by Pat Tigges
The mother of all junk science and possibly the biggest waste of money in US regulatory history is the hoopla over dioxin. This monster raises its ugly head every year or so simply because its a huge regulatory and advocacy money maker and because it makes great news. People are terrified! Mention dioxin and people suck in their breath. Government agencies and enviros regularly raise new fears without any evidence to support the hype. And of course the media picks up the cry, still quoting junk scientists whose 20-year old conclusions aren’t justified by later research.
Dioxin has a long and sordid history of turning up in the most inopportune places: Boy Scout camps, a Times Beach horse arena. Viet Nam, the pot fields of northern California, and a multitude of other places. Why was it found? Simply because someone looked. If they had looked elsewhere they would have found it there too.
As we now know, dioxin is everywhere, it’s “natural”, it’s made by Mother Nature. And we also know there is simply no evidence that it is responsible for any ill health effects even in cases of massive exposure. But the regulatory machine was in action before science corrected itself and therein lies the problem. The bureaucrats and enviros are not willing to give up a cash cow easily.
Actually dioxins are a whole class of compounds and they are a natural product of combustion. They are created by forest fires, cooking food, volcanoes and in many industrial processes that include high heat. They have been around forever, they cannot be eliminated, and even in catastrophic industrial accidents man has never managed to be exposed to enough to do lasting damage. If you bathed in them you might get a skin rash.
Mother Nature dumps tons of them into the atmosphere every year through fires and eruptions and this relates directly to current affairs in Washington State. The “toxic waste” fertilizer scare that began over heavy metals somehow grew to include a search for dioxins. The DOE will now be testing fertilizers for dioxin. But, someone better check background levels first. If you recall, in 1980 Mt. St. Helens blanketed Eastern Washington with dioxin containing ash. We also regularly have catastrophic fires.
Dioxin binds tightly to soil which keeps it from migrating downward. Soil particles also protect the compound from the sun which would otherwise cause it to break down. When exposed the half-life is estimated at one to three years, however, when it settles below the surface it’s half-life may exceed ten years or more. In Eastern Washington significant amounts were tilled into the soil with volcanic ash years ago, more is continually added thru fires, and chances are some is still sitting there waiting for the DOE to “find” it.
Chasing dioxin costs industry billions. They are still living under absurd and outdated regulations born of the 1980’s scares. In light of current science they asked for a reassessment in 1990, hoping that regulation would be eased.
EPA completed the draft of the new study in 1994 and stunned the scientific community when the report claimed that dioxin was actually worse than previously thought. Industry and science both cried “foul” so EPA then gathered a broad-based advisory panel of 39 scientists which it asked to peer-review the report. The scientists were chosen by EPA for their expertise and objectivity and were officially called the Scientific Advisory Board Dioxin Reassessment Subcommittee.
Not surprisingly the panel dealt EPA a smack in the face, sending them back to the drawing board. The panel concluded that the draft overstated the risks of dioxin, that its conclusions were not scientifically defensible, and that they would not endorse it as written. They further chastised EPA by stating that it lacked scientific balance. At this point a new draft has not been released. But, no matter. Prior to the panel review, the NRDC say that the report got the desired headlines and the public was again reminded they should fear dioxin. As with other reports that don’t meet credible scientific review, the EPA may never issue a rewrite, That way they can continue to regulate based on the draft. It would be insane to assume they will backup. That would be counterproductive to “mission creep” more regulators, regulation, and budget.
Source: EAT First, PNAAEF 509-632-5256
Reprint permission given by AgAir Update, P.O. Box 850, Perry, GA 31069 - an international agricultural aviation publication.
Return to Spreading the Facts