winterjc
|
Wasted
Jan 25, 2002, 10:13
|
I was reading today about the study published in the Lancet concluding that there is a 40% higher chance of babies being born with chromosone abnormalities which cause permanent disability, if mum lives within 3000metres of a landfill site. There was an earlier, similar study that concluded that babies were 33% more likely to be born with non-chromosone problems like heart defects, spinabifida, gastro-intestinal problems......and the list goes on.
I know I personally can do better on the recycling front and we can all annoy our loc. auths., MPs/MSPs, MEPs, and of course, the big supermarkets. I just looked in my cupboard and my bin and most of the crap in there is unnessesary packaging.
My next door neighbour worked in chemical disposal and developed a lump in his balls. His employer of course being one step ahead is fully medically insured and promptly whipped him into private hospital the same day. They are of course, insured 'cause they KNOW and they've been there before.
Dangerous industrial practices go on quietly. Disposal of the crap that's left goes on quietly. And the permanent damage it does goes on - and goes on quietly.
Make a noise!
|
cancer boy
|
Re: Wasted
Jan 25, 2002, 10:32
|
The only thing I would add to that is that I think the study lumped disposal of domestic and industrial waste in landfills together. I think more research would be beneficial to work out whether it's any type of landfill or just the ones with the really toxic crap so people have a better idea what risk they are under.
As an aside, when I was a youngster I had a summer job with a company that made Titianium Dioxide (the white layer under the coloured coating in M & M s among other things). One day I was walking my usual five miles from Stockton high street down to the plant, and I'd nearly arrived when suddenly all the sirens on the neighbouring ICI plants went off. The gates on all the plants immediately closed automatically leaving me stuck outside breathing in what later turned out to be some carcinogenic chemical that had leaked from ICI. D'oh! That'll teach me not to have a car eh!
|
spirit
|
Re: Wasted
Jan 25, 2002, 10:43
|
My mum used to remove excess packaging at point of sale and leave it at the till - this doesn't resolve the problem as of course the shops would just chuck it in the bin rather than recycle it - but (once I was old enough not to be embarrassed) I thought it was a fair way of making the point.
Our council have finally provided regular newspaper recycling but anything else - bottles, shoes etc you have to do yourself - which I don't object to but I'm sure more people would do it if they didn't have to make such an effort.
xx
|
FourWinds
|
Re: Wasted
Jan 25, 2002, 11:11
|
Quite sometime ago I raised this issue. I even suggested organising a 'day' for protests where we could try and get everyone to return all the excess packaging either to the manufacturers or the super market. Just dump it in the foyer/reception!
As I mentioned back then in Germany the supermarket IS OBLIGED to take back all packaging and similarly the manufacturers are OBLIGED to take it back from the supermarkets. Most bottles still carry a deposit there too.
|
AgentOrange
|
Re: Wasted
Jan 25, 2002, 11:19
|
Most bottles everywhere still carry a deposit. The drinks companies prefer to re-use bottles. Its only because British supermarkets decided that they dont give the right image. Personally Id like to see all bottles with a deposit to reduce the amount of glass I cycle through daily.
The city I live in has almost no landfill left. Yet its still behind much of the country when it comes to recycling. The Reduce and Reuse parts of the strategy are non-existant. I think a lot of the sluggishness about tackling the UK waste problems is that national government think its a local issue, but packaging can only be tackled from a national standpoint. Duh!
If only we ran the country eh?
|
