From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,ec3b1a84cab8fc8a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-09-07 17:54:13 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newshub2.rdc1.sfba.home.com!news.home.com!news2.rdc2.tx.home.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3B997008.85311F1D@home.com> From: Larry Elmore X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.7 i586) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada and the NMD References: <3B970152.4AC6C6E3@PublicPropertySoftware.com> <3B9795E1.54B12E70@worldnet.att.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2001 00:54:12 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.10.25.74 X-Complaints-To: abuse@home.net X-Trace: news2.rdc2.tx.home.com 999910452 65.10.25.74 (Fri, 07 Sep 2001 17:54:12 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 17:54:12 PDT Organization: Excite@Home - The Leader in Broadband http://home.com/faster Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:12919 Date: 2001-09-08T00:54:12+00:00 List-Id: Preben Randhol wrote: > > On Thu, 06 Sep 2001 17:59:52 GMT, Ted Dennison wrote: > > > As ususal I think the truth is somewhere in the middle, although I have to say > > that I've yet to see any *hard* evidence that Preben is wrong. However, you > > can't really use the term "government" wrt the US as Preben does, because we > > don't quite work that way. Our government has 2 political branches, one of which > > is split into two parts. Of those 3, 2 are presently controlled by one party, > > and the third is (barely) controlled by another. Obviously, you'll search in > > vain for any kind of unified coherent message comming out of the whole. > > When I say government I mean the Bush administration. The system is a > bit different here so that is why I said government. > > But one thing that strikes me as very odd is that the Bush adm. > wants/wanted (I don't know the current status) to allow increased levels > of pollution in drinking water in the US as I understood it. It sounds > to me that the industry is much more important than the people of the > US for the Bush adm., but then again I'm not living over there. Not _increased_ levels, just the same levels we've had for years and years. _Most_ of the country already meets the proposed new lower standard for arsenic, for example. The places that don't are overwhelmingly due to natural sources in the local environment. Also, there's absolutely _nothing_ preventing a state, or a county, or a town from spending the money to meet whatever standards the local citizens approve of setting for themselves. IIRC, the new standard would've been an "unfunded mandate", so the federal government wouldn't be providing money to the effort, only fining those towns who didn't meet the standards soon enough. I read the NRC/NAS report on arsenic, and I thought the summary's conclusions were misleading at best, and directly contradict some of their own earlier statements. Several times they mention that virtually _no_ scientifically valid studies of the effects of low levels of arsenic are available, but they conclude that because high levels do cause problems, then low levels must be bad, too. Never mind the fact that almost nothing natural that we know of follows such a linear scale of toxicity, or danger... Larry