Pellets and water don’t mix

LETTER

Drop a pellet into 1000 litres of water, let it sit overnight and ask the New Zealand “experts” to drink it.

Since they think it’s safe there should be no problem with them drinking at least a glass. I doubt any of them would.

RUFUS

Drop a pellet into 1000 litres of water, let it sit overnight and ask the New Zealand “experts” to drink it.

Since they think it’s safe there should be no problem with them drinking at least a glass. I doubt any of them would.

RUFUS

Your email address will not be published. Comments will display after being approved by a staff member. Comments may be edited for clarity.

Mathew Bannister - 2 months ago
I doubt that such a demonstration would be accepted by all as proof.

Grant Vincent, Chair, Forest and Bird Gisborne branch - 2 months ago
Well then "Rufus" whoever you are, hiding behind a nom de plume and proposing a pointless exercise; one 12g cereal pellet containing 0.15% 1080, 1000L of water, an 80kg adult, one or two glasses of said water, factor in the lethal (or even mild) dose, Rufus, I'd say you'd be very safe. We could get together and drink a whole 1000L each but we'd be dead by water ingestion before there was any hint of 1080 affecting our systems. And there wouldn't be any effect because the mammalian body is very adept at dealing with and eliminating small amounts of 1080.

Anyway, do some maths, see what you come up with. You could start by reading Dave Hansford's book "Protecting Paradise, 1080 and the fight to save New Zealand's wildlife" but maybe there are too many facts in there for you to cope with?


Stuart Moriarty-Patten - 2 months ago
Noam Chomsky said that, "Propaganda very often works better for the educated than it does for the uneducated. This is true on many issues. There are a lot of reasons for this, one being that the educated receive more of the propaganda because they read more."
. . . and funny how the "educated" are quick to dismiss the thoughts of the rest as the ramblings of idiots.

S. Williams - 2 months ago
"Claims by DoC that there is evidence aerial 1080 poisoning is safe, will retain its efficacy against rats, has desirable outcomes and has no alternatives are readily refuted.
"Moreover, examination of DoC's internal unpublished documents regarding rare kea and mohua reveals no scientific or ecological basis underlying their management.
"There is an urgent need to review conservation management in New Zealand."
Source: Response to the Department of Conservation's reply to "Aerial 1080 poisoning in New Zealand: reasons for concern"
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313881837/download

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Joanna_Pollard/publication/313881837_Response_to_the_Department_of_Conservation's_reply_to_Aerial_1080_poisoning_in_New_Zealand_reasons_for_concern/links/58ad6e8eaca272af0667b3e5/Response-to-the-Department-of-Conservations-reply-to-Aerial-1080-poisoning-in-New-Zealand-reasons-for-concern.pdf?origin=publication_detail

S. Williams - 2 months ago
"As McQueen explains, the motivation for using poisons - many of which, like Compound 1080 are banned in the rest of the world - became clearer with the blackmail story. There is a lot of money in the pesticide poison industry. Marketing gimmicks are skilfully presented so that their flawed science can convince those overseas agencies desperate to reduce the ever-present rats. New Zealand's biggest export is probably poisoning propaganda, with profitable (and dangerous) 'experiments' regularly carried out by Kiwi consultants on overseas islands.
Back in 1962 a biologist Rachel Carson published her book Silent Spring. It was ground-breaking in highlighting the damage the chemical DDT was doing to the environment and public health, and raised awareness of the dangers so that eventually the pesticide was banned in the USA in 1972. An increased public awareness of contaminants and pollutants in our environment, including for example the heightened risks of losing bee populations because of insecticides used in farming, has renewed interest in these texts. Globally there are increasing calls for a reduction in the use of harmful pesticides and herbicides. New Zealand seems to be lagging behind (again) in policy-making in this area. So, I am very much hoping that Fiona McQueen's book, along with other important voices in the conservation debate like Prof Wayne Linklater, Dr Jamie Steer and others will see some significant change very soon and in particular a halt to the aerial use of poisons like 1080 and Brodifacoum." Source: Book Review: The Quiet Forest: the case against aerial 1080 by Fiona McQueen
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/book-review-quiet-forest-case-against-aerial-1080-edgington-phd

S.Williams - 2 months ago
The Startling Truth: "No known epidemiological studies for potential adverse health effects of 1080 on humans"
. . . and yet DOC continues to drop it into our waterways
https://envirowatchrangitikei.wordpress.com/2016/10/30/the-startling-truth-no-known-epidemiological-studies-for-potential-adverse-health-effects-of-1080-on-humans-and-yet-doc-continues-to-drop-it-into-our-waterways/

Brian Habberfield, Waihi - 17 days ago
They would. I would. You're wrong. Can't understand science 'Rufus'?

Poll

  • Voting please wait...
    Your vote has been cast. Reloading page...
    Do you think the road over Titirangi/Kaiti Hill should be one-way to make it safer for pedestrians?​