BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Peter Borst <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 16 Oct 2002 11:12:57 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (27 lines)
Harry writes:
Peter, I think you are making a mistake when you say that we trust
scientists.  Just because they have the skill to detect minute traces of
 things is not to be confused with trust.  Scientist are in a group of
people with high expectations and are therefore prone to being biased or
even corrupt.


Since you address me personally, I will reply. I don't know who you refer to
when you say "we". I trust the EPA and the FDA to do a decent job. Not
perfect, mind you, but we are a lot better off with them than we would be
without them. I have been to Mexico and South America so I have seen
societies that lack basic regulations for protecting the safety of citizens
against greedy companies.

As for scientists having high expectations -- what are you saying here? That
you have low expectations? Or that people with high expectations are biased?
Whatever. They're just people. Scientists as a group are no better nor worse
than any other group, in my opinion. People have various motives. The
principle mandate of organizations like EPA and FDA is to protect, not
promote chemicals.

Last month I was accused of being a Luddite; this month I am a dupe of the
EPA.

Peter Borst

ATOM RSS1 RSS2