From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeff Owens)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 15:37:29 -0700
OK, that is a sampling of the book. My questions would be:
Does this design process create a world of fragile people who
survive only by staying in sealed environments. Is this a
sustainable approach and does it separate us from nature?
Huh?? Jeff, are these real questions or are you just trying to boost list
traffic? Either that or I'm massively misreading what you mean. I know
the book in question and I really fail to see the problem with advocating
natural materials...something you do every time you post.
Us "fragile people" do indeed only survive in nontoxic environments. The
safe spaces we create don't make us more "fragile," they keep us alive.
I'm sick of seeing people I care about die of chemical poisoning, cancer,
and other diseases of our modern world.
In polluted areas will this create an inequality where
the poor die off quickly and the rich are not motivated
to find global solutions? (I've got mine, the rest of
the world just needs to get rich and buy it).
Nontoxic products are not necessarily more expensive than the toxic ones.
It depends on your resources. If you make a house out of straw bales,
rammed earth, local wood, or a variety of other things, you can do it
cheaply and sustainably. The commercial nontoxic products are indeed more
expensive (most, but not all, of the time) but that has to do with the
scale of distribution and production. Also with the cost of raw
materials...one of the reasons products are so toxic is because companies
would rather save a few pennies than worry about the health of their
customers. Unfortunately, sometimes using toxic products (or excluding the
less expensive nontoxics) has to do with building codes (some reasonable,
some not).
People are already dying off quickly all over the world because of the
toxic products. Have you seen what pesticides have done to the third
world? Switching to nontoxic products made with local resources can only
help.
My bias is that this book puts too much emphasis on the perfect
environment for people and needs a slight shift towards
earth friendly.
As I've posted before, it's hard to find people who can see things from
both sides: human health and environmental health. The idiots who do
marketing for the chemical companies use the same argument, only in
reserve...that life for humans is so much better now, do we want to return
to the dark ages before chemicals? it's not really hurting the
environment, with chemicals we get more food to more people and cure
diseases and improve infant survival and lengthen lifespan, etc. These
arguments are false and misleading in many ways.
Your statement also sets up a false dicotomy. Human health and
enviromental health go hand in hand; we don't have to choose. If you
aren't already ill or disabled, the things you do to maintain good health
are basically the same things you do to live sustainably and promote
ecological health...that is, if you look at things the right way and not
blinded by modern society's definition of health.
If we always put the health of people first
we will eventually destroy ourself by short sighted thinking.
What a strange argument. I don't put health of people first but it as
important as anything else. And in most cases coincides with health of
animals, plants, and the earth.
Cyndi...who lives in a pretty nontoxic house that would cost a lot to
replace but isn't any more expensive than any other house once
standing...it was just built in 1940 when plaster walls, metal pipes
(leadfree), and hardwood floors were the default, wood wasn't
pressure-treated with arsenic or glued with formalehyde, and hard outdoor
surfaces were made with cement, not asphault. I really fail to see why you
object to this.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Oakland, California Zone 9 USDA; Zone 16 Sunset Western Garden Guide
Chemically sensitive/disabled - Organic Gardening only by choice and neccessity
_______________________________________________________________________________
"There's nothing wrong with me. Maybe there's Cyndi Norman
something wrong with the universe." (ST:TNG) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.consultclarity.com/
_________________ Owner of the Immune Website & Lists http://www.immuneweb.org/
