Honey NOT so sweet

[ian]

I don't know. There are no publicly accessible CO2 monitors that I know of around here.

is the Cape Grimm data local in this context?
https://www.csiro.au/en/Research/Oan...eenhouse-gases

[MAPLEMAN]

Kabul's average is 190ug/m^3...even beats Beijing
A city with little sanitation unfortunately...MM

[BobL]

In 2012 Kolkata had the same PM2.5 as Beijing but there are 40 Indian cities that have higher PM2.5 values than Kolkata.
The dust is primarily from coal burning power plants and vehicle emissions but from time to time there are significant contributions from middle eastern dust storms.

Kabul's average is 190ug/m^3...even beats Beijing.

A city with little sanitation unfortunately...MM

A sizeable component of Kabul's dust often comes from natural desert sources.

Here we go - a new test to detect cancers - once they start using it the cancer rates will no doubt increase even further.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-19/blood-test-could-be-able-to-detect-early-stage-cancers/9342340

[BobL]

is the Cape Grimm data local in this context?
https://www.csiro.au/en/Research/Oan...eenhouse-gases

CG is about 2000 km away from here.
Had a quick look and the latest CG data I can see from August 15 last year when it was 403 ppm

On Jan 17 2018 at the Muana Loa CO2 station it was 406.75.

Our Lab measured lead in dust sampled at CG.
Concentration, isotopic composition, and sources of lead in Southern Ocean air during 1999/2000, measured at the Cape Grim Baseline Air Pollution Station, Tasmania - ScienceDirect
I even made the author list on this one.

[rob streeper]

I needed a wet bulb/ dry bulb thermometer to keep our minisplit AC in good order and ended up with a unit that also measures CO₂. Typical outdoor readings here run ~450 ppm.

Since this thread has wandered so far I'll comment on the cancer test Bob mentioned and that has shown up in the morning news.

The new cancer test isn't too impressive based on what I've read so far with ~70% sensitivity, despite its ability to detect a reported 7 different types of cancer. Need to get the paper to tell more.

P.S. 8 cancer types, not 7.
.

<...yielded a positive result about 70% of the time across eight common cancer types in more than 1000 patients whose tumors had not yet spread...>

And the stinker:
.

<...and caught only 43% of stage 1 cancers.>

Still haven't looked at the paper, yet.

As to the diagnostics there are two really important measures. First is 'sensitivity' (SE) which is the ability of a test to detect disease against a background of health. The second is 'specificity' (SP) which is the ability to a test to detect health against a background of disease, i.e. how good is the test at avoiding false positives. These are typically reported on a 0 to 1 scale so the test being discussed here and in the news has a sensitivity of 0.7 overall and 0.4 for Stage I disease. It does better for breast and ovarian cancer but the performance for the other six types is mediocre at best. Cancer is most easily treated in the early stages and a sensitivity of 0.4 for Stage I disease is dismal.

I/we have done some work in this area, specifically for non-small cell lung cancer, the most common type. See: Plasma Biomarkers Distinguish Non-small Cell Lung Cancer from Asthma and Differ in Men and Women

Our sensitivity and specificity were both 1 when we considered the sexes separately.
.

<The performance of the classifier was improved with restriction by gender [males: 1.0, 0.94 (0.018) and females: 1.0, 0.97 (0.016)], and became perfect (both SE and SP=1.0) with restriction to the best subset of four biomarkers among males and three biomarkers among females.>

This performance was later extended to Stage I disease as well and the results were just as strong, albeit using more markers. Note that this was published 6 years ago (we had the data 8 years ago) and the panel is still not in the market.

"Business Issues" are, IMO the primary impediment to getting such things out of the lab and into the market. So you see MM, it's not the scientists or science that are the problem, it's the MONEY people and MONEY is the root of all evil.

[MAPLEMAN]

Let's get back on topic Rob...contamination found in Australian honey was the essence of the thread
Seems the problem is indeed a global one
Pesticides/herbicides/heavy metals/antibiotics are the major contaminants being found
Add to that bee populations are also dwindling
What is the answer?
Will a simple treat that has been enjoyed since biblical times be lost forever?
And what consequences for agriculture if our pollinators are destroyed?
The environment is screaming at us people!...MM

[rob streeper]

Let's get back on topic Rob...

What is the answer?

I gave you the answer, MONEY. Get the money out of politics and you'll reduce the influence of money and its' tendency to pervert and misuse the products of science.

You chose to attack science and scientists

You know what Bob...I wouldn't TRUST the scientific community as far as I could throw them mate!
Why?
Because they are OFTEN get it wrong

which is exactly what the moneyed interests want you to do.

[MAPLEMAN]

I gave you the answer, MONEY. Get the money out of politics and you'll reduce the influence money and its' tendency to pervert and misuse the products of science.

You chose to attack science and scientists
which is exactly what the moneyed interests want you to do.

Let's get back on topic thanks Rob...MM

[rob streeper]

Let's get back on topic thanks Rob...MM

You asked and I gave you my opinion.

The reason that there's elevated lead in honey is human activity, something that Bob has very ably pointed out (www.who.int/bulletin/archives/78(9)1068.pdf). In the modern era the primary source of worldwide lead contamination comes from leaded fuels. Paint is also a singnificant source of environmental contamination. There are foci of high lead that are due to mining and refining activities but worldwide leaded gas is/was the primary source.

Lead in the form of tetraethyl lead was added to gasoline because moneyed interests (General Motors specifically) wanted it to be the preferred way to boost octane https://www.thenation.com/article/secret-history-lead/, Hidden History of Leaded Gasoline Reveals Industry Conspiracy to Conceal Dangers - Lethal Product Still Marketed Throughout World, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetraethyllead, https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...ted-180961368/

Alternatives were and are available. Ethanol is a relatively safe alternative. Unfortunately it has some technical limitations but they aren't too difficult to overcome. MTBE was marketed in the 90's but it has its' own problems https://archive.epa.gov/mtbe/web/html/faq.html, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MTBE_controversy, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3550129/.

Nowadays another of the major octane boosters is Methylcyclopentadienyltricarbonylmanganese, MMT also has problems, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4991359/. The neurotoxicity of manganese (manganism) is similar physiologically to lead (plumbism) though it occurs at different exposures and via different molecular species. MMT is made by our 'friends' at Ethyl Corporation, the same company that advanced the cause of lead for so long (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methyl...se_tricarbonyl). Note that Ethyl got a waiver from USEPA for MMT back in the nineties.

Thus, money IS the problem. The only way to fix it is to vote the politicians who are willing to sell themselves to the moneyed interests out of office and to lay blame at the feet of those who really are to blame, the plutocrats, not the scientific community.

[BobL]

Money is an issue because consumers make it so by often buying silly amounts of the cheapest dirtiest products to maintain a certain lifestyle.
If scientists and regulatory authorities were properly funded to determine causes and effects, and people bothered to stay informed and raise enough hooha and not buy the product, then the corporations might smarten up a little.

[woodPixel]

Or, one of the roles of a good government, is rectify persistent negative behaviors via regulation when companies (or people) refuse to do it themselves.

More stick than carrot.

We, as a society, seem to be needing a lot of stick recently....

[MAPLEMAN]

You asked and I gave you my opinion.

The reason that there's elevated lead in honey is human activity, something that Bob has very ably pointed out (www.who.int/bulletin/archives/78(9)1068.pdf). In the modern era the primary source of worldwide lead contamination comes from leaded fuels. Paint is also a singnificant source of environmental contamination. There are foci of high lead that are due to mining and refining activities but worldwide leaded gas is/was the primary source.

Lead in the form of tetraethyl lead was added to gasoline because moneyed interests (General Motors specifically) wanted it to be the preferred way to boost octane https://www.thenation.com/article/secret-history-lead/, Hidden History of Leaded Gasoline Reveals Industry Conspiracy to Conceal Dangers - Lethal Product Still Marketed Throughout World, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetraethyllead, https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...ted-180961368/

Alternatives were and are available. Ethanol is a relatively safe alternative. Unfortunately it has some technical limitations but they aren't too difficult to overcome. MTBE was marketed in the 90's but it has its' own problems https://archive.epa.gov/mtbe/web/html/faq.html, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MTBE_controversy, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3550129/.

Nowadays another of the major octane boosters is Methylcyclopentadienyltricarbonylmanganese, MMT also has problems, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4991359/. The neurotoxicity of manganese (manganism) is similar physiologically to lead (plumbism) though it occurs at different exposures and via different molecular species. MMT is made by our 'friends' at Ethyl Corporation, the same company that advanced the cause of lead for so long (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methyl...se_tricarbonyl). Note that Ethyl got a waiver from USEPA for MMT back in the nineties.

Thus, money IS the problem. The only way to fix it is to vote the politicians who are willing to sell themselves to the moneyed interests out of office and to lay blame at the feet of those who really are to blame, the plutocrats, not the scientific community.

Clearly the lead found in the honey can be traced to human activity...blind freddy can tell you that.
And I mentioned earlier in the thread that $ is god...I agree with you on that
As for ALL scientists having a moral compass...don't believe so
Some 25% of scientists worldwide are engaged in the 'arms race'...no doubt being motivated by $
Sure there are a multitude of scientists from a multitude of professions that are doing amazing work for the good of the earth and humankind
There are many that are NOT...because of this... $
Yes I do have trust issues with certain sectors of the scientific community...I have my own reasons for this!
Certainly agree that the machinations of modern politics undermine the good work of a lot of scientists too
Money is without doubt the root of all evils
But I struggle to think how we can turn things around...government is such a powerful entity to challenge
Didn't intend to insult you Rob...or you either Bob!
Imformation,as I see it, empowers people...but information also needs to be communicated without one being condescending
Scientists at times fall into that trap
Anyway...any info as to how we can, as a global community reduce the pollutants that we use in our daily life would be most welcome
Our way of life simply must change...MM

[rob streeper]

Okay, since you ask here's some things we've done to reduce our environmental toxin exposure.

Electrostatic precipitator on the HVAC to knock down dust.
HEPA filtered vacuum cleaner.
Metal roofing and concrete surfaces to reduce PAH exposure.
All volatile chemicals possible isolated from the living spaces of the house.
Minimize contact with and use of chlorinated and aromatic solvents.
Castile soap as far as possible for all body and food contact cleaning.
Wash all produce with soap and water.
No teflon pans for cooking.
No plastic for cooking and as little as possible in contact with stored food.
Water softener followed by mixed bed ion exchanger followed by carbon filter for all water in the house (we have fracking just outside the city limit).
No makeup.
Purchase fruit and vegetables from a local supplier that does testing for excess and or illegal pesticide residues (unique to Texas I think).
Wood, metal, cotton, wool etc. and glass, avoid plastic wherever possible.
NO pesticides in or around the house. We welcome spiders, they eat the other bugs. Cats help too.
Avoid canned food, buy fresh or dried.
NO Scotchguard.
NO bottled water.
NO carbonated sugar beverages.
We avoid processed foods and those foods including preservatives.

[MAPLEMAN]

Okay, since you ask here's some things we've done to reduce our environmental toxin exposure.

Electrostatic precipitator on the HVAC to knock down dust.
HEPA filtered vacuum cleaner.
Metal roofing and concrete surfaces to reduce PAH exposure.
All volatile chemicals possible isolated from the living spaces of the house.
Minimize contact with and use of chlorinated and aromatic solvents.
Castile soap as far as possible for all body and food contact cleaning.
Wash all produce with soap and water.
No teflon pans for cooking.
No plastic for cooking and as little as possible in contact with stored food.
Water softener followed by mixed bed ion exchanger followed by carbon filter for all water in the house (we have fracking just outside the city limit).
No makeup.
Purchase fruit and vegetables from a local supplier that does testing for excess and or illegal pesticide residues (unique to Texas I think).
Wood, metal, cotton, wool etc. and glass, avoid plastic wherever possible.
NO pesticides in or around the house. We welcome spiders, they eat the other bugs. Cats help too.
Avoid canned food, buy fresh or dried.
NO Scotchguard.
NO bottled water.
NO carbonated sugar beverages.
We avoid processed foods and those foods including preservatives.

That is a bloody good start...MM

[rob streeper]

Personally I like Kirks. https://www.ebay.com/itm/Kirks-Origi...EAAOSwux5YSLwo