This is your U.S.: Protecting lunch box makers over children
February 19, 2007 by William K. Wolfrum
This is part and parcel of the ultimate GOP wet dream – slay the beast, and eventually remove all government departments engaged in helping Americans. That’s socialist, you see. They want the nation to be a giant free-for-all, with tax money only used for war and embezzling, and the general public protected by business men, who are supposed to grow morals at some point. That’s pure capitalism,, which is heroic, American, and which normally spirals all the way down until most the population is running around naked smacking each other with clubs.
Until that happens, the idea is for government agencies to be horrifyingly corrupt, up to the point that they have no qualms whatsoever about poisoning children.
(AP) — In 2005, when government scientists tested 60 soft, vinyl lunchboxes, they found that one in five contained amounts of lead that medical experts consider unsafe — and several had more than 10 times hazardous levels.
But that’s not what they told the public.
Instead, the Consumer Product Safety Commission released a statement that they found “no instances of hazardous levels.” And they refused to release their actual test results, citing regulations that protect manufacturers from having their information released to the public.
Public health experts consider elevated levels of lead in blood a significant health hazard for U.S. children. Studies have repeatedly shown that childhood exposure to lead can lead to learning problems, reduced intelligence, hyperactivity and attention deficit disorder. There is no lead level that is considered safe in blood, and recent studies have shown adverse health effects even at very low levels.
“I don’t think the Consumer Product Safety Commission has lived up to its role to protect kids from lead,” said Dr. Bruce Lamphear, a lead poisoning specialist at the Children’s Hospital Medical Center in Cincinnati, Ohio. “As a public agency, their work should be transparent. And if one is to err on the side of protecting children rather than protecting lunch box makers, then certainly you would want to lower the levels.”
In the end, of course, action will be taken. Expect to see a non-binding resolution fail to get passed on this issue within the next few years.