am simply stating that if professional people promoted the studies that
showed the consequences in living in air for more and more days without
good
reading in charts as some are getting now close to 70 percent plus days
without good air.. those people are in materially worse shape then those
who get clean air. I think this challenge would show the vast differences
in
health , in health costs output, in productivity and in longeivity and
stress test results and lung function results. We are not all protected
equally. The people made to breathe this toxic mess, without being warned
should be able to sue the companies that didn't protect them. and in fact
harmed them when averages were taken.
"mcs" <mcs@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:PKIii.16294$MR5.2984@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> and politicians and media to prove or disprove that moderate or worse
> pollution, exposed to populations in certain cities over and over again
is
> safe . I challenge lawyers, government officials and medical scientists,
> to
> show that air quality with or without more co2 and which measures
moderate
> particulate or and or ozone levels ( in reading that are not good on
> charts) or worse consistently, over and over again doesn't in fact show
> more illness and morbidity and diminished lung function for the people
> exposed then people who get good air consistently and they both ate the
> same things (generally speaking).. That damage I attest and differences
in
> health and lost production and costs from health care, are more
> contrasting the longer the people are exposed compared to people who get
> cleaner air. I think if stress tests and lung function and cancers were
> compared one can show proof now of harm and SOME people are not
protected
> or told to adequately protect their families or to get warnings to get
out
> of harms way. I think the damages and what to do about it is swept under
> the
> rug for lots of reasons. Lawyers must look at the ramifications of
people
> not protected from undue harm and damages that resulted. ,, Energy
> companies, diesel engines and coal and pollution is harming some people
> more
> then others and they are not being told or protected,, which to me is a
> mass
> poisoning going on. Call it global warming or call it pollution do the
> studies to show what I think is the largest poisoning of Some people in
> decades to hide energy control of politicians .
>
>
>
>
"mcs" <mcs@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:X0Kii.4038$wu5.2258@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> and politicians and media to prove or disprove that moderate or worse
> pollution, exposed to populations in certain cities over and over again
is
> safe . I challenge lawyers, government officials and medical scientists,
> to
> show that air quality with or without more co2 and which measures
moderate
> particulate or and or ozone levels ( in reading that are not good on
> charts) or worse consistently, over and over again doesn't in fact show
> more illness and morbidity and diminished lung function for the people
> exposed then people who get good air consistently and they both ate the
> same things (generally speaking).. That damage I attest and differences
in
> health and lost production and costs from health care, are more
> contrasting the longer the people are exposed compared to people who get
> cleaner air. I think if stress tests and lung function and cancers were
> compared one can show proof now of harm and SOME people are not
protected
> or told to adequately protect their families or to get warnings to get
out
> of harms way. I think the damages and what to do about it is swept under
> the
> rug for lots of reasons. Lawyers must look at the ramifications of
people
> not protected from undue harm and damages that resulted. ,, Energy
> companies, diesel engines and coal and pollution is harming some people
> more
> then others and they are not being told or protected,, which to me is a
> mass
> poisoning going on. Call it global warming or call it pollution do the
> studies to show what I think is the largest poisoning of Some people in
> decades to hide energy control of politicians .
>
>
>
>
>
|
