We’d been discussing mercury actually (with me having a giggle about how it used to be used as a cure for VD). I used Cr6 as an example of bad science, not as something to derail the thread because it was raised as part of the discussion.
Did I ever suggest otherwise? Or were you attempting to build a straw man?
Sarcasm is unbecoming as is copying huge lumps of Wikipedia without citation or quotes. We used to call this plagiarism but my college days are a fading memory.
You clearly don’t like science that doesn’t agree with you. Here’s a simple article for everyday people run in a nasty little British tabloid that’s rarely pro environment, being that it’s only slightly less right-wing than Donald Trump.
The facts (and remember level of Cr6 was above “safe” limit then) speak volumes. I don’t choose to believe red or blue, I’m a science writer (retired) and I’m interested in facts. The facts behind this article come from a professor of epidemiology and once again, show that Brockovich was full of it.
Some chemicals get a bad name and when people follow what they believe (usually the people with the flash website who speak in hyperbole) then that becomes fact.
Aluminium salts are also in the frame for a number of ailments and yet the evidence to back that up is suspect at best. Much of that derives from a terrible incident in Camelford, Southern England when tons of aluminium sulfate was dumped into drinking water, resulting in a level 3000 times that considered safe and people got sick. At least one lady died and aluminum was found in her brain matter. The details are really O/T here but you’re welcome to read up and cross-reference scaremongering sites, there are plenty of them.
The point here is that when we focus on the wrong compound, bad or misleading statistics, or just close our minds to new evidence, we miss what is right under our nose. Blaming glyphosate (and GM tech) for cancer and god knows what else in the tobacco regions of Argentina masks the real environmental catastrophe where the poor are ingesting toxic amounts of heavy metals in their drinking water. But it was easier for a documentary crew to blame Monsanto/Bayer and give those people the idea that they would make enough money to get themselves out of crushing poverty caused by American tobacco buyers like Philip Morris.
And children continue to suffer there for that very reason. The insidious nature of lead (Pb) in particular means this won’t go away if the lead is removed from the water supply either. You might read from that, I have very little truck with people who look to prove their own ideas and ignore contrarian evidence that is presented. Remember what Richard Feynman said.
Various (and very vocal) voices have claimed that glyphosate causes cancer (based on sketchy evidence and bad science) and then went on to point out there are “detectable” levels even in organic wines.
That glyphosate is present at such levels is questionable since the assays were based on unpublished techniques but they found what they were looking for. Not that it mattered, the outcry was as sudden as it was loud.
But there’s a far more insidious toxin/carcinogen in wine. Alcohol. And it’s present at far greater levels than glyphosate. Ethanol causes cancers through the entire digestive tract, it’s toxic to our liver and brain and is fetotoxic too even in relatively small amounts.
Yet save for prohibition, there hasn’t been any serious attempted to limit alcohol consumption in the US; nor pretty much anywhere in most of the West. That’s one thing Muslim countries do have right.
To quote you, “opinions are not facts”.
It seems (and I could be wrong) that you’re finding articles that agree with your own belief but not following or even reading them.
This is a natural mistake we’re all prone to called “selection bias”.
The Livescience piece which isn’t written by a science writer and quotes from the EWG, an advocacy group known for playing fast and lose with the facts. In this case, apparently conflating environmental Cr6 with Cr3 - but it’s all chromium to them, just like ethyl mercury and methylmercury are mercury compounds. One is used in vaccines, one is a dangerous environmental pollutant. Antivaxxers don’t know the difference either but it matters.
Cr6 in the tiny (but detectable) amounts in drinking water is destroyed before it can ever get into our systems.
This is a fact. It’s not my opinion, it’s backed up not just by multiple respected doctoral level chemists but supported by the evidence from Hinkley as discussed in that article about Brockovich and it’s not the only one. Here’s another that’s light on technical terms but sources actual indentured scientists from respected universities,
EWG and Erin Brockovich recycle discredited chromium claims – Food Science Institute
Copypasta is a term I use when people copy and paste something from a source without attribution in an attempt to make themselves appear more learned or invested in the subject. It’s also become a form of spamming depending on how they are used.
This is a quote from the EPA source you’ve cited above and (again) it agrees with the science that Cr6 in the levels we’re exposed to is safe and might even be beneficial. Emphasis is mine.
“Chromium-3 is an essential human dietary element. It is found in many vegetables, fruits, meats, grains, and yeast. Chromium-6 occurs naturally in the environment from the erosion of natural chromium deposits. It can also be produced by industrial processes. There are demonstrated instances of chromium being released to the environment by leakage, poor storage, or inadequate industrial waste disposal practices.”
Now there’s an irony here that Professor Morgan might have accidentally unearthed too. His analysis of the data shows that the rates of cancer in Hinkley (contrary to my memory) are not the same but actually LOWER than the average. Which might suggest that a miniscule amount of Cr6 in water, which results in Cr3 the essential element in our diet when it hits the stomach, might actually prevent some cancers.
I wouldn’t bet on it. The sample size is far too small.
But Brockovich tried the Hinkley play again more recently only this time a judge demanded to see the data and threw the case out. In fact, she seems to show up every time there’s a $$$ to be made only to sublimate when it becomes clear there isn’t, leaving people in these areas rudderless. Brockovich and those lawyers aren’t just hurting the people they claim to want to help, but they leave a tidal wave of bad science in their wake which then gets amplified by social media and on the Internet. Why? Because people feel let down (who wouldn’t) but they tend to believe the honeyed words and let’s be honest, science isn’t easy.
As a writer I have to rely on my sources, but I can evaluate them coldly and without emotion even when they don’t agree with what I believe. Because if what I believe is wrong, then I’m wrong. Like a butterfly, I can flit between the various specialties and learn from each one forming a view that is supported and informed by evidence.
There are other sources in that Mail article that prove what I’ve been trying to say - people far more educated in this subject than I am and people without an axe to grind.
Here’s Dr. Henry Miller, MD (full disclosure, we know each other, but we’re not colleagues) Don’t buy into the chromium-6 hysteria :: Henry I. Miller M.D. (henrymillermd.org)
And here’s Dr. Joe from McGill University explaining this in more detail at Quackwatch:
Erin Brockovich Story Largely Fiction
and Michael Fuemento (retrieved from the Internet archive):
Bestselling author Michael Fumento reports: “The Dark Side of Erin Brockovich.”
The experts say one thing but people tend to believe the Hollywood fiction which is then amplified by scaremongering self-interest groups like the EWG, another one whining about glyphosate in wines but seemingly unconcerned about the real carcinogen in there.
Even the “woke” Californians with Prop. 65 don’t seem overly concerned about alcohol, but that legislation which was well meant has given groups not limited to the EWG a plentiful supply of extra-large cudgels to beat us all with.
Back with 3D printing, much the same applies there too. People are scared that their hot ends will autoignite PLA and burn the house down and yet seem oblivious that poor quality power supplies and badly routed wiring are the real culprits. Because it’s easier to blame what you can see and touch rather than the thing you can’t. Bad or worn wiring, the most frequent cause of these fires is hard to see.