Anonymous wrote in
newsan.2004.02.12.05.44.08.772767@notarealserver .com:

Even if there are heavy metals in the ink (a point still open to
contention), there is darned little ink on a page and only a TINY
fraction of that would be the actual offending metal. Moreover,
composting does bind up elemental toxins into safer compounds ...
they, after all, are the building block of 'molecular' toxins.

Every little bit adds up.

I'm curious as to what "safer" molecules are created from lead (or any
other "heavy" metals) by composting.

I have a great deal of confidence in the effectiveness of the
microbiology of a compost pile. While I would not lace it with
strychnine and then dine on it directly, that's because I don't
deliberately eat compost directly under any circumstances. I would be
completely willing to dose a fresh pile, compost it as per my usual
custom and then use it in my garden after a 2 year aging period.

What a great philosopher's stone that would be ... garbage in, gold out.
Unfortunately I still have questions about the transmutablity of many of
the reactants.

Might be marginally off-topic, but I saw this in another group:
[Article] French peat bog reveals thousands of years of mining pollution.
http://groups.google.com/groups?as_u...%3CFXWOb.19025$Wa.10981@news-
server.bigpond.net.au%3E

"Once lead is locked up in organic material such as peat, it tends to
stay put rather than being washed away by water. "