"Billy" wrote in message
...
In article ss,
"gunner" wrote:
Ahhh! It is obvious from your posting history you don't take the time to
read and certainly don't use higher order thinking skills to put facts
together. IN this case again, you didn't read the data you so quickly
endorsed, did ya? Typical Billy, then you try to cover your tracks with
pure unadulterated BS and more links you still didn't read. Google is not
your friend Billy. As well, I have to laugh about your use of the word use
"citations" as well as the way you attempt to "bait" someone. You have
obviously have a lot of practice on the playground.
If you would have read and verified the PAN site you would know PAN uses
the USDA's PDP test data, a fact they talk about in several places, in fact
WOMF specifically
references they use the PDP and the PesticideInfo.Org ( which is also
themselves). On their PesticideInfo.Org site they state they use the PDP
and a few other source references most of which are again FED papers of some
agency or other. So once again the database traces back to the PDP as the
primary source of all the data used by PAN. Now how bizarre is that !
Because of my training and experiences I have to ask why? I can't come up
with anything other than they just another 501 c. 3. looking for money,
scare money is pretty easy to get from the uninformed.
so here is your "citation" (In my business its source or reference ) , check
out the page:
Apple Sauce
.... snipped...
Footnotes
1. Tests for any given food are often conducted in multiple years. In all
cases WhatsOnMyFood shows...snipped...
2. All pesticide residue results on this page and elsewhere on the
WhatsOnMyFood website were obtained by the United Stated Department of
Agriculture (USDA) Pesticide Data Program (PDP)
3. Punzi,
JS, Lamont, M, Haynes, D, Epstein, RL, USDA Pesticide Data
Program: Pesticide Residues ...snipped...
4. All toxicological data was either compiled for this site - typically from
U.S. EPA reregistration eligibility decisions - or obtained from data
compiled for the PesticideInfo website
Here, let me further help you do your research, this is the summary of the
2007 report PAN used for their pie chart website presentation:
http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/getf...TELPRDC5074338
2007 data, published Dec 2008
"PDP analyzed 11,683 samples of fresh and processed food commodities in
2007, excluding groundwater and drinking water. Overall, the percent of
residues detected (the number of residues detected divided by the total
number of analyses performed for each commodity) was 1.9 percent. Over 99
percent of the samples analyzed did not contain residues above the safety
limits (tolerances) established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) and 96.7 percent of the samples analyzed did not contain residues for
pesticides that had no tolerance established."
Seem like we got an Ivory Snow report card Billy, 99%!!!!! so go back to
that little pie chart fluff, ground clutter thingies and verify that none
exceed the
allowable safe limits. Not a one Billy, not a one should exceed the EPA
limits, ok maybe the one%.
Bottom line.... PAN just downloaded the USDA data base, framed it, added
some whirligigs to get your attention and poof ....Its magic,.... please
send your dollars to support our important research.
Again, understand the data presented. This is presented in a very
prejudicial
manner, designed to alarm. "OMG this has pesticides on it!" Americans do
not seem to understand the nature of statistics, especially about
measurements of
parts per billion (ppb), for reference 1ppb is equal to 1 minute in 2000
years
I recommended Dr. Bruce Ames, the noted Microbiologist for you to read
because his research on cancers and carcinogenicity are world renown. But
since you don't do much more than goggle and wiki, here is a synopsis link
for you to scoff at:
http://www.nytimes.com/1994/07/05/sc...l?pagewanted=1
or
http://tinyurl.com/nkltzn.
I will warn you, like most of your "citations", this reference is a bit
old
but still very relevant to what he has discovered especially if you can find
other writings using his works. Most all his papers
are locked up behind password access but you can certainly write to him on
his website and ask for copies. I find most Profs want to share, well
perhaps except when you slanderously infer them a corporate shrill with your
unique style of research.
Just remember most here do understand and endorse being green, It is just
the fringe lunacy gets a bit much with you. Certainly the co-mingling of
extraneous " citations"
doesn't help your cause.
Good luck in your quest for the holy grail.
My best to you this new day Billy.
Gunner
In all lies there is wheat among the chaff...
- A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court