work ) is associated with harmful health effects believed to be related to disruption of the body’s natural circadian rhythm ( the day-night cycle ).
Completing work during standard, daylight hours is the best way to limit circadian disruption.
However, Night Shift-Work is necessary to maintain essential services, as well as continuous processes and services in varies industries.
Eliminating it is often NOT practical.
Work-places that must use Shift-Work can take initiative by promoting strategies to minimize the health effects, such as improved shift scheduling.
The strongest evidence is for rotating schedules that move rapidly from morning-afternoon-evening shifts, which has been shown to improve sleep quality and quantity.
Flexible work schedules that allow workers to have input on their shift schedules resulted in workers reporting improved general health and reduced stress.
There is less evidence for other types of interventions, such as the use of controlled light exposure and behavioral strategies.
Medications ( other than melatonin ) to improve sleep or wakefulness have been associated with adverse health effects in several studies.
Controlling Occupational Exposure To Carcinogens
Silica
Safer substitutes for Silica-containing products should be considered to provide the highest level of protection against exposure.
For example, Silica in sand-blasting operations may be replaced by garnet, alumina, cereal husks and/or high pressure water.
Likewise, sandstone grinding wheels can be replaced with aluminum oxide wheels, and Silica bricks in furnaces can be replaced with magnesite or aluminum oxide bricks.
Where materials cannot be eliminated, processes that generate respirable crystalline Silica could be eliminated.
For example, ensuring a smooth surface while pouring concrete eliminates the need to grind rough concrete.
Where substitutes or process changes are NOT available, engineering controls provide the next best level of protection.
These controls include using local exhaust ventilation with dust collectors and filters, process enclosure to prevent the release of dusts into the work-place, mechanized processes, and placing workers in enclosed cabs with filtration systems.
Furthermore, workers should be trained to select processes and tools that are least likely to generate respirable dusts.
Administrative controls that can be employed include maintaining good housekeeping practices ( e.g., using vacuums and wet sweeping methods instead of dry sweeping or cleaning with compressed air ), maintaining dust control equipment, removing excess dust from clothing and skin, and removing work clothes at the work site.
Controlling Occupational Exposure To Carcinogens
Solar Ultra-Violet ( UV ) Radiation
All work-places with workers that work outdoors for part or all of the day should develop a comprehensive, multi-component sun safety program.
Sun safety programs include ―
• a risk assessment to identify workers at high risk of exposure and scenarios where high exposure may occur
• sun protection control measures
• sun protection policies and training
Sun Safety at Work Canada provides resources on how work-places can develop and implement sun safety programs.
The best way to protect outdoor workers from solar UV radiation is to provide shade.
If no natural sources of shade are available, shade structures can be built.
The design, placement and use of the shade structure should maximize protection.
The UV protection factor rating for shade materials should be at least 40 for maximum protection.
Other engineering controls include modifying reflective surfaces and tinting windows on vehicles.
Scheduling shifts and tasks to minimize time spent in the sun during peak UV hours ( i.e. between 11:00 am and 3:00 pm ) can have a significant impact on individual workers’ daily exposure.
Controlling Occupational Exposure To Carcinogens
Welding Fumes
Most jurisdictions in Canada DO NOT have an occupational exposure limit for welding fumes and, instead, regulate the mixture as its constituent metals and particulates.
Where a limit for welding fumes does exist, the fumes are treated as a nuisance dust, which DOES NOT adequately reflect the hazard.
As welding fumes are now a confirmed lung CARCINOGENS, Occupational Cancer Research Centre ( OCRC ) recommends reviewing and updating these regulations to include an appropriate limit for welding fumes in all Canadian jurisdictions.
The composition and amount of fume formed during welding depends on the welded material and the welding process, including the shielding gas, electrode size and type, manual or mechanized welding, current/voltage and arc time.
Choosing lower-fume welding techniques and welding rods with less hazardous fume composition can help reduce exposure.
Ventilation and isolation of workers are common engineering controls used to reduce worker exposure to welding fumes.
Closed systems with properly maintained negative pressure relative to the surroundings may be used to isolate workers.
Local exhaust ventilation ( e.g., fume hoods, fume extractor guns, and vacuum nozzles ) is usually more effective than general ventilation, although a combination of local exhaust and general ventilation is ideal.
Other methods of reducing exposure include removing paint, coatings or residues from the weld area prior to welding, providing adjustable welding tables or positioning the body to avoid breathing the fumes, and scheduling operations that lead to the highest levels of exposure during times when the fewest employees are working.
―――――――――――――――――――
–
–
–
–
–
–
―――――――――――――――――――
―――――――――――――――――――
About NORAHG
We Speak The Whole Truth About Pesticides
& Cancer From An Independent Perspective
We are the National Organization Responding Against HUJE that conspire to destroy the Green space & other industries ( NORAHG ). As a non-profit & independent organization, we are environmentalists who are dedicated to reporting about truth-challenged pesticide-hating fanatжcs ( HUJE ) who conspire to destroy businesses that are dependent on the use of safe & effective conventional pest control products. NORAHG also reports on the work of several highly-rated leading experts who have recognized expertise, training, & background in matters concerning pest control products, and who promote environmental realism & pesticide truths. https://wp.me/p1jq40-8DV NORAHG provides accurate information about pest control products, their use, & their regulation. NORAHG shares news releases, fact sheets, and other valuable resources highlighting the benefits of these products.
Not surprisingly, enviro-fanatжcs have demonstrated that they are incapable of processing overwhelming scientific evidence. Should we trust these fanatжcs, who conveniently ignore scientific evidence, and attempt to impose their politicized-doctrines & twisted life-style choices against our society ?!?!
NORAHG was the brain-child of Mr William H Gathercole & his colleagues in 1991. Mr Gathercole is now retired, although his name continues to appear as founder. NORAHG dares to defy the pesticide-hating fanatжcs by exploring the whole truth from an independent perspective on The Pesticide Truths Web-Site … https://pesticidetruths.com/ If you wish to receive free reports on issues that concern you, please contact us at … force.of.de.nature@gmail.com WILLIAM H GATHERCOLE AND NORAH G
―――――――――――――――――――
―――――――――――――――――――
