| DAILY ECO NEWS* | ACTIVISM * | COMPANIES/PRODUCTS * |
|---|---|---|
| ECO QUOTES * | ECO INVESTMENTS * | RENEWABLE ENERGY * |
| BUSINESS TO BUSINESS * | ECO LINKS * | WHAT'S NEW * |
| ECO-RESTAURANTS * | COMMUNICATIONS * |  |
. ---February 15, 1996--- . . HEADLINES: . . BANANA LAWS AND POTATO HEADS . . ========== . . Environmental Research Foundation . . P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403 . . Fax (410) 263-8944; Internet: erf@rachel.clark.net . . ========== .
BANANA LAWS AND POTATO HEADS
The food industry went ballistic last month when Food & Water, Inc., a grass-roots advocacy group in Walden, Vermont, and Environmental Research Foundation in Annapolis, Maryland, published an ad in SUPERMARKET NEWS comparing pesticide deaths to deaths by assault rifles, concluding that, "More people are killed by their salad." (See REHW #480.)
For the past five years, the food industry --especially the produce industry (fruits and vegetables) --has been developing a campaign called "5-a-Day." They want everyone to eat five helpings of fruits and vegetables each day. This is a multi-million-dollar food-industry campaign, directed by the Produce for Better Health Foundation. Because we read food industry publications like PRODUCE NEWS, SUPERMARKET NEWS and THE PACKER, we know that the food corporations are banking on this campaign to provide greatly increased profits for agrichemical food growers.
That's why they went nuts when Food & Water struck their Achilles heel, which is the fact that most of the fruits and vegetables in supermarkets today contain pesticide residues that can cause disease. This a dirty little secret that the food industry doesn't want anyone talking about.
In fact, agribusiness corporations are so eager to close off discussion of toxic pesticide residues on food that the industry has been campaigning state by state in recent years to pass "food disparagement" laws making it a crime to criticize agricultural products without "a sound scientific basis." Such "banana laws" (as they are called) are now on the books in eleven states (Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Texas) and they are under consideration in California, Delaware, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Washington state.[1] Further, the food industry is trying to stick a "food disparagement" provision into the 1996 Farm Bill,[2] which is still being bitterly debated in Congress as we go to press.[3] It seems clear that these banana laws will be declared unconstitutional when they are challenged in court, but it will be a long, expensive fight--probably costing upwards of half a million dollars to litigate. As a result, such laws will very likely have a chilling effect on journalists and others who might be inclined to discuss the possibility that pesticide-laced foods aren't as healthy for you as fruits and vegetables that are free of poisonous residues.
Proponents of banana laws openly admit that their purpose is to silence food-safety activists.[4] In Florida, anyone found guilty of "agricultural disparagement" must pay a fine equal to three times the estimated dollar amount of damage done to agribusiness plaintiffs. The Georgia statute defines disparagement as "the willful or malicious dissemination to the public in any manner of false information that a perishable food product or commodity is not safe for human consumption" and defines false information as "not based on reasonable and reliable scientific inquiry, facts, or data." It's anybody's guess what "reasonable" and "reliable" mean. We can recall a time not long ago when "reasonable" and "reliable" data showed that diethylstilbestrol (DES) and DDT were both "safe" for humans and the environment. Unfortunately those reasonable and reliable data were quite wrong.[5]
The food industry flatly denies that anyone has ever been harmed by the roughly 600 million pounds of toxic chemicals that have been intentionally sprayed on the nation's food and fiber crops each year for the past 50 years. Bob Carey, president of the Produce Marketing Association in Newark, Delaware, told SUPERMARKET NEWS that he was "dismayed and appalled" by the Food & Water advertisement which said thousands of Americans are killed each year by pesticide residues.[6] "No one... has ever been harmed by eating fresh produce properly treated with crop protection tools," Carey told the NEWS. He told the PACKER, "Produce on store shelves and on restaurant plates is safe."[7] Tom Stenzel, president of the United Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Association called the statements in the ad "pure fabrication."[7] David Moore, president of the Western Growers Association said that comparing the hazards of fresh produce to assault weapons was "tantamount to yelling 'fire' in a crowded theater." Falsely yelling "fire" in a crowded theater has been used by the U.S. Supreme Court as a legal test for determining when society has the right to limit a person's Constitutional right of free speech.
But suppose it is true that pesticides kill more people than assault rifles do each year. Then Mr. Carey, Mr. Stenzel, Mr. Moore are making false statements that would tend to harm people by inducing them to consume toxic chemicals. (We agree that organic, pesticide-free fruits and vegetables are excellent for health. However, putting poison on your salad just doesn't make sense to us.)
So who's right? Unfortunately, good data are scarce. The only book-length study of pesticide hazards was published by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) in 1987. The NAS reported in 1987 that they could find "very limited actual data"[8,pg.59] regarding pesticide residues on food. David Pimental at Cornell University pointed out in 1993 that "U.S. analytical methods now employed detect only about one-third of the more than 600 pesticides in use."[9,pg.49] So estimates must be substituted for real data. Fifty years into pesticide technology, this lack of data is shocking and pathetic. (Ask yourself, who benefits from the absence of such data?)
The NAS study restricted itself to pesticides in and on food. It omitted pesticide exposures that occur as a result of drinking pesticide-contaminated ground water,[8,pg.45] a phenomenon that is very common in parts of the U.S.
Pesticides come in 3 flavors: herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides.
According to the NAS, about 480 million pounds of herbicides are used annually in the U.S.; of these, 300 million pounds (62.5%) are agents that "the EPA [U.S. Environmental Protection Agency] presumes to be oncogenic or for which positive oncogenicity data are currently under review by the agency."[8,pg.46] Oncogenic means tumor-producing. The NAS estimate omitted two large-volume herbicides, atrazine and 2,4-D, because EPA received data indicating oncogenicity of these chemicals after the NAS study was completed.[8,pg.47]
Quantities of oncogenic insecticides are not described in detail in the NAS study. Insecticides are described in terms of acre treatments; one acre-treatment is defined as one acre to which one pesticide has been applied one time. NAS says that presumed oncogens make up between 35% and 50% of all insecticidal acre-treatments.[8,pgs.47-48]
About 90% of all fungicides show positive results in oncogenicity tests. These oncogenic fungicides represent from 70 million to 75 million of the 80 million pounds of all fungicides applied annually in the U.S.[8,pg.48]
The NAS committee worked with a 1985 list of 53 pesticides that EPA considered oncogenic.[8,pg.50] However, an estimate of oncogenic potency was only available for 28 of the 53, or 53%.[8,pg.51] In other words, NAS found that it could not estimate the risks for 47% --roughly half --of the pesticides that EPA identified as oncogenic because necessary data on oncogenic potency were not available. The NAS therefore restricted its analysis to the 28 pesticides for which data existed. NAS used EPA's data and EPA's risk assessment methods.[8,pg.46]
NAS says that, in doing risk assessments, EPA "tries to make necessary assumptions in a way that minimizes the chance of underestimating risks."[8,pg.50] "The result is that these [NAS] risk assessments probably overstate true oncogenic risk," NAS said.[8,pg.50] Risk refers to incidence of cancer cases, not death.[8,pg.65]
The NAS said there are 4 reasons why its risk estimates may overstate the risk, and four reasons why its estimates may understate the risk.
Reasons why NAS estimates may overstate the risk:
** In extrapolating from high-dose tumor incidence data to low-dose estimates, conservative assumptions have been made;
** NAS assumed that all acres of all crops are treated with the pesticides which are registered for use on those crops;
** NAS assumed that residues are always present at the legally allowable level, when in fact they are usually present at lower levels;
** NAS assumes that daily exposure occurs during a 70-year lifetime.[8,pg.65]
Reasons why NAS may have understated the risk:
** NAS lacked toxicological data for some active ingredients and for most "inert" ingredients, degradation products, and metabolites. [So-called "inerts" make up the bulk of most pesticides and are closely-held secrets. Some "inerts" are toxic in their own right; see REHW #469. Likewise, metabolites and degradation by-products can be more poisonous than the parent compound; for example, DDE is more toxic than its parent, DDT.]
** The models used for extrapolating from animal data to humans may have been insufficiently conservative in some respects.
** Certain routes of exposure were omitted.
** Possible synergistic (multiplier) effects of pesticides and metabolites) were omitted from consideration.[8,pgs.65-66]
NAS estimated[8,pg.68] that the total risk from the 28 pesticides was 5.85 cancers per thousand people per lifetime. Dividing this by 70 (years in a lifetime) and multiplying it by the number of groups of 1000 in the U.S. population (250,000 such groups) yields an annual estimated pesticide-caused cancer incidence of 20,800 in the U.S. If half of the new pesticide-caused cancers each year result in death, this brings NAS's estimate of annual deaths from pesticides-in-food to 10,400 per year.[10] How does this compare to deaths by assault rifles? And didn't we set out to discuss dioxin strategy? More next week. --Peter Montague
===============
[1] Helen Cordes, "Watch Your Mouth!," UTNE READER January, 1996, pgs. 16-17.
[2] Paul Rauber, "Vegetable Hate Crimes," SIERRA MAGAZINE November/December, 1995, pgs 20-21.
[3] PMA ISSUE UPDATES February 2, 1996; available as document #414 from the Produce Marketing Association's (PMA) fax-back service; phone (302) 738-2981 in Newark, Delaware.
[4] Marion D. Chartoff and Michael C. Colby, "Agribusiness Leads Effort to Silence Activists," SAFE FOOD NEWS Summer, 1994, pgs. 16-17. Available from Food & Water, Inc., R.R. 1, Box 68 D, Walden, Vermont 05873; phone: (802) 563-3300. SAFE FOOD NEWS has been renamed the FOOD & WATER JOURNAL.
[5] The histories of both DES and DDT are told well in Edward W. Lawless, TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIAL SHOCK (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1977).
[6] "Trade Groups Blasting Anti-Pesticide Ad," SUPERMARKET NEWS December 25, 1995, pg. 26.
[7] Dave Swenson, "Ad stirs quick response," THE PACKER Dec. 25, 1995, pg. 4A.
[8] Richard Wiles and others, REGULATING PESTICIDES IN FOOD; THE DELANEY PARADOX (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1987).
[9] David Pimentel and Hugh Lehman, editors, THE PESTICIDE QUESTION; ENVIRONMENT, ECONOMICS AND ETHICS (New York and London: Chapman & Hall, 1993).
[10] This is a reasonable estimate; each year about a million new cases of cancer are reported in the U.S., and about 500,000 cancer deaths occur. See Lynn A. Gloeckler Ries and others, CANCER STATISTICS REVIEW 1973-1988 [National Institutes of Health Publication No. 91-2789] (Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute, 1991).
Descriptor terms: pesticides; advertising; advertisements; progice;' fruits; vegetables; carcinogens; cancer estimates; national academy of sciences; produce for better health foundation; food & water inc; banana laws; first amendment; produce marketing association; united fresh fruit and vegetable association; wastern growers association; david pimentel; mortality statistics;
################################################################
NOTICE Environmental Research Foundation provides this electronic version of RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY free of charge even though it costs our organization considerable time and money to produce it. We would like to continue to provide this service free. You could help by making a tax-deductible contribution (anything you can afford, whether $5.00 or $500.00). Please send your contribution to: Environmental Research Foundation, P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403-7036.
--Peter Montague, Editor
Very rarely, we E-mail something to the Rachel list besides our newsletter. Here is an invitation to a conference that we believe you would enjoy attending. Hope to see you there March 15-17 in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. --Peter Montague
TIME FOR ACTION:
The Third Citizens' Conference on Dioxin and Other Synthetic Hormone Disrupters Baton Rouge, Louisiana
March 15-17, 1996
WHY NOW?
Because in September, 1995, the US EPA confirmed that: a) Dioxin's non-cancer effects like immune damage, endocrine disruption and reproductive impacts may be even more serious than its cancer-causing effects;
b) The average person has dioxin tissue levels close to where we would expect to see these effects;
c) We can't avoid dioxin exposure because we get most of it from our food; and
d) The highest doses are going to the fetus and the breast-fed infant.
In short, we are all victims of dioxin, with the brunt falling on communities of color and low income. However, rather than address the dioxin problem at its roots, the paper and chemical industries are spending a fortune to undermine the EPA's findings. Meanwhile, even the well-intentioned at EPA responding to this crisis at the wrong end. They are enacting unenforceable regulations on incinerators, while the production of organochlorines like PVC plastic continues unchecked. If we want to get dioxin out of our food and out of our children's bodies, we have to get industrial uses of chlorine out of the economy. That means tackling corporate power while tying to save jobs. This will require mounting an unprecedented public and media educational campaign.
This conference represents a major effort to bring people together who are concerned about health, food production, 'waste' management, environmental and economic justice, sustainability and community development, the abuse of corporate power and the erosion of our democratic system. Together we have to communicate to the general public that the insidious build-up of dioxins and other endocrine disrupters in our food is as great a threat to life inside our bodies as ozone- destroying CFCs are from the outside; and that both have a common source: the industrial use of chlorine.
The Citizens' Conference on Dioxin was initiated to expose the efforts of industrial and government officials to downplay the dangers of dioxin and related compounds. The previous two conferences (Chapel Hill, NC, September 1991; and St. Louis, MO, July 1994) allowed an exchange of information among the victims of dioxin, activists, scientists, and the general public. We start the third conference believing that we know enough about dioxin TO ACT. That is why we are de-emphasizing presentations so that participants can focus their energies on the designing of strategic campaigns.
No one pretends that getting dioxin out of our food and out of our children's bodies is going to be easy. We now that we are up against huge corporate power, but tackling the misuse of corporate power is what the 21st century is going to be about. This is a good place to start. It's TIME FOR ACTION.
CONFERENCE AGENDA
FRIDAY, MARCH 15, Afternoon and Evening 3 pm on
Registration
4-5:30
Pre-conference "get-up-to-speed" tutorials.
Choose one of the following:
1) DIOXIN 101 with Paul Connett and Tom Webster
2) ENDOCRINE DISRUPTERS: WHAT ARE THEY? with Louis Guillette and J. Peter Myers
3) INTERNET FOR ACTIVISTS WHO ARE SCARED OF COMPUTERS with Adam Berrey.
6-7 RECEPTION AND WELCOME TO LOUISIANA AND THE SOUTH.
Mary Lee Orr and Connie Tucker. An introduction to local grassroots battles on dioxin.
7-8
KEYNOTE ADDRESS by Louis Guillette: "The Global Significance of Endocrine Disrupters."
8-9
A welcome to our international visitors. Jack Weinberg on "POPs: A Global Framework for Eliminating Dioxin Sources."
SATURDAY, MARCH 16
8 am- on
Registration
8:50 - 9
Opening ceremony: Louisiana Native American nation representative
9 - 9:30
Opening address with Lois Gibbs, Paul Connett and Tom Goldtooth
9:30 - 10:30 Panel on Environmental Justice. Nina Laboy (moderator), Michelle Depasse, Tom Goldtooth, Beverly Wright, Torm Nom Praseurt, and Margaret Williams.
10:30 - 10:45 Refreshment break
10:45 - 12:30 First Round of Campaign Strategy Sessions*
1) Getting chlorine out of the pulp/paper industry
2) Getting organochlorines out of manufacturing and cleaning
3) Halting all forms of incineration
4) Phasing out all uses of PVC
5) Creating a scientific SWAT team to help communities
6) Linking dioxin to health
7) Getting dioxin out of our food
8) Developing tools to help poisoned communities
9) Communicating dioxin issues to the public and the media
12:30 - 2
Luncheon and Panel Session: Working with Workers for a Dioxin-Free Future. Charlotte Brody (moderator), Willie Fontenot, Diane Heminway, Richard Moore, Rex Tingle.
2 - 4 Second Round of Campaign Strategy Sessions*
4 - 4:15 Refreshment Break
4:15 - 5:30 Interaction meetings and free time. Networking, Caucuses, "Ongoing Newsletter/communications to keep track of campaigns" meeting. Free massages for weary activists! Video watching ("Assault on the Male," "Dioxin: The Perfect Poison.")
6 - 8 Dinner. "Alternative Visions and Model Solutions" with Elaine Gross, David Morris, Wayne Roberts and Ken Geiser.
8 - 9 The Great Quiz Show: Corporate Spin Doctors vs. Citizens' Truth Squad
9 - midnight Entertainment: Sketches, songs & dances to drive the dioxin menace away and the Chemical Manufacturers Association crazy. Greg Moore will be Master of Ceremonies.
SUNDAY, MARCH 17 9 - 10:30 Panel: "Challenging Corporate Power." Lois Gibbs (moderator), Richard Healey, Peter Montague, Ron Nixon and John Stauber.
10:30 - 11 Short break to vacate rooms, get luggage, etc.
11 - 12:30 Third Round of Campaign Strategy Sessions*
12:30 -2:30 Luncheon and panel discussion. Each workshop will report back on one highlight of their campaign strategy (the rest of the strategy will be distributed in writing to all the participants.)
Panel: "Reflections and Directions from this Conference." Mary O'Brien (moderator), Barry Commoner, Jackie Warledo, Mildred McClain.
2:30 - 2:45 Closing drum ceremony
*Note = Campaign strategy sessions will be facilitated by seasoned campaigners. It is anticipated that every participant will be actively engaged in shaping the strategies discussed. It is our intention that participants will choose one of the nine strategy sessions and stay with it throughout the conference. If more than one strategy session is of interest to your group, we encourage you to send more than one person.
Note: Wherever we have used "dioxin" in this agenda, it stands for dioxins, furans, PCBs and other synthetic hormone (endocrine) disrupters.
SCHOLARSHIP COMMITTEE
Limited travel and housing scholarships are available. Contact Leslie Byster, Connie Tucker or Jackie Warledo of the Conference Organizing Committee listed below.
CONFERENCE FUNDING* FROM:
Clearinghouse for Hazardous Waste, Citizens' Conferences on Dioxin, Inc.; Greenpeace; Jenifer Altman Foundation, and conference co-sponsors. (* as of 1/31/95)
PLEASE TAKE NOTE:
Many people attending this conference are chemically sensitive. We ask that participants refrain from wearing perfume or aftershave and avoid wearing clothes that have been dry-cleaned. Thanks.
Help reduce water and energy use! Please bring your own coffee/tea mugs.
TRAVEL AND ACCOMMODATIONS
The Hilton Hotel. The conference will be held at the Hilton Hotel, 5500 Hilton Avenue, Baton Rouge, LA 70808. 504-924-5000, extension 1084. (Double room has two king-sized beds) They operate a complimentary airport shuttle service (one hour notice necessary).
The Wilson Inn, 3045 Valley Creek Road, Baton Rouge, LA 70808 (Double room has two king-sized beds), 504-923- 3377.
Info on Baton Rouge is available from the Baton Rouge Chamber of Commerce: 504-371-7125.
TRAVEL: Marazul Tours of Weehawken, NJ, is the official travel agency for our conference. Please ask for Mayda Gil. They have discounted fares on some carriers to Baton Rouge. They can be reached at 1-800-223-5334 or 201-319-9009, hours 9-5 Eastern. We encourage people to fly directly into Baton Rouge instead of into New Orleans. If it is too expensive to do so, please contact Mary Lee Orr at LEAN (504-928-1315) for details about ground transportation from New Orleans to Baton Rouge which is approximately 1-1/2 hours travel time.
THE CONFERENCE ORGANIZING COMMITTEE
Charlotte Brody, Citizens Clearinghouse for Hazardous Waste, Falls Church, VA 703-237-2249
Angela Brown, Youth Task Force, Atlanta, GA,404-892-7601
Leslie Byster, Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, San Jose, CA, 408-287-6707
Jackie Hunt Christensen,Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, Minneapolis, MN, 612-379-5980
Gary Cohen, The Learning Alliance, Jamaica Plain, MA, 617-524-6018
Paul & Ellen Connett, WASTE NOT, Canton, NY, 315-379-9200
Colleen Cooney, Ontario Coalition to Stop the Burn, Coldwater, Ontario, 705-686-7457
Charlie Cray, Greenpeace, Chicago, IL, 312-563-6060
Ken Deal, Vietnam Veterans of America, Woodbridge, NJ, 908-636-9059
Billie Elmore, NC Waste Awareness & Reduction Network, Sanford, NC, 919-774-9566
Judy Enck, New York Public Interest Research Group, Albany, NY, 518-436-0876
Willie Fontenot, Louisiana Environmental Action Network, Baton Rouge, LA, 504-342-7900
Nina Laboy, South Bronx Clean Air Coalition, Bronx, NY 718-365-59071
Peter Montague & Maria Pellerano, Environmental Research Foundation, Annapolis, MD, 410-263-1584
Ron Nixon, Institute for Southern Studies, Durham, NC, 919-419-8311
Mary O'Brien, Environmental Research Foundation, Eugene, OR, 504-485-6886
Mary Lee Orr, Louisiana Environmental Action Network, Baton Rouge, LA, 504-928-1315
Florence Robinson, North Baton Rouge Environmental Assn., Baton Rouge, LA, 504-775-0341
Terri Swearingen, Tri-State Environmental Council. Chester, WV, 304-387-0574
Connie Tucker, Southern Organizing Committee, Atlanta, GA,404-755-2855
Jackie Warledo, Indigenous Environmental Network, Tulsa, OK, 918-743-6530
Jim Warren, NC Waste Awareness & Reduction Network, Durham, NC, 919-490-0747
Tom Webster, Boston University, School of Public Health, Boston, MA, 617-638-4641
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
SEND IN THIS PORTION OF THE CONFERENCE INFORMATION TO THE ADDRESS BELOW:
CONFERENCE REGISTRATION FORM
LAST DAY TO REGISTER: MARCH 1, 1996
Please return this form with your check (payable to "Citizens' Conferences on Dioxin) for Hotel, Meals and Registration to:
Citizens Conferences on Dioxin, Inc. 530
1 Rolling Hill Road, Sanford, NC 37330 (Phone: 919-774-9566; fax: 919-774-7498; Billie Elmore: Treasurer) U.S. only: Contributions are tax-deductible
ROOM & MEALS PACKAGE
All prices include tax.
HILTON HOTEL (The conference will be held at the Hilton.) ____ Double Room (2 king-sized beds) Friday and Saturday night; dinner on Friday and Saturday nights, plus Saturday and Sunday lunches $119 per person _____ Room to be shared with: ___________________________________________ OR _____ I am willing to share a room with a conference participant. ____ Single Room Friday and Saturday night; dinner on Friday and Saturday nights, plus Saturday and Sunday lunches $188 per person OR
MEALS ONLY AT THE HILTON HOTEL
_____ Friday Dinner $15.00 _____ Saturday Dinner $15.00
_____ Saturday Lunch $10.00 _____ Sunday Lunch $10.00
ROOM ONLY AT THE HILTON HOTEL
_____ Friday Night (Single) $70.00 (per person)
_____ Friday Night (Double) $35.00 (per person)
_____ Saturday Night (Single) $70.00 (per person)
_____ Saturday Night (Double) $35.00 (per person)
ROOM ONLY AT THE WILSON INN
_____ Friday Night (Single) $57.00 (per person)
_____ Friday Night (Double) $30.00 (per person)
_____ Saturday Night (Single) $57.00 (per person)
_____ Saturday Night (Double) $30.00 (per person)
_____ Room to be shared with:
____________________________________________ OR
_____ I am willing to share a room with a
conference participant
Registration Category:
_____ Students/low income $10
_____ Citizens/Activists $25
_____ Government Officials $250
_____ For-Profits (includes their lawyers/court
transcribers/ associates/representatives $1000
_____ Individual conference co-sponsors
(Entitled to 2 Free registration) No Fee _____ Group conference co-sponsors (Entitled to 2 Free
registrations) No Fee
YES! We want to be a co-sponsor of the conference!
Deadline is February 25, 1996.
_____ All Grassroots groups (receive 2 conference
registration tickets) $100
_____ All State/National groups (receive 2 conference
registration tickets) $200
_____ Individuals (receive 1 conference registration
ticket) $50
________________________________________________________
(name of individual or group co-sponsor)
_____ YES! I am coming to Baton Rouge! Enclosed is my
check for $___________
Name:
________________________________________________________
Address:
________________________________________________________
Phone: _____________________ Fax: ____________________
E-mail: __________________
Please check your dietary preference:
_____ Meat ______ Fish ______ Vegetarian _____ Vegan
Which campaign strategy session will you attend? Check
only one
_____ 1) Getting chlorine out of the pulp/paper industry
_____ 2) Getting organochlorines out of manufacturing and
cleaning
_____ 3) Halting all forms of incineration
_____ 4) Phasing out all uses of PVC
_____ 5) Creating a scientific SWAT team to help communities
_____ 6) Linking dioxin to health
_____ 7) Getting dioxin out of our food
_____ 8) Developing tools to help poisoned communities
_____ 9) Communicating dioxin issues to the public and the
media
_____ Table space needed to sell or distribute information from
my group ($25 conference fee to sell)
_____ Willing to perform in the Entertainment on Saturday
night.
_____ I can't come to the conference but want to be more
involved. Enclosed is $______ to cover costs for sending me
information from the conference.
_____ I can't come to the conference but wish to donate $______
to help a low-income activist attend the conference.
If you have questions about the conference, contact: Jim Warren, Citizens' Conferences on Dioxin, Inc., PO Box 61051, Durham, NC 27715. Phone: 919-490-0747; fax: 919-493-6614
Jackie Hunt Christensen
Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy
1313 5th St. SE #303
Minneapolis, MN 55414
phone: 612-379-5980; fax: 612-379-5982
E-MAIL: jchristensen@igc.apc.org
| DAILY ECO NEWS* | ACTIVISM * | COMPANIES/PRODUCTS * |
|---|---|---|
| ECO QUOTES * | ECO INVESTMENTS * | RENEWABLE ENERGY * |
| BUSINESS TO BUSINESS * | ECO LINKS * | WHAT'S NEW * |
| ECO-RESTAURANTS * | COMMUNICATIONS * | |