>> |
No. 387110
>>387087 Pollution by non-native chemicals is still the number one problem facing the environment. Everything else takes a second seat, and the majority of other problems stem from it. It's not arbitrary or "cartoon villain" shit just because you've never heard of a major environmental problem, we've been feeding our livestock hormones without proper regulation and it's been devastating the environment (which again is still a problem even if you haven't heard of it), and there are far more humans than livestock, we are everywhere, and we are much harder to regulate. http://toxics.usgs.gov/pubs/FS-027-02/ So far the issue is being kept in check by three factors: 1. Currently it's prescription only, so it can't really be overused, and it limits the percentage of population that uses it. 2. The human sourced pollution is localized to urban regions of a few developed nations (~12 million women in USA, <100 million worldwide) 3. Other sources of pollution are localized to plants and farms in these nations.
If you make it OTC it's harder to justify any regulation, even among farm animals or industrial runoff, and other nations will follow suit. Imagine if the three billion people in Asia looked to our model and decided it's a good idea to control their birth rate with hormones or to pump their cows full of milk producing hormones? I'm not overstating things when saying that global unregulated use of hormones and hormone mimicking compounds is dangerously unwise. Since all vertebrates depend on estrogen as a sex mediating hormone it has the potential to make all higher animals and many plants that depend on them simply stop reproducing. It would be on par with the late Devonian mass extinction... and that's just with widespread use of estrogen, not even including many other hormones and steroids which could become popular.
So in summation, we should be phasing out the use of hormonal bir
Message too long. Click here to view the full text.
|