A prominent PCB testing scientist will forward a direct discussion on the topic to me later this wk. I will post it's complete content when it arrives.

Here is the link to the law suit press release or better said propaganda release.

http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/6491/p/salsa/web/press_release/public/?press_release_KEY=36

In a nut shell, the law suit appears to be for publicity only, It would be interesting to know who is funding this work. It has to be some group who will gain from this work. Their are many groups that would stand to profit from such publicity.

Below are a couple bullet points to keep the discussion going until I have a more direct post provided by the mentioned PCB testing expert.

* Prop 65 allows .090 ppm total PCB in Fish. I consume several ounces of fish per serving, My guess is you do as well. Fish oil capsules are what? 1ml each vs several ounces per serving in fish, both are held to the same tough standard even though the serving size is substantially different.

* US law allows for 2PPM PCB in fish. I think this is way too high, but it is the law. Prop 65's .090 ppm is the toughest standard in the world!

*The stats are being skewed to scare people. To put the first graph into perspective, the units of measure should be in ppm, but they use a multiplier representing the numbers in the 100's rather than .000. It appears the only reason this is done is to generate publicity. Media has been duped into putting this story front and center. It is much scarier to say 59.125 ng/day vs .059 ppm. To put first graph into proper perspective they should discuss in terms of ppm and put forth real PCB results not a toxicology equivalent multiplier as this does not fit the discussion nor is it relevant to meet prop 65 guidelines. If you want to get an idea on what the real readings of the graph represent just move the decimal place over 3 places to the left and this is ppm.

* 7 of the 10 samples shown appear to meet prop 65 tough standards. The report does not tell you this, but rather leaves the reader wondering what this all means.

*I am not saying that a couple of the samples appear to possibly have some issues but rather I am saying that the law suit propaganda is improper. For the press release to be news rather than propaganda they would discuss in terms of ppm of real PCB test results. their are no results listed and they use a improper multiplier for purpose other than news.

* Prop 65 says total pcb count is to be evaluated, but the information provided does not give any test results but rather gives a toxicology equivalent multiplier and this is meaningless in the spirit of prop 65. As far as I can tell the only reason for this multiplier is to make the numbers seem more scary than they are.

* the second graph is meaningless and has no place for discussion of the question.

*Green Pastures uses the premier PCB testing lab in the country and the results are always below prop 65 mandates. Most fish oil companies do not test PCB's as the law does not require testing but we do test. We make very small batches and lots compared to the industry so our testing is done more frequently.

a few PCB stats from a book called 'The Invisible Additives' (1973)

Occurance of PCB's in packaged food in Parts per Million

less than .01 66.7%

.01-.05 6.7%

.06 - .10 12% (Prop 65 is this level and below and most fish oils will consistantly be at this level or below)

.11-.50 10.7%

.51-.99 1.3%

1-5 2.6%

Most fish that have issues are either farm raised, live in rivers and lakes or frequent in river and lake habitat. The same holds true for heavy metals, PCB's and other contaminents. More and more salmon and cod are farm raised!. Some oceans are more polluted than others especially surrounding larger industrial centers. The contaminents in the fish will follow the trend in the water they are in.

Monsanto is the real villan. They gave us PCB's and told us they were safe, They gave us herbicides such as agent orange, agent blue, agent white and told us they were safe and now they bring us GMO seeds and the chemicals associated with these seeds and they tell us its safe. We keep giving them the nod..when will we learn?

Maybe our outrage and law suits should be directed towards the real villan. I think we can all agree on who this is and others like them.

Categories: Dave's Rants  |  General Health Topics