Re: Diesel School Buses, Un ion of Concerned Scientists

[Guest guest]

>What's your agenda?<

I am a survivor of biotoxin mediated illness who finds the current

attitude of " You have no evidence and you can't prove it " unacceptable.

Especially considering that we do have evidence and we can prove it.

There is a vast schism between perspectives in this group which is

mostly held in check by silence on the part of members who know full

well that their clients are manifesting exactly the health effects

they describe, as a result of exposure to toxic mold.

-

[Guest guest]

Well, if you are asking what my agend is, I guess it is to have a

discussion based on reasonably accurate facts and not based upon a

bunch of emotional hype and BS.

My orginal response was a question about the " open crankshaft " . A

central point of the article is that the " open crankshafts " in diesel

engines are the cause of pollutants getting into school buses. But no

one (including me) knows what an open crankshaft is or how it could be

a problem.

Someone speculated that the author really meant open crankcase. But

someone also pointed out that open crankcases have not be allowed

since the 1960s. And crankcases are not unique to deisel engines.

Someone speculated that exhaust was being drawn into the buses. But

that also would not be unique to deisel engines.

The article also places much emphasis on children in school buses

getting sick from the diesel engines. Why the emphasis on children and

school busses? I submit that adults are exposed to diesel exhaust much

more than children on school buses. Children are typically on a bus

for perhaps one hour in the morning and then again in the afternoon.

On the other hand, truck drivers are exposed to diesel exhaust at

least 8 hours a day, 5 days a week. So if we are concerned about the

health affect of deisel exhaust, why not talk about harm to truck

drivers instead of children?

Well, relating the problem to potential harm to children will evoke a

much more emotional response than relating it to adults. Relating an

issue or person to potential harm to children is a favorite tatic of

polititians trying to get elected or push some agenda. The article

clearly pushes the " harm to children hot button " .

So, going back to my orginal question, what is an open crakshaft? How

is it a problem? What is it that is unique to diesel engines and

school buses?

BTW, I don't own a vehicle with a diesel engine, never have, and I

don't work for a company that is in any way connected to any kind of

engines or fuels.

Tom is St. Louis

>

> We don't know many medical editors moonlighting as mechanics. Surely

if you're on an IEQ list you should know about diesel health effects

and anti-idling legislation to improve the asthma epidemic. What's

your agenda?

>

>

>

>

>

>

> FAIR USE NOTICE:

>

> This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not

always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are

making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding

of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy,

scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this

constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided

for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title

17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed

without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in

receiving the included information for research and educational

purposes. For more information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use

copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go

beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

,

Regarding:

There is a vast schism between perspectives in this

group which is

mostly held in check by silence on the part of members who know full

well that their clients are manifesting exactly the health effects

they describe, as a result of exposure to toxic mold.

-

Please explain, I don’t

understand.

I think we are all here

to learn from each other.  On this list

there is a varying depth of knowledge, background and experience. 

Most formally trained

scientists believe you can only make statements about what you can prove.  Supposition is just that and really irrelevant,

until someone has a eureka moment; and then the body

of science moves forward.  It’s

much safer that way.  Their reputations

are built on what they say, and if they get caught giving our erroneous

information it doesn’t look good for their careers or their egos.  They also really know what they are talking

about and if you argue their fact with opinion you look quite foolish in their

eyes. They are conservative in their positions because Credibility is the

watchword.  This is the truth. 

This is the whole truth:

Does this mean that all

or any of what you say is wrong? No!  How

much is true? Depends on who and what you are talking about.  Lots of things can’t be proven.  Does that mean that they don’t exist? Of

course not!  (Try proving you exist.)  Perhaps the scientific community is not yet

ready to receive the information or maybe we don’t know what form that

the information is in in order to look for it. 

Some scientists believe in

the whole truth, some don’t. 

There is also a huge lack

of understanding between how science works and how the rest of the world

perceives it.  That also plays into our

everyday life in a huge and very complicated way.  And then someone invented lawyersJ.

No doubt there are vested

interests, also, but I think your going after the wrong people.

Mark Doughty

[Guest guest]

" Mark Doughty " wrote:

>

,

> Most formally trained scientists believe you can only make

statements about what you can prove. Supposition is just that and

really irrelevant, until someone has a eureka moment; and then the

body of science moves forward. It's much safer that way.

> (Try proving you exist.)

Perhaps the scientific community is not yet

> ready to receive the information or maybe we don't know what form

that the information is in in order to look for it.

> Mark Doughty

Theoretically, it should be easy to empirically verify my corporeal

reality in a compelling manner.

I just don't shower for a week, and EUREKA!:

" I STINK, therefore I AM " . QED.

Ok, just kidding.

The outlook you refer to is the very interesting paradigm that

automatically suppresses new ideas, and caused Barry Marshall's " H-

Pylori " concepts to go untested for so many years. As a novel

hypothesis, it had no " peer reviewed evidence " to support it. And

of course, no respectable scientist would examine anything that

cannot be supported by prior references and literature. Ironic that

scientists used lack of peer review as evidence that the phenomeon

did not exist and should not be investigated.

Pretty neat that Robin Warren and Barry Marshall won the Nobel prize.

The " Union of Concerned Scientists " does sound to me like someone

who is very concerned about some strange and disturbing trends, and

used the classic buzzwords to make the point. Sure, its a cliche'

but there's no escaping that it just doesn't do to say " To heck with

the children "

I drive a diesel, and I'd rather not give it up because people are

becoming chemically sensitive, but I do try to drive it as little as

possible and use a bicycle whenever I can - to assuage my guilty

conscience. I don't think it would be reasonable for MCSers to ask

me to give up my truck, and I don't believe it is reasonable or

possible to require all buildings to meet the pristine requirements

of severely reactive people.

All I said was that it puts the population into a quandary that is

similar to the situation that has developed with peanut allergy.

So far, people have made great accomodation for PA - the packets of

peanuts on planes are disappearing - and PBJ's in schools are

becoming extinct.

But how many concessions are people willing to make? And what if

the prevalence of PA continues to increase?

What about communities that are starting to ask people to limit

perfumes? We're seeing more and more of this - how far will it go?

Total perfume abolishment? or will users fight for it, feeling that

their rights have been violated?

Mold remediation taken to " normal " standards may be fine for normal

people, but what about the growing number of people who are not able

to tolerate re-exposure? One simply cannot act as if we don't exist

when our requirements conflict.

I don't know what the answers are, but I do know that the harder

people try to push the problem aside, the more the problem tends to

push back. The " problem " has little choice in the matter.

-

[Guest guest]

I find this discussion regarding diesel particulates in school busses

interesting, but it always brings up a whole lot of questions....

Just how does a school bus " fill up " with diesel soot? I've been on a lot

of buses, I have chaperoned on school buses, and I have yet to find one

" filling up " with the smell of diesel, nor did I detect a hint of

diesel....at least not from diesel from the bus I was riding on. (Maybe it

was the bus next to us?) Is this phenomenon a result of a front-engine or

rear-engine bus? This is relevant. The issue of an " open crankcase " is

relevant to buses built prior to 1986, and I don't know how many of these

older buses are still on the road. Is this an issue based on old data? Is

this problem more of an issue when the bus is stationary and idling, or

moving? I can't see this being an issue on a moving bus...that is unless

you are the person driving directly behind the smelly bus whose tail pipe is

mounted to the rear bumper. All modern buses are built such that no engine

emissions can enter into the passenger compartment; it is a legal

requirement. If they do, then it is a maintenance issue and not an

operational issue. Is the exhaust vertical or horizontal? Because

rear-bumper horizontal-discharge exhaust fumes are more easily re-entrained

into open windows of the passenger compartment when stationary, i.e., not

moving. Solution - Don't have windows that open, and require vertical

discharge of exhaust. Which brings up another observation...For those that

have traveled to Holland, Germany, Belgium, etc., I found it appalling that

many large diesel trucks discharge their exhaust to the left side of the

tractor unit, right in front of the drive wheels, about 1-meter off the

ground. Therefore, as you drive past these rigs with your passenger windows

down (in the itty bitty cars they have there), you instantly get a car full

of diesel exhaust! It is a direct shot/pathway into your car. (I almost

crash a car one time and nearly choked to death on the instant slug of

blinding soot that filled my little Peugeot.) Needless to say, I now am an

educated driver and I NEVER drive (in Europe) with the passenger windows

down. So....back to the original question, Just how does a school bus fill

with diesel soot?

For what it is worth....

--

Geyer, PE, CIH, CSP

President

KENTEC Industries, Inc.

Bakersfield, California

www.kerntecindustries.com

This E-mail scanned for spam and viruses by ATG Internet.

[Guest guest]

,

Lots of great questions. I e-mailed Medical News Today. The editor and I

have been having a conversation about this article. It seems that it is

coming over the wire and they were not the source. It is in hundreds of US

newspapers. Whoever wrote this needs to do some homework. There may be some

agenda going on here. I can't believe the school bus fleet is that old and

ill maintained.

The part about the " open crankshaft " was pulled from the Medical News Today

article an hour after it went out. The editor checked the article with his

mechanic, who laughed at the crankshaft comment just as I had, so he took it

out. The mechanic said that the problem he sees there (UK) is that the

busses are very large for the streets and get stuck in traffic for extended

periods.

The original article is much more sensible, offering facts and solutions.

Crankshafts and soot filled busses are not mentioned. The article is rather

positive.

Here is the original version:

http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/big_rig_cleanup/clean-school-bus-

pollution.html

Here is the LA Times version:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-

schoolbus25may25,1,3677284.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

It is apparent that someone sensationalized the report and " made up " (?) or

misrepresented a lot. It is sad that this is not unusual any more. It

seems that most of what we are debating about this article is not in the

article, but is fiction.

As for the original question: Just how does a school bus fill with diesel

soot?

It has help from someone shoveling BS.

Bruce

Bruce Rundlett, BBEC

Bio-Home Solutions

HC 1 Box 3354

Oracle,AZ 85623

www.bio-homesolutions.com

Re: Re: Diesel School Buses, Un ion of Concerned

Scientists

I find this discussion regarding diesel particulates in school busses

interesting, but it always brings up a whole lot of questions....

Just how does a school bus " fill up " with diesel soot? I've been on a lot

of buses, I have chaperoned on school buses, and I have yet to find one

" filling up " with the smell of diesel, nor did I detect a hint of

diesel....at least not from diesel from the bus I was riding on. (Maybe it

was the bus next to us?) Is this phenomenon a result of a front-engine or

rear-engine bus? This is relevant. The issue of an " open crankcase " is

relevant to buses built prior to 1986, and I don't know how many of these

older buses are still on the road. Is this an issue based on old data? Is

this problem more of an issue when the bus is stationary and idling, or

moving? I can't see this being an issue on a moving bus...that is unless

you are the person driving directly behind the smelly bus whose tail pipe is

mounted to the rear bumper. All modern buses are built such that no engine

emissions can enter into the passenger compartment; it is a legal

requirement. If they do, then it is a maintenance issue and not an

operational issue. Is the exhaust vertical or horizontal? Because

rear-bumper horizontal-discharge exhaust fumes are more easily re-entrained

into open windows of the passenger compartment when stationary, i.e., not

moving. Solution - Don't have windows that open, and require vertical

discharge of exhaust. Which brings up another observation...For those that

have traveled to Holland, Germany, Belgium, etc., I found it appalling that

many large diesel trucks discharge their exhaust to the left side of the

tractor unit, right in front of the drive wheels, about 1-meter off the

ground. Therefore, as you drive past these rigs with your passenger windows

down (in the itty bitty cars they have there), you instantly get a car full

of diesel exhaust! It is a direct shot/pathway into your car. (I almost

crash a car one time and nearly choked to death on the instant slug of

blinding soot that filled my little Peugeot.) Needless to say, I now am an

educated driver and I NEVER drive (in Europe) with the passenger windows

down. So....back to the original question, Just how does a school bus fill

with diesel soot?

For what it is worth....

--

Geyer, PE, CIH, CSP

President

KENTEC Industries, Inc.

Bakersfield, California

www.kerntecindustries.com

This E-mail scanned for spam and viruses by ATG Internet.

FAIR USE NOTICE:

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been

specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material

available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental,

political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice

issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such

copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is

distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in

receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your

own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright

owner.

[Guest guest]

" Bio-Home Solutions " wrote:

> It is apparent that someone sensationalized the report and " made

up " (?) or misrepresented a lot. It is sad that this is not unusual

any more. It seems that most of what we are debating about this

article is not in the article, but is fiction.

>

> As for the original question: Just how does a school bus fill with

diesel soot? It has help from someone shoveling BS.

> Bruce

The article has all the hallmarks of sensationalism and hype

generated by someone with an agenda.

But what kind of agenda?

Why would someone attack schoolbuses, particularly if the problems

mentioned has been largely corrected in the last thirty years.

Sounds to me like a chemically sensitized person is writing it from

that perspective.

The agenda may be concern over whether diesel will be a progressive

factor which might drive others into having what appears to non

chemically sensitive people as nothing more than an irrational fear.

-

(I have empathy for such people, but I still like my truck, so I

guess I'm in a moral quandary)

[Guest guest]

The articles below have been sent to you from http://www.ucsusa.org Title: National Pollution Report Card Grades Every State on School Bus Pollution and Efforts to Protect Children’s Health Summary: The School Bus Pollution Report Card 2006 found that some strides have been made to reduce school bus emissions but more investments need to be made in replacing polluting old buses and retrofitting more recent models. Link to full page: http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/national-pollution-report.html Title: Clean School Bus Pollution Report Card Summary: 2006 ranking of states Clean School Bus standings. Link to full page: http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/big_rig_cleanup/clean-school-bus-pollution.html UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS, Citizens and Scientists for Environmental Solutions UCS is an independent nonprofit alliance of more than 100,000 concerned citizens and scientists. We augment rigorous scientific analysis with innovative thinking and committed citizen advocacy to build a cleaner, healthier environment and a safer world.UCS's programs are the means by which we accomplish this. They are the pressure points translating vision into action. Through them, we connect the best

scientific insights with the knowledge and support of an astute citizenry and apply them to the machinery of government at all levels—with results that have set a standard for effective advocacy for decades. UCS was founded in 1969 by faculty members and students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who were concerned about the misuse of science and technology in society. Their statement called for the redirection of scientific research to pressing environmental and social problems.From that beginning, UCS has become a powerful voice for change. Our core groups of scientists and engineers collaborate with colleagues across the country to conduct technical studies on renewable energy options, the impacts of global warming, the risks of genetically engineered crops, and other related topics. We share the results of our research with

policymakers, the news media, and the public.Our experts work together with citizens across the country to disseminate our findings and alter policies in local communities as well as on the national level.Our advocates are highly respected in Washington, DC, as well as in state capitals, and are frequently called to testify before government committees.The UCS Online Action Network gives citizens the means to keep informed on our issues and to help shape policy by expressing their view to government and corporate decisionmakers. Through our Sound Science Initiative, thousands of scientists provide the facts on environmental science to government and the media.Knowing the enormity of the challenge, we actively work in coalition with other environmental groups that share our goals. National Headquarters2 Brattle SquareCambridge, MA 02238-9105Phone: Fax: Washington Office1707 H St NW, Suite 600Washington, DC 20006-3962Phone: Fax: West Coast Office2397 Shattuck Avenue, Suite 203Berkeley, CA 94704-1567Phone: Fax: erikmoldwarrior wrote: "Bio-Home Solutions" wrote:> It is apparent that someone sensationalized the report and "made up" (?) or misrepresented a lot. It is sad that this is not unusual any more. It seems that most of what we are debating about this article is not in the article, but is fiction.> > As for the original question: Just how does a school bus fill with diesel soot? It has help from someone shoveling BS. > Bruce The article has all the hallmarks of sensationalism and hype generated by someone with an agenda.But what kind of agenda?Why would someone attack schoolbuses, particularly if the problems mentioned has been largely corrected in the last thirty years.Sounds to me like a chemically sensitized person is writing it from that perspective.The agenda may be concern over whether diesel will be a progressive factor which might drive

others into having what appears to non chemically sensitive people as nothing more than an irrational fear.-(I have empathy for such people, but I still like my truck, so I guess I'm in a moral quandary),_.___ ,___

Sneak preview the all-new Yahoo.com. It's not radically different. Just radically better.

[Guest guest]

,

I really didn't stop to ponder the agenda. It could be that someone is

unhappy with the smell and particulate levels from the diesel vehicles they

follow that have exhaust under the rear bumper as I have noticed on many

school busses. I am none too happy with the diesel exhaust when it is

smelly. Today's diesels are much less to emit this type of exhaust than

earlier models, and many folks drive diesels that are ill maintained.

I would prefer not to inhale diesel exhaust, it makes me ill. This is why I

have turned down a number of VERY well paying jobs as a diesel mechanic. I

try to co-exist with everyone on the road and just try to avoid being in

close proximity to the diesels. I think that it is your right to have and

love your truck, but some folks don't.

I think the most likely agenda is of self promotion. How better, as a

writer, to sell your story to hundreds of newspapers than to have uncovered

a threat to the most innocent and vulnerable of us, our children. How does

that journalistic saying go, if it bleeds, it reads.

Just a possibility.... Bruce

Bruce Rundlett, BBEC

Bio-Home Solutions

HC 1 Box 3354

Oracle,AZ 85623

www.bio-homesolutions.com

Re: Diesel School Buses, Un ion of Concerned Scientists

" Bio-Home Solutions " wrote:

> It is apparent that someone sensationalized the report and " made

up " (?) or misrepresented a lot. It is sad that this is not unusual

any more. It seems that most of what we are debating about this

article is not in the article, but is fiction.

>

> As for the original question: Just how does a school bus fill with

diesel soot? It has help from someone shoveling BS.

> Bruce

The article has all the hallmarks of sensationalism and hype

generated by someone with an agenda.

But what kind of agenda?

Why would someone attack schoolbuses, particularly if the problems

mentioned has been largely corrected in the last thirty years.

Sounds to me like a chemically sensitized person is writing it from

that perspective.

The agenda may be concern over whether diesel will be a progressive

factor which might drive others into having what appears to non

chemically sensitive people as nothing more than an irrational fear.

-

(I have empathy for such people, but I still like my truck, so I

guess I'm in a moral quandary)

FAIR USE NOTICE:

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been

specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material

available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental,

political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice

issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such

copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is

distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in

receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your

own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright

owner.

[Guest guest]

, " Bio-Home Solutions " wrote:

>

> ,

> I think the most likely agenda is of self promotion. How better, as

a writer, to sell your story to hundreds of newspapers than to have

uncovered a threat to the most innocent and vulnerable of us, our

children. How does that journalistic saying go, if it bleeds, it

reads.

> Just a possibility.... Bruce

Well, we might want to be just a little cautious about coming to

this conclusion, for that's the exact excuse people used to dismiss my

story about mold exposure at the beginning of the CFS epidemic, when I

tried to draw attention to this little peculiarity.

I was called " arrogant " for thinking that I was right and that the

doctors were wrong. They said my story was ridiculous, that mold was

harmless, and that I was indulging in blatant self promotion for

trying to capitalize on peoples fears.

When I said " Just wait. Mold is going to be huge. " they just laughed.

But they're not laughing anymore.

-

[Guest guest]

In response to recent postings about school buses and diesel fumes

(particulate and chemical):

Multiple studies over several years (including some from well-respected

organizations and universities) have found elevated levels of diesel

fumes inside school buses. Some have suggested different pathways:

- fumes come directly through the crankcase and floor;

- fumes enter through doors (loading/unloading) and windows(often

open, may not seal tightly)

- fumes enter by air pressure differential at the back of the bus;

and/or

- fumes enter when several buses are in a row, either idling or

caravanning.

Not surprisingly, critics have found fault with these studies. EPA's

Web site does not discuss diesel fumes inside buses.

Regardless of what is or isn't inside the bus, EPA is concerned with

diesel school bus emissions. The EPA " Clean School Bus USA " program

focuses on anti-idling programs (which cut emissions and save fuel); bus

engine retrofits (which reduce emissions); and older bus

replacement (because one-third of buses in use were built before 1990

regulations and may emit six times more pollution). Visit

http://www.epa.gov/cleanschoolbus/ for more info.

Lastly. school buses have an impressive vehicular safety record. It is

clearly safer for children to ride a bus (with however much emission

inside) than it is for them to be carried by private automobiles, in

which approximately one child dies each day going to or from school. So

please do not take any of this as " Kids shouldn't ride buses. "

This info was vetted by an EPA colleague who has worked on bus emissions

for years. I welcome any knowledgeable response, (but please, no

speculation if you haven't even read a few articles of the research in

this field.) As Joe Friday used to say on the Dragnet TV show, " Just

the facts, ma'am. "

Thanks, y'all.

Henry Slack

Henry Slack, P.E.

U.S. EPA Region 4

Indoor Air Program

For more assistance, try EPA's Web site, www.epa.gov/iaq

or call EPA's Indoor Air Quality Information Clearinghouse

. Experts are available 9-5 M-F

[Guest guest]

,

I agree with you that one of the methods of attacking the credibility of a

person is to connect them to a personal agenda, thereby injecting possible

bias into the argument. I did not mean to do that, but a statement like "

filling with soot " ( is this all the way to the roof?) is a bit sensational

considering the original article. I was only comparing the two articles

since the writer did not claim their own research or credit others for the

differences.

Can Henry provide a link to the study that says that " fumes come directly

through the crankcase and floor " ? I am having trouble understanding the

pathway " directly through the crankcase " . The other paths are very

probable. I am very glad that attention is now being given in a more

holistic way to air quality for children being transported to and from

school. We need to look at the things that increase the possibility for bad

things to happen. Lining up and idling the busses is one example of just

asking for exposure to diesel exhaust. I'm sure that, for example, careful

planning of routes, times of idling, proximity to other buses and

ventilation in the busses (and many other factors) would greatly decrease

the likelihood of exposures. These were expressed in the great articles

from Matt, thanks.

Tony, thanks for the overseas opinion.

Regards, Bruce

Bruce Rundlett, BBEC

Bio-Home Solutions

HC 1 Box 3354

Oracle,AZ 85623

www.bio-homesolutions.com

Re: Diesel School Buses, Un ion of Concerned Scientists

, " Bio-Home Solutions " wrote:

>

> ,

> I think the most likely agenda is of self promotion. How better, as

a writer, to sell your story to hundreds of newspapers than to have

uncovered a threat to the most innocent and vulnerable of us, our

children. How does that journalistic saying go, if it bleeds, it

reads.

> Just a possibility.... Bruce

Well, we might want to be just a little cautious about coming to

this conclusion, for that's the exact excuse people used to dismiss my

story about mold exposure at the beginning of the CFS epidemic, when I

tried to draw attention to this little peculiarity.

I was called " arrogant " for thinking that I was right and that the

doctors were wrong. They said my story was ridiculous, that mold was

harmless, and that I was indulging in blatant self promotion for

trying to capitalize on peoples fears.

When I said " Just wait. Mold is going to be huge. " they just laughed.

But they're not laughing anymore.

-

FAIR USE NOTICE:

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been

specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material

available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental,

political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice

issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such

copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is

distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in

receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your

own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright

owner.

[Guest guest]

" Bio-Home Solutions " wrote:

> ,

> I agree with you that one of the methods of attacking the

credibility of a person is to connect them to a personal agenda,

thereby injecting possible bias into the argument. I did not mean to

do that, but a statement like " filling with soot " ( is this all the

way to the roof?) is a bit sensational considering the original

article. I was only comparing the two articles since the writer did

not claim their own research or credit others for the differences.

>

Yes, it's very sensationalistic and exaggerated!

Almost as sensational and unbelievable as someone saying " My House is

Killing Me " .

Who could believe such a thing? What is THEIR agenda?

As I said, it sounds like this is written from the perspective of a

chemically sensitive person who has become reactive to diesel, and

uses expressions that sound wildly exaggerated.

Considering the disbelief the met the statement " Mold is Killing me " ,

and the subsequent discovery that this is an accurate expression, I

wonder how quick people should be to discount the warning about diesel

this person is trying to give?

I like my diesel truck and don't want to give it up, but this article

does give me pause, and it causes me to ponder the question of " What

if it happened to me? "

-

[Guest guest]

,

I guess I didn't quite look at it in that way. Since I never thought " Mold

Is Killing Me " or " My House Is Killing Me " were outrageous statements, I

missed the other point. My apologies. (BTW, the diesel issue does happen

to me, sometimes strongly)

Bruce

Bruce Rundlett, BBEC

Bio-Home Solutions

HC 1 Box 3354

Oracle,AZ 85623

www.bio-homesolutions.com

Re: Diesel School Buses, Un ion of Concerned Scientists

" Bio-Home Solutions " wrote:

> ,

> I agree with you that one of the methods of attacking the

credibility of a person is to connect them to a personal agenda,

thereby injecting possible bias into the argument. I did not mean to

do that, but a statement like " filling with soot " ( is this all the

way to the roof?) is a bit sensational considering the original

article. I was only comparing the two articles since the writer did

not claim their own research or credit others for the differences.

>

Yes, it's very sensationalistic and exaggerated!

Almost as sensational and unbelievable as someone saying " My House is

Killing Me " .

Who could believe such a thing? What is THEIR agenda?

As I said, it sounds like this is written from the perspective of a

chemically sensitive person who has become reactive to diesel, and

uses expressions that sound wildly exaggerated.

Considering the disbelief the met the statement " Mold is Killing me " ,

and the subsequent discovery that this is an accurate expression, I

wonder how quick people should be to discount the warning about diesel

this person is trying to give?

I like my diesel truck and don't want to give it up, but this article

does give me pause, and it causes me to ponder the question of " What

if it happened to me? "

-

FAIR USE NOTICE:

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been

specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material

available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental,

political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice

issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such

copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is

distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in

receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your

own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright

owner.

[Guest guest]

your evaluation sounds well founded to me. I don't know anything about illnesses caused from diesel fumes. I was merely pointing out that the reason school buses are probably a focus is because school air advocacies groups are prominent, and therefore school buses are probably an easy focus for them to make their point.

Sharon

[Guest guest]

, you are right on target. I've investigated and evaluated several hundred IAQ issues for schools including: bus emissions, building design, ventilation, carpet loading, overhead tile abrasion, school children asthma, etc, etc, etc....

What's happening in the schools to exacerbate the onset of, or increase of, asthma and asthma-like symptoms is no where near as significant as the combination of the following that occur during home-life, not school life: 1) lack of exercise, 2) excessive down time on the couch with the TV, computer, game boy, cell phone, whatever, 3) extreme apathy toward nutrition, 4) minimal exposure to clean fresh air, and 5) excessive prescription drug exposure. (I'm sure I've forgotten some others.)

These are primarily the result of a lack of parental interest in the wellfare of their offspring. Sorry, folks, if you want healthy children get off your butts and work at. It is your responsibility, not mine!

Miles Athey, PhD

Athey Consulting Services

Ritzville, WA