July 12, 2008

Ringsend Health Impact Big Lies?

Ringsend Health Impact Big Lies?

Even an expert using the required diplomatic language says work from DCC is "inadequate" and even "derisory".

Many people, but certainly not all, would conclude that DCC has apparently produced another Big Lie. This is a Big Lie with the potential to be used by DCC-DDDA's well-funded PR agency or by the Marketing Communication departments of foreign Waste-To-Toxins corporations to spread disinformation about your health or your early death. With the Big Lie established literally on a European Beachhead, the Big Lie can then be re-purposed worldwide including in China.

Below are Key Sentences from The human health impact of the proposed municipal waste incinerator at Ringsend: a critique of the health assessment in the EIS submitted with the planning application.

Dr. Anthony Staines,
Senior Lecturer in Epidemiology,
Dept. of Public Health Medicine,
University College Dublin,

The whole document is here:

Key Sentences
The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) contains several sections addressing health issues. The main discussion is in Chapter 13 'Impact on Human Beings'.
  • The process use to carry out this piece of work is unclear, and no specific justification or rationale is given for it.
  • In no case is there any serious consideration of the actual impacts of the estimated emissions on people in the local community or on human health.
  • It is at best careless, and more realistically reckless, to proceed with a major development without considering methods of minimising harm and maximising benefits to the localcommunity from the development.
  • Overall the human health assessment of the EIS seems very inadequate.
  • The section on the most important issue of 'Cumulative impacts and Interactions' is almost derisory – four pages in total, one table, one page of contents, one blank page and about one hundred words.

A final issue is the scientific evidence for health effects on populations adjacent to municipal incinerators. Prof. Schrenk, who is a most distinguished toxicologist ... [text omitted, Click here for full text] ...
  • [Prof. Schrenk]'s review contains some questionable interpretations of the existing literature, and shows a very common misunderstanding of the principles and limitations of epidemiology.

Galwaytent Footnote:
EU Toxicology standards setting seems to be dominated by the German Chemical Industry. BASF (fka IG Farben) apparently openly has contracts with 235 politicians.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Dáil Éireann - Volume 174 - 29 April, 1959


Questions. Oral Answers.

- Sandymount Dump.

Dr. Browne

25. Dr. Browne asked the Minister for Local Government whether he is aware that the continued indiscriminate dumping of rubbish at Sandymount is causing a serious nuisance and inconvenience to the local residents, and constitutes a serious danger to their health in so far as it is likely to become a breeding ground for rats, disease bearing flies, mosquitoes, and other pests; and if he will take steps to advise the health authority responsible that, if the dumping cannot be discontinued, it should be so controlled as to obviate the dangers to health which it at present constitutes.

Mr. Blaney: I have seen some newspaper references to this matter but I have received no complaints about it. I understand that the Dublin Corporation takes all practicable steps to ensure that the dumping involves no danger to health and that any temporary injury to amenity is kept within the narrowest possible limits.