While the levels aren't a trigger, contrary to posts made on this website its not exactly a nothingburger either.
And it didn't have to happen. But the people there voted for it, right Joy Behar?
Supporters of Biden, "Well that's only if you're a living
organism. What a biased headline."
“After resisting calls for weeks to test for dioxins, the EPA on 3 March announced it would order Norfolk Southern to do so”
The EPA is completely useless.
Uh, didn’t booteeplug say it was safe?
There were two more train derailments yesterday. Pete Buttplug is hard at work again.
We must ban all trains
Possibility everything 25 miles downwind of the burnoff will suffer the effects of the Dioxon.
Dioxin’s alleged human health issues were politicized decades ago. With all due respect for the many veterans groups who felt victimized by exposure to it as a defoliant during Vietnam war, those who argued that the alleged effects of it were not occurring more often than what properly controlled studies showed for background chance had pretty good data. The anti-war left thought differently, but what data they presented never much impressed me. The poor vets with cancers, or in some cases with suffering from birth defects, were much more sympathetic figures and many were desperate to know “why” that had happened. But such questions are often not answerable and their pointing towards dioxin didn’t necessarily make it so. So when the quoted “safe” levels came from Obama era EPA I’m reflexively dubious. Now if you are a guinea pig, as opposed to a human “guinea pig,” dioxin is very toxic. But for people the one proven adverse effect of very large dioxin exposure is chloracne, which is different in localization and behavior from even fairly severe regular acne. And the one human who likely received the largest dose ever, a former president of Ukraine, survived it albeit with significant facial damage. If some cases of chloracne appear in E. Palestine, which IIRC would take a bit more time to develop, I’d be more concerned.