Schwarzenegger Backs Aerial Biochemical Spraying That Harms Children, page 2
Pages: <<  1    2  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 13 times


reply posted on 1-11-2007 @ 03:51 AM by Damocles
well, i live in monterey, I, my wife, and my dog are all ok as a result of this "evil spraying"

but, just for kicks i thought id check up on this stuff...so here is a fun comparison


LD50 for ingestion of this stuff in rats is:
5000mg/kg

so, compare that to something many of us consume willingly every day such as say...caffine which has an LD50 of 192mg/kg

i think i can live with them trying to keep the bugs down in a relatively safe manner.


reply posted on 1-11-2007 @ 03:51 AM by SimiusDei
reply to post by defcon5



Agent Orange was harmless as well.

Even after those guys' hair started dropping off their bodies and many unexplained illnesses started popping up.

To date, these are ONLY the illnesses that the government has "recognized" as conditions "possibly" caused by Agent Orange exposure. Notice, even now they won't really take a direct stance of responsibility.

* Chloracne or other acneform disease consistent with chloracne. (Must occur within one year of exposure to Agent Orange).
* Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia
* Diabetes Mellitus, Type II
* Hodgkin’s disease.
* Multiple myeloma.
* Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.
* Acute and subacute peripheral neuropathy. (For purposes of this section, the term acute and subacute peripheral neuropathy means temporary peripheral neuropathy that appears within weeks or months of exposure to an herbicide agent and resolves within two years of the date of onset.)
* Porphyria cutanea tarda. (Must occur within one year of exposure to Agent Orange).
* Prostate cancer.
* Respiratory cancers (cancer of the lung, bronchus, larynx, or trachea).
* Soft-tissue sarcoma (other than osteosarcoma, chondrosarcoma, Kaposi’s sarcoma, or mesothelioma).


Source



Even if this proves to be harmless as we are told, that doesn't mean everyone gives the government approval to spray POTENTIALLY harmful chemicals (or any chemicals for that matter) on the population without our say so.

But hey, maybe the government has given you some reason to trust them that they haven't given the rest of us.


Jasn



reply posted on 1-11-2007 @ 04:48 AM by defcon5
reply to post by SimiusDei



Agent Orange was a chemical weed poison used to kill foliage in a combat zone. This is a pheromone which makes bugs not feel in the mood to reproduce. If you cannot see the difference here, then I cannot help you with it.

Personally I would be more worried about the stuff they spray to keep the mosquitoes down, but whatever it is I would rather breath it then get West Nile, Malaria, Encephalitis, or have constant itching bites.


reply posted on 1-11-2007 @ 05:01 AM by SimiusDei
reply to post by defcon5



I wasn't attempting to make a direct comparison of the two.

The comparison I was making was that in BOTH cases the government says the chemicals are harmless.

How do you know for sure that what they are spraying over Cali is REALLY just pheromones? What else may possibly be in those sprays that isn't being released? Just to use agent orange as an example again (to express what I mean), many of the chemicals in that spray were also harmless. However, it only took the dioxin to make it deadly.


I just don't trust them spraying us with anything at all. The government makes lying and harming us too much of a habit.


Jasn


reply posted on 1-11-2007 @ 12:36 PM by yahn goodey
reply to post by Harlequin



spraying pheromones to confuse male moths looking for mates ?i wonder how long a time they spent checking for side effects for the long term. what other types of life will this end up affecting?saw not too long ago where the human female pee of those that take the birth control pills ends up in the rivers and lakes after going thru the sewage systems----- still is capable of changing the sex of fish living in those waterways thus reducing their ability to reproduce--------we are so smart for the short term with no vision for the future damage we will cause.


reply posted on 20-1-2008 @ 12:26 PM by psychedeliack
aren't we doing Pheromone experiments with humans? testing fear or stress Pheromones; blog.wired.com...
why would they not do it like this?
I know this post is about legitimate spraying; but combine the two topics and it seems like a very likely agenda.


reply posted on 20-1-2008 @ 01:09 PM by shortywarn
Originally posted by MajorMalfunction
I've got a bit of experience with pesticides and biocontrols. After looking over the PAN Pesticides Database for the chemicals, I found the following:

(Z)-11-Tetradecenyl acetate

It says that the chemical has slight toxicity in its pure form. But that no risk to human health is expected and no adverse effects have been reported.

(E)-11-Tetradecenyl acetate pretty much says the same thing.

A pheromone is going to be minimally or non-toxic to people unless someone has some sort of exotic allergy.

There is an EPA report here that describes why lepidoptera pheromones are not considered dangerous to people.

Leafrollers are part of the Lepidoptera family.

It isn't dangerous. It's probably one of the least toxic ways to deal with an insect pest. There is a type of pest control that is known as Integrated Pest Management. This is a way of controlling infestations of crops with the least harmful products first, using pesticides only as a last resort.

I worked with IPM principles for several years. This Checkmate stuff, from the information available, and from what I know about IPM, is innocuous and a very eco-friendly way of dealing with a pest of very valuable California crops.

Not all chemicals are the devil. A pheromone is going to do nothing but target the creature it is meant to target and affect nothing else.




[edit on 31-10-2007 by MajorMalfunction]


having pest control experience myself---as well as it sound yhou do as well,,,any chemicals that worked well were pulled off the market 5 years ago----dursban was great!!!! from my point of view----i have rolled in chemicals all day long and never suffered any symptoms--as warned in directions----people read into labels to much---they seem to list evry possible situation, hypothetical etc.. they go overboard compared to what really happens or may happen

also---your store shelf raid or supermarket pest control products----ones everyday consumers buy at the store----look at the active ingredient label----it's usually .oo1 or even .01-----thats only 1/10th of 1%---it's laughable---because you might as well use bleach and water and yet people pay 4 dollars a can!!!1

also most commercial pesticides are around 20%-30% active ingredient

store bought---.01 compared to 20% big difference


anyway i'm drifting

also---do we realize many people are paying $20 to $30 dollars for phermones--the perfume type ones to attract the opposite sex-so they may get laid!!!!!!

i am probably biased so....

but i do think we need to watch every move the gov't and states make--and i believe chemtrails are real and happening

ps what ever happened to that airplane mechanic that found the extra compartments and nozzles in the belly of the plane and was threatened and suspended from work???? is he still breathing?????

also like mm said this is stuff many bugs use and posess naturally--not a chemical as one thinks of chemical-----bugs use pheromones all day long----do you ever notice all ants will follow the same line or walk in a line---they following a pheromone trail----they use it for direction---leading to home or to a source of food----like our car gps's but for ants

mm i'll pm you...to bs a bit


reply posted on 20-1-2008 @ 05:23 PM by pikypiky
This is a bit of humor but I cannot image seeing our store shelf filled with can sprays labeled: ‘Terminator’: The newest pest control for overpopulation – humans!'

[If I only were a graphic artist and knew my way around this forum, I’d post a picture of this label].

For those interested in a somewhat related topic on spraying, there is an online
article. This has to do with malathion spraying to control the Medfly in California. Towards the end of the article it mentions fish kills as one of the effects of this pesticide.

So, any amount of aerial spraying not only harms children but game and wildlife as well.

[edit on 20-1-2008 by pikypiky]
Pages: <<  1    2  >>    ^^TOP^^