1 1
JoeWeber

Citing Covid-19 EPA suspends rules

Recommended Posts

Well, they're losing a lot of profit due to the economic slowdown.

They need to make it up somehow. Having them be their own enforcement of pollution rules is one way for them to not have to pay for proper treatment, disposal and handling of pollutants.

Now they can just dump them where ever they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't be concerned. Its just trump trying to kill more Americans.

Now Is the Time to Take Care of Your Lungs. Here’s How.

"air pollution can cause or aggravate respiratory illnesses like asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. And those illnesses can make you more susceptible to the worst effects of lung infections. Second, exposure to air pollution is known to raise the chance of contracting viruses in the first place, regardless of underlying health conditions.

“Increased pollution increases susceptibility to infection,” said Dr. Meredith McCormack, a spokeswoman for the American Lung Association and associate professor of pulmonary and critical care at Johns Hopkins University. “All things being equal, a person exposed to air pollution would likely have a worse outcome if they were exposed to coronavirus.”

Even FOX news admits these facts." air pollution puts people at higher risk of dying. Researchers studying the SARS outbreak in China in 2003 discovered that infected people living in areas with more air pollution were twice as likely to die as those in less polluted locations. ... “Once this crisis is over, policymakers should speed up measures to get dirty vehicles off our roads. Science tells us that epidemics like Covid-19 will occur with increasing frequency. So cleaning up the streets is a basic investment for a healthier future.

Obviously FOX will be taking this story down in the next couple days. Can't have the base aware of trump's homicidal propensities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, jimjumper said:

I don't know of any factual data off-hand, but I wonder how much smoking plays into the  overall severity or lethality of the virus....

Quite a bit, which is likely why more men than women die of the virus (more men, traditionally, have smoked).   Smoking paralyzes the cilia in your airways, so they don't sweep out the mucus and dirt as well as a non-smoker's lungs.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A paper published in the New England Journal of Medicine looked at more than 1,000 COVID-19 patients in China and found that people who smoke are 2.4 times more likely to become critically ill and require ventilation than those who don’t.

Source: http://www.capradio.org/articles/2020/03/28/stop-vaping-and-smoking-health-officials-urge-californians-to-quit-to-protect-against-covid-19/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, ryoder said:

A paper published in the New England Journal of Medicine looked at more than 1,000 COVID-19 patients in China and found that people who smoke are 2.4 times more likely to become critically ill and require ventilation than those who don’t.

Source: http://www.capradio.org/articles/2020/03/28/stop-vaping-and-smoking-health-officials-urge-californians-to-quit-to-protect-against-covid-19/

 

Quit 20 years ago, maybe. Whatever, now's the time to start getting data for the lists. Job 1 is getting the economy going, period. We need to know just who is dying from this, is it left handers, low pullers, Lutherans, large people, just who are these losers? The bottom line is we can not with any degree of confidence call this a human tragedy until we know if the motherfuckers had it coming. Am I right? Viva La Trump!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wmw999 said:

I wonder if that would apply only to cigarettes, or pot too? Probably not a lot of data on that in China, but where it's been legalized it too might matter.

Wendy P.

You can never safely speculate on medical matters without data. That is the job of Presidents. But I will speculate that the key factor is the damage smoke does to the respiratory cilia. Pot smoke and pollution will both damage those. But I have never met a pot smoker who inhales the sheer volume of smoke that a tobacco addict does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

But I have never met a pot smoker who inhales the sheer volume of smoke that a tobacco addict does.

Huh? 

"Smoke is harmful to lung health. Whether from burning wood, tobacco or marijuana, toxins and carcinogens are released from the combustion of materials. Smoke from marijuana combustion has been shown to contain many of the same toxins, irritants and carcinogens as tobacco smoke.4-7

Beyond just what's in the smoke alone, marijuana is typically smoked differently than tobacco. Marijuana smokers tend to inhale more deeply and hold their breath longer than cigarette smokers, which leads to a greater exposure per breath to tar.8

Secondhand marijuana smoke contains many of the same toxins and carcinogens found in directly-inhaled marijuana smoke, in similar amounts if not more.5 While there is no data on the health consequences of breathing secondhand marijuana smoke, there is concern that it could cause harmful health effects, especially among vulnerable children in the home. Additional research on the health effects of secondhand marijuana smoke is needed."

https://www.lung.org/quit-smoking/smoking-facts/health-effects/marijuana-and-lung-health

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

We need to beat this thing however we can.

I read that as being more of a pain in the ass later; than complying with the existing policies now. They'll need to explain exactly why & how compliance was directly attributed to the COVID-19. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BIGUN said:

Huh? 

"Smoke is harmful to lung health. Whether from burning wood, tobacco or marijuana, toxins and carcinogens are released from the combustion of materials. Smoke from marijuana combustion has been shown to contain many of the same toxins, irritants and carcinogens as tobacco smoke.4-7

Beyond just what's in the smoke alone, marijuana is typically smoked differently than tobacco. Marijuana smokers tend to inhale more deeply and hold their breath longer than cigarette smokers, which leads to a greater exposure per breath to tar.8

Secondhand marijuana smoke contains many of the same toxins and carcinogens found in directly-inhaled marijuana smoke, in similar amounts if not more.5 While there is no data on the health consequences of breathing secondhand marijuana smoke, there is concern that it could cause harmful health effects, especially among vulnerable children in the home. Additional research on the health effects of secondhand marijuana smoke is needed."

https://www.lung.org/quit-smoking/smoking-facts/health-effects/marijuana-and-lung-health

I didn't say it was good for you. And I don't recommend it. I smoked both, but neither now for 20 years or so. You can take my word for it that smokers inhale deeply and that a pack a day (half of my intake in the end) of cigarettes is more smoke than the most dedicated pot head could inhale. Especially these day with high grade cannabis products.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

I read that as being more of a pain in the ass later; than complying with the existing policies now. They'll need to explain exactly why & how compliance was directly attributed to the COVID-19. 

Why even go there? Votes, maybe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, gowlerk said:

I didn't say it was good for you. And I don't recommend it. I smoked both, but neither now for 20 years or so. You can take my word for it that smokers inhale deeply and that a pack a day (half of my intake in the end) of cigarettes is more smoke than the most dedicated pot head could inhale. Especially these day with high grade cannabis products.

That is more to my point than yours 99% of pot smokers started out as cigarette smokers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BIGUN said:

That is more to my point than yours 99% of pot smokers started out as cigarette smokers. 

I think we both agree that smoking is bad for your lungs. My only point is that cigarette smoking is worse. If a person can only quit one, quit tobacco first. If you still need to get high? Consider switching to edibles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Why even go there? Votes, maybe?

Holy shit. Stop reading what the alarmists are reporting and read the thingie you posted. . It's a simple matter of social-distancing their employees and with the need to pull back - compliance becomes an internal recording mechanism with non-compliance having to be explained and you can bet that the fines will be more than the value of compliance relaxation.

PS Just a reminder - I am so far left of the liberals when it comes to the environment that I've been chastised by the Professor for believing that wind turbines are a form of pollution. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

Beyond just what's in the smoke alone, marijuana is typically smoked differently than tobacco. Marijuana smokers tend to inhale more deeply and hold their breath longer than cigarette smokers, which leads to a greater exposure per breath to tar.8

Is exposure per breath at all relevant? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In conclusion, while both tobacco and cannabis smoke have similar properties chemically, their pharmacological activities differ greatly. Components of cannabis smoke minimize some carcinogenic pathways whereas tobacco smoke enhances some. Both types of smoke contain carcinogens and particulate matter that promotes inflammatory immune responses that may enhance the carcinogenic effects of the smoke. However, cannabis typically down-regulates immunologically-generated free radical production by promoting a Th2 immune cytokine profile. Furthermore, THC inhibits the enzyme necessary to activate some of the carcinogens found in smoke. In contrast, tobacco smoke increases the likelihood of carcinogenesis by overcoming normal cellular checkpoint protective mechanisms through the activity of respiratory epithelial cell nicotine receptors. Cannabinoids receptors have not been reported in respiratory epithelial cells (in skin they prevent cancer), and hence the DNA damage checkpoint mechanism should remain intact after prolonged cannabis exposure. Furthermore, nicotine promotes tumor angiogenesis whereas cannabis inhibits it. It is possible that as the cannabis-consuming population ages, the long-term consequences of smoking cannabis may become more similar to what is observed with tobacco. However, current knowledge does not suggest that cannabis smoke will have a carcinogenic potential comparable to that resulting from exposure to tobacco smoke.

Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1277837/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
43 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

That is more to my point than yours 99% of pot smokers started out as cigarette smokers. 

Are you sure? In any event the smart thing to fill out on the medical forms for C-19 treatment is to under-report your age, over report your education and check non-smoker for tobacco, pot. In case ventilator is needed.

Edited by Phil1111

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

Holy shit. Stop reading what the alarmists are reporting and read the thingie you posted. . It's a simple matter of social-distancing their employees and with the need to pull back - compliance becomes an internal recording mechanism with non-compliance having to be explained and you can bet that the fines will be more than the value of compliance relaxation.

PS Just a reminder - I am so far left of the liberals when it comes to the environment that I've been chastised by the Professor for believing that wind turbines are a form of pollution. 

I did read it and I'm betting that any fines will be inconsequential. Again, why even go there? Votes, I'm betting and they are likely coal and oil country votes.

 
Why not a statement such as: 
 
"The mission of the EPA remains of critical importance. All regulators shall make every best effort to conform to the meaning and intent of the agencies regulations and policies. When required to maintain enforcement, and upon request and review, additional resources will be provided.  Additionally, a fast track procedure for granting necessary waivers is being developed. 
In the meantime no looking over the cubicle partitions, no wet willies, no spitball fights and only one person at a time in the effluent tank".
 
COVID-19 Implications for EPAs Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program (March 26 2020)

The consequences of the pandemic may constrain the ability of regulated entities to perform routine compliance monitoring,2 integrity testing,3 sampling,4 laboratory analysis,5 training,6 and reporting or certification.7

COVID-19 Implications for EPAs Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program (March 26 2020)

2 If affected by COVID-19, this category may include, for example, CEMS and stack tests, relative accuracy test audits, LDAR monitoring, fence line monitoring, RICE readings and monitoring, tank and piping inspections, assessments, or stormwater inspections.
3 If affected by COVID-19, this category may, for example, include tank integrity testing (e.g., API 653) for compliance with certain “good air pollution control practices.”

4 If affected by COVID-19, this category may include, for example, effluent sampling and testing, as well as cooling tower sampling.
5 If affected by COVID-19, this category may include, for example, laboratory holding times and turn-around times.
6 If affected by COVID-19, this category may include, for example, SPCC training, hazardous waste trainings, CAA section 129 renewals, and other annual re-certifications.

7 If affected by COVID-19, this category may include, for example, reports and certifications associated with delayed activities described above, and late reports under permit or other regulatory obligations, including TRI and greenhouse gas inventory reporting. 

And, FYI, I'd vote for you in an actual fetal heartbeat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BIGUN said:

 

PS Just a reminder - I am so far left of the liberals when it comes to the environment that I've been chastised by the Professor for believing that wind turbines are a form of pollution. 

Well:
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/apr/08/donald-trump/republicans-dismiss-trumps-windmill-and-cancer-cla/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

1 1