Sender: |
|
Date: |
Sat, 19 Jul 2008 08:53:45 -0400 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed |
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Brian Fredericksen wrote:
> the movement to ban cosmetic chem use on lawns started in Canada in Quebec and then spread to
> Ontario this spring. many eastern US cities were the early adapters.
Not banned yet in Ontario. It is proposed legislation. Plus, it is not
a blanket ban, but selective in which chemicals are allowed and which
are not. It also allows the "banned" ones to still be used in selected
applications. Certainly is not a "ban cosmetic chemicals" since they
do not ban them all, and for those they do they regulate their use.
The important fact is they do so selectively and with scientific
backing as to why certain chemicals are "banned", which was the whole
issue with the original post, that science be damned, do it anyway.
Truth is, there is not much new here. When pesticides show a problem,
they are restricted or removed from use. But the reason is scientific.
As far as women using plant derivatives for cosmetics since they are
found in nature, orangutans are found in nature and are as unnatural
to apply to skin as plants.
Bill Truesdell (Will someone get this monkey off my back!)
Bath, Maine
****************************************************
* General Information About BEE-L is available at: *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm *
****************************************************
|
|
|