Kedves erdeklodok!

AZ FTP://ANG8.JPTE.HU/PUB/IQDEPO/DSM#06_2.EXE
cim alatt letoltheto egy cikkujtemeny, mely 1550 lapozo oldalbol
all, 1,44 Mb.
Temak: betegsegek, atom, legszennyezes, kornyezetvedelem, stb.
Nezzek meg ERDEMES!

Megjegyzeseiket az ujsaggal kapcsolatosan a
 cimre k-ldhetik.

THE SPERM OF NEW YORK MEN IS NOT THE ISSUE

It's fascinating to watch the reaction to "Our Stolen Future," the book about
endocrine disruptors, which is rapidly coming to be known as the book about
sperm.

If you've heard of "Our Stolen Future" at all, you've likely heard that it
blames modern chemicals for the declining sperm count of human males.  You
may
have heard denials too, especially from the New York Times, which has
heralded
a new study showing that the sperm counts of New York men not only are
undiminished, but are twice as high as the sperm counts of Los Angeles men.

So there!

I guess it was predictable that the complex message of "Our Stolen Future"
would be reduced to simple masculine one-upmanship.  The book is only
marginally about sperm.  It is mainly about the many ways in which some
human-made chemicals act like hormones.  Within the bodies of all higher
forms
of life, these chemicals mess up subtle signals that control sexual behavior,
sperm and egg production, fertilization, cell division, the unfolding of
embryos, immune system function.  The possible effects include reproductive
failures of birds, birth defects in whales, die-offs of seals, breast cancer
in women and -- maybe -- declining sperm production in men.

Public discussion has zoomed right in on the sperm.  The book's authors,
seriously worried people, two of them scientists, have gone along to a
certain
extent, because they know that sperm are the key to media attention.  So a
profound issue is trivialized and swept away.  Don't worry about chemicals,
folks, especially if you live in New York.  (In L.A. maybe the low sperm
count
is connected to smog or O.J. or immigrants.)

We have many ways to fend off ideas we don't like.  We can pretend we've
dismissed the evidence by dismissing the messengers.  (According to various
reviewers, the authors of "Our Stolen Future" aren't "regular scientists." 
One is a "grandmotherly zoologist" and a "technophobe."  Another is a
"crusading
journalist" and the third a mere "philanthropist.")

We can deride them for writing a popular book.  ("It's a very unscientific
presentation."  Of course it was intended to be, in the belief that the
public
ought to know what scientists are talking about.  For those who want the
science there are footnotes to hundreds of journal articles.) 

We can sneer at the fact that the publisher hired a publicity firm -- "Fenton
Communications, the same PR firm that brought us Meryl Streep and the Alar
scare."  (By this criterion we should never listen to a politician or
corporation, all of whom speak to us through publicists.  This accusation
also
assumes that the Alar scare was false, which is by no means a certainty.)

We can call into question one small corner of the argument and then claim to
have disproved the whole thing.  That's what the sperm business is about. 
The
book quotes 61 studies of falling sperm counts in 20 countries.  The New York
Times cites two studies showing stable sperm counts in Seattle, New York,
Minnesota, and Los Angeles.  (The men in these studies were volunteers for
vasectomy, not typical of the whole population.)  So we veer off to argue
about
sperm, forgetting the larger issue of endocrine disruptors, which would not
be
disproved even if human virility were booming everywhere.
Some reviewers dismiss the endocrine disruptor hypothesis  because there are
natural hormone-mimicking chemicals in soybeans and broccoli. ("Our Stolen
Future" discusses the difference -- vegetable hormones are not fat-soluble,
not stored in the body or concentrated up the food chain.  And of course the
presence of toxins in nature is no license to release still more toxins.)
They have said the book is obsolete because levels of two of the worst
chemicals, DDT and PCBs, are dropping.  (They are dropping because these
chemicals have been banned.  Many other suspect chemicals are still in use.)

They have put ridiculous arguments into the mouths of the authors, accusing
them of wanting to ban chlorine, to stop treating drinking water and thereby
to expose the world to a cholera epidemic.  It's impossible to stomp out
false
accusations like these.  As Mark Twain said, a rumor can go three times
around
the world while the truth is still getting its boots on.

Most maddening is the old tobacco company ploy: "it's not proven."  A half
dozen scientists are found to express doubts.  Those doubts allow us,
somehow,
to ignore the dozens of scientists quoted in the book, who also have doubts
(doubts are intrinsic to science), but who are saying, "Hey, we're seeing
something here.  Of course it's not proven, nothing in science is ever
proven,
but this is troubling evidence."  

Ask any scientist "Is it proved that some chemicals cause endocrine
disruption?" and the only possible answer is "No."  Ask "Is it proved that
the
quantities and mixes of chemicals we release into the environment are
harmless?" and again there's only one answer: "No."  Ask "Which is more
likely
on scientific grounds, that the tens of thousands of chemicals we dump into
nature in enormous quantities are, or are not, harmful to life, including
human life?"

It would be amazing if those chemicals, individually or acting together, do
no
harm.  Therefore the important questions are not about scientific doubt but
about risk and ethics.  Given some sobering evidence here, while we do more
studies, while we argue about sperm, while we malign the authors of "Our
Stolen Future," should we, or should we not, go on releasing
hormone-mimicking
chemicals with abandon into our environment?  How many of these chemicals are
actually needed?  Who profits from them?  Who bears the risk?  Who should
decide?

(Donella H. Meadows is an adjunct professor of environmental studies at
Dartmouth College.)

Szetlocsolt olajszarmazekok (MN)

Egy miskolci szekhelyu kft. oriasi mennyisegben helyezett el Borsod es
Heves megye telepulesein, foldjein, folyopartjain kornyezetkarosito
olajszarmazekokat.  A rendorseg majus kozepen szerzett tudomast a
dologrol.  Kedden orizetbe vettek az 52 eves K. Csabat, a kft. ugyvezeto
igazgatojat, akit a rendorseg szerint komoly felelosseg terhel az
ugyben.

A Borsod-megyei Rendor-fokapitanysag junius 3-an rendelt el nyomozast.
Megallapitottak, hogy tartalykocsikrol kilocsoltak a veszelyes
anyagokat.  A kft.-vel a Mol Rt. johiszemu szerzodest kotott, hogy
bizonyos telephelyeirol szigoru eloirasok betartasaval megfelelo
helyekre szallitsak az olajszarmazekokat.  A rendorsegi informaciok
szerint K. Csaba ugyvezeto igazgato elbocsatassal fenyegetve
kenyszeritette a ceg soforjeit, hogy parancsat hajtsak vegre, azaz
uritsek ki az olajhulladekokat.  A Mol Rt. egyebkent otmillio forintot
fizetett a szolgalataiert.  Az ugyben a vizsgalat tovabb folytatodik.
Becslesek szerint a tovabbi kornyezetkarositas megakadalyozasa tobb mint
100 millio forintba kerul.

(K.Cs.) -tol a Hirmondobol
----------------------
kerdes: ilyenkor miert nem lehet leirni a Kft. nevet, es hogy milyen K. Csaba
az illeto????? (remelhetoleg nem ugyanaz a KCs, aki szerkesztette ezt a
Hirmondot...;-)
Az ilyeneknek nem szabadna tovasurranni a nevtelenseg pancelaban!

Diana

Nem fontos, de talan erdekes adalek Vizvari Belanak a 
szeneromuvekrol (igen tavol all tolem az a szandek, hogy furjam a 
szeneromuveket, de a mereven atomeromu elleneseknek talan nem 
art, ha ezt is tudjak):

"A kemiai szennyezoanyagok mellett a szentuezelesu eromuvek 
esetenkent jelentos mennyisegu radioaktiv anyagot bocsatanak a 
legkoerbe. A szenek hamutartalmaban - a lelohely geologiai 
adottsagaitol fueggo mertekben - mindig megtalalhato a termeszetes 
radioizotopok egy jelentos resze, elsosorban az U238, az U235 es a 
Th232 teljes bomlasi sora es a kalium radioaktiv K40 izotopja.. A 
szenekben az egyik leggyakoribb, igen jellegzetes radioaktiv anyag, 
a radium 226 toemegszamu izotopja (U238 bomlasi sor tagja). A 
valamennyi bomlasi sorban megtalalhato gazalaku bomlastermek, a 
radon teljes egesze a fuestgazokkal a koernyezetbe keruel. Az egyeb 
izotopok kemiai formajuktol es illekonysaguktol fueggo mertekben 
keruelnek a tuezeles folyaman a fuestgazba. A fuestgazba keruelo 
hanyad 
egyreszt a fuestgazzal a koernyezetbe tavozhat, masreszt a kazan 
hidegebb reszein a pernyeszemcsek felueletere kondenzalodva a 
pernyevel egyuett nagyreszt levalasztasra keruel. A le nem 
valasztott 
pernye a rakondenzalodott radioaktiv anyagokkal egyuett jut a 
koernyezetbe. A pernyelevalasztok foleg az igen kis szemcsemeretu, 
ezert nagy fajlagos felueletu pernyet eresztik at, amelyek fajlagos 
aktivitasa emiatt a kiindulo hamuenal sokkal nagyobb lesz. A 
koernyezetbe keruelo aktivitas tehat nagymertekben fuegg a pernye 
szemcseeloszlasatol es a pernye levalasztasi fokatol.
A szen fajlagos aktivitasa a lelohelytol fueggoen szeles hatarok 
koezt 
valtozhat. A Ra226 koncentracioja altalaban 1...10 Bq/kg, de nehany 
helyen - pl. Donyeck, egyes lengyel es pennsylvaniai lelohelyek - 
elerheti a 20...100 Bq/kg-ot is [Levai, 1973], [Izrael, 1971]. 
[Knyizsnyikov, 1977]. A hazai szenekre vonatkozo vizsgalatok 
eredmenyeit [Bodizs D.-Keoemlei G.-Gaspar l. 1992] a teljes bomlasi 
sorokra szamitva adja meg (ez az ertek a Ra226 koncentracio 
10...30-szorosa lehet!). Az atlagos szenek fajlagos aktivitasa 
100...250 Bq/kg, a visontai lignite 35 Bq/kg, a pecsi szene 300 Bq/kg, 
egyes ajkai mintakban meghaladta az 500 Bq/kg-ot. Emellett 
altalaban 150...300 Bq/kg K40 is talalhato a szeneinkben. A 
kibocsatott pernyeben kb. oetszoer akkora koncentraciot mertek, mint 
a kiindulo szenekben.
A kibocsatott aktivitas erteke oesszehasonlitva egy atomeromu 
radioaktiv kibocsatasaval viszonylag csekely, azonban szinte teljes 
egeszeben alfa sugarzo - egeszsegre igen veszelyes - izotopokbol 
all, mig az atomeromuvi kibocsatas doento toebbsege kevesbe 
artalmas, beta es lagy gamma sugarzo nemesgaz. A szentuezelesu 
eromuvekbol legkoerbe keruelo radium, torium es kalium izotopok jol 
beepuelnek az emberi szervezetbe, igy a koernyezetben lakok egyes 
szerveit (csontvelo, tuedo) lenyegesen - egyes esetekben akar ket 
nagysagrenddel - nagyobb egyenerteku dozis eri, mint atomeromu 
koezeleben [Knyizsnyikov, 1977]. A hazai eromuvekbol kibocsatott 
fajlagos aktivitas [Bodizs D.-stb.] szerint 1988-ban altalaban 
200...1200 MBq/MW/ev, de pl. az Ajkai es az Inotai Eromuben 
4000...7000 MBq/MW/ev volt. OEsszehasonlitasul koezlik, hogy a 
Paksi Atomeromuben - ha csak az aeroszol kibocsatast vesszuek 
figyelembe - ugyanez az ertek 0.3 MBq/MW/ev volt. A szentuezelesu eromuvek 
radioaktiv kibocsatasa azota a terheles csoekkenese es a 
pernyelevalasztok rekonstrukcioja koevetkezteben lenyegesen - 
esetenkent nagysagrendekkel - csoekkent.
Radioaktiv anyagot - ha sokkal kisebb mertekben is - az 
olajtuezelesu 
berendezesek fuestgazaiban is talalhatunk."

dg-nek:

"... Csernobilnak 31 halalos aldozata volt, ami jol megkozeliti a 
nemregiben idezett Czeizel-fele szamot. Honnan vettek?..."
Onnan, hogy annyi volt. A kozvetlen. 29 a sugarzastol, 1 az 
elviselhetonel nagyobb darab fejere esesetol, 1 ijedtseg miatti 
infarktusban. A kozvetettrol mindenfele becsles van forgalomban, de 
az informatikaban jaratosak jol tudjak, hogy jelnek a zaj 
nagysagrendjebe eso vagy annal kisebb valtozasa nem mutathato ki.

"A nemregiben feldobott akkumlator-porblema megoldasa:
Pierce/Turner: Economics of Natural Resources and the Env.: "The 
lead in junked car batteries is GENERALLY recycled." no comment..."
Comment (vagy inkabb kerdes):
Az idezett urak vallalnak-e Magyarorszagi bermunkat vagy esetleg  
tovabbkepzest?

Udv                     Gacs Ivan

Ui: Az utolso mondatot Diana keresere modositottam. Az elozo verzio 
- eszerint serto modon - pontositotta a tovabbkepzendok koret. Idezni 
- gondolom - szabad: "A pokolba vezeto ut is joszandekkal van 
kikovezve." Ez - megitelesem szerint - a tevedes jogat is rogziti. Azt 
azert nem ertem, miert kell olyanok lelket patyolgatni, akik mero jo 
indulatbol - esetleg tobbszor ismetlodoen - ezt az utat kovezik ki?
GI