EDITORIAL  "I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the People themselves. And if we think them not enlightened  enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the  remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform that  discretion." Thomas Jefferson.  At the risk of being accused of oversimplifying everything, I am going to  suggest that the analogy of life being like a test-tube is a very useful  one, even very accurate and possibly one of the most useful analogies we  can maintain for the most succinct model of our roles in the world and our  effect upon that world.  I do not intend that this be taken too seriously, it's an analogy, not a  philosophy.  Dr. Barnard Weiss spoke to this analogy when he appeared before the Senate  Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs, in 1977:  "...Having evolved from a chemical soup, we should be equipped to  survive in one, for evolution may be viewed as a process by which  living systems were fashioned from environmental debris. But our  capacity to adapt is not infinite. We carry both inherited and  acquired limitations, some of which restrict our choice of  foods....  "Besides these idiosyncratic limitations, we are constrained by  more universal hazards inflicted by the environment. Such hazards  can originate from natural sources or from human interventions. These are among the hazards typically encompassed by the  discipline of toxicology--the science of poisons."  Of course, a test tube is a static vessel, which is why it is useful to the  scientific observer. The scientist can limit what goes in or out, put in  specific components and observe the reactions and changes which occur and  so acquire specific knowledge.  Similarly, the influx of selected components or additives to the living  organism can also be regulated or observed and measured, and so some  knowledge can be acquired by the individual on an empirical, subjective  basis that can be important to the smooth functioning, the harmonious  functioning of the living vessel.  On a higher plane, the individual is also a component in a much larger  test-tube. This test-tube is the world, including the natural environment  as well as the social, civil and political components of our world. Our own  experience teaches us that what we put into ourselves has an effect and  conversely, what we fail to put into our bodies also has an effect.  Furthermore, what we fail to take into our minds, our judgment, our faculty  of reasoning, has an effect for good or ill. And the same can be said about  what we neglect to do in this world.  We are all caught up in the "soup" of life, being nourished and maintained  by it, and at the same time, impinging upon the way of things outside of  us. Effect radiates in all directions, into us, and from us. It is an  inescapable reality.  And so I wish to address the reality of the social/political effect we have as components of the world test-tube. In 1989 or so I became aware of the problem of dioxin poisoning amongst the  American population. It was convincingly brought to my awareness that this  highly toxic, artificial compound of civilization made the majority of it's  inroads into the human body by means of packaging and food processing. I  was rather amazed by this information because I was under the general  impression that dioxin affected mostly veterans of the Vietnam war, as a  component of "agent orange", the defoliant used to destroy the green sward  in which the Viet Cong hid themselves. I was also under the mistaken  impression that our risk of poisoning from dioxin was rather low, with  highest risk mostly near industrial areas where it is produced or stored. I was mistaken indeed. Allow me to quote from the report that alerted me:  "In the fall of 1988, J.J. Ryan, a Canadian researcher, announced  that his research showed that dioxin was leaching from paperboard  milk cartons into milk. His study of whole milk samples packaged  in carton containers revealed levels of dioxins at 40 picograms  per kilogram and levels of furans at 750 picograms per kilogram.  (According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,  the average person is exposed each day to approximately 1  picogram of dioxins for each kilogram of body weight; a kilogram  = 2.2 pounds.) Similar levels were detected in 2 percent milk and  skim milk samples, with even higher concentrations found in  cream. Ryan also tested these same food products in non-carton  containers such as plastic and glass. These samples showed no  dioxins or furans. In other words, dioxin in the milk comes from  the paper packaging, not previous environmental contamination."  Northwest Environmental Advocates "Dioxins and Paper  Products--The Facts" I learned further that dioxin pollution in these packages was due to the  wood/paper pulp processing known as kraft bleaching using chlorine gas. The  dioxin that results from this process ends up in such common items as  "paper towels, paper plates, bond paper, coffee filters and tea bags,  coated milk cartons, uncoated packaging (cereal boxes), disposable diapers  (furans only), toilet paper, tampons and sanitary napkins, coated packaging  for frozen foods."  At this rather inflammatory information I became alarmed and angry. Naturally I stopped using carton carried milk and other similarly packaged  foods. Using any coffee made with white filters was also out. I tried  unbleached filters, but discovered I preferred using a French Press or  drinking Espresso, which eliminated the whole question. But I drank a lot  of mixed herbal teas that only came in bags. So I decided to write those  companies that I patronized to find out how they bleached them.   I quoted Ryan's paper and the information provided by Northwest  Environmental Advocates. All those I wrote responded....in one way or  another. Those from whom I received written responses assured me that they  used only oxygen bleaching processes, which produce no dioxins. I was  gratified to know I could resume drinking the tea from those companies. One  company did not respond directly to me. But about 3 weeks to a month after  I wrote them, one found on their packaging little sticky labels that said,  essentially, and emphatically: "NO DIOXINS".  The other companies sent me letters and complementary coupons for free tea,  etc. But those sticky labels really were the most gratifying response I  got. In fact, I was bit taken aback by it. Could one single little letter  from me compel a large corporation to go through the added expense of  applying a sticky label adviso about the purity of their product? Since I  had no way of knowing how many others wrote, I at least toyed with the  thought that one letter might have made a difference. The exercise was enlightening, and empowering. The coincidence of the  appearance of those sticky labels after my efforts may have had a delusive  effect on me, I admit, at least for a time. But I took great pleasure in  thinking my two-bit influence on the world test-tube was visible, and  detectable, and as a result could appreciate the reality that we can make  our voices heard individually as well as collectively.  Later I realized there was a little bluff in my letters. I thought I might  start a campaign, and so as a letter head, I captioned: Coalition of Letter  Writers. I imagine some corporate officers saw that and fearing a ground  swell of reaction, acted promptly to assuage any fears. My intent was that  eventually, more letter writers could avail themselves of this vehicle.  Eventually I decided that organizations and associations were essentially  weaker than merely popular and individual action. People already were  writing letters, and getting things done, without any external impetus from  me, or anyone else. Of course everyone relies upon a "feed", "intelligence", sources of  information about the world. Some of these conduits of information take  more than a merely reportorial position on issues. There are "advocates" of  causes. These information sources seek to inspire action by means of a  natural reaction in their receivers or audience. Northwest Environmental  Advocates played that role for me about dioxin. Newspapers, word of mouth,  any form of input can have the same potential in the test-tube of our  brains...if we act on the information, rather than simply react emotionally  and do nothing.  Most of the time prior to this, I merely grouched out my dissatisfaction  with the news and expressed my advocacy or dissatisfaction by my purchase  power, or boycott. I still believe the boycott one of the most effective  means of creating change in the commercial sphere. But a letter or two on  top of that can multiply that power many fold. I should point out that I  never did write Lipton or any of the various coffee filter companies, or  the milk carton manufacturers...and there are many other possible lines of action for the letter writer. I recently got around to reading then Senator John F. Kennedy's "Profiles in Courage". His very frank, and honest remarks about the tremendous  pressures placed on a representative of the people by various interest  groups made me reflect some more on various other of my letter writing  campaigns. Let me quote him: "We may tell ourselves that these pressure groups and letter  writers represent only a small percentage of the voters---and  this is true. But they are the articulate few whose views cannot  be ignored and who constitute the greater part of our contacts  with the public at large, whose opinions we cannot know, whose vote we must obtain and yet who in all probability have a limited  idea of what we are trying to do."[emphasis mine]  Before my readers form the conclusion that John Kennedy had a low opinion  of the intelligence of the American people, I wish to state that for my part that is not the impression President Kennedy gave me. I felt as a  child he spoke directly to me, and that if I should speak to him, he would  listen. He was aware that ignorance does not equate with stupidity. But  Americans are ignorant of many things going on in government, often the  most important things beyond what the media and politicians hype up. The  fact that he signed his name to Profiles in Courage proves he had a high  respect for the intelligence of the reading American public. His own  political record also substantiates, for me, that he represented and  pursued the best interests of the American people with a foresight that,  still, today we can say was thoroughly modern and of a high consciousness.  Many of the things he said presaged what a growing number of politically  and environmentally conscious and progressive people are saying and asking  for now. He did this in advance of these movements, before they became  popular issues. He knew that we were on the brink of extinction, from our  "interventions" in nature, and our political and military postures.  My point in quoting from Profiles in Courage is to drive home the need and  responsibility we have to help make the test-tube truly functional and  harmonious. We need to be informed of and understand what is happening on the Senate floor in Washington and in our own States. We also need to make  our elected representatives aware we are watching and listening with  understanding and that we will have a voice in the process. To do this  effectively, we must be sure that they know that the letter writers are  knowledgeable and not isolated from one another, but representative of many  others...that there are a growing number of people whose "discretion" is  well informed.  I would encourage anyone who hasn't, to make a point of reading Profiles in  Courage, because it delineates what an informed discretion really is when  it comes to dealing with our personal goals or ideals on one hand and  political representatives and the governmental processes on the other. The  intelligent men and women in those lofty halls know that our form of  government progresses in a steady if somewhat frustrating course of compromises. The voices of many people with understanding reason, informed  of the processes of Legislation, of current Laws as well as the  Constitution; possessing a sober and necessary knowledge of the selfish  interests of private industry: insurance, medical, health, manufactory; of  the war industry, and their practices; of lobbyists and political factions,  etc., such voices will perk the ears of any competent representative and  will have an effect. And if it doesn't, then we have our recourse come  election season. The internet has made the letter writer a thousand, a million times more  powerful than in former times. At one's finger tips we have the means of  self-education, of garnering a robust knowledge of what's going on in any  phase of human endeavor, of political news, of what bills are pending in  National or State legislatures. All available in minutes at relatively  minuscule costs. And our power of sharing opinions, of garnering a working  group to evolve new information, or to make change or progress is  correspondingly magnified. We can find out so much about the world through that stream of information tapped by the machine before us that, for those  of us that have one or access to one, to remain ignorant of what's going on  and to refuse to have a say in what's going on, can only be due to willful  ignorance and apathy. We will then have no one to blame but ourselves when  the buffetings of the world that we might have forestalled impinge on our  little drop in the test-tube.

Finally, I would like to quote from The Myelin Project:  "The underlying philosophy of The Myelin Project is that  afflicted laypeople must, and can, expedite the pace of medical  research."  The Myelin Project was begun by Augusto Odone who, together with his wife  Michaela Odone, discovered "Lorenzo's Oil". Neither one were scientists.  They did this through intense, independent research of medical and  scientific literature. They were trying to save their son's life. Their  example is truly an inspiration of what can be accomplished by people when they are sufficiently motivated and decide to get involved in solving their  own problems.  Usefull Links: * Legislative Information on the Internet: A resource run by the Library of  Congress. While there, visit:  * Making Laws how Laws are Made. Now follows the people you can directly  influence through this wonderful medium and the good old pen and paper.  * The Executive The Chief of State's branch.  * Congress Legislative Branch  * State Government Your local employees.  * Judiciary The Grand Interpreters. Don't expect to have much direct  influence here. But by all means, write them anyway.  * Stats get your Stats right. Actually a very good education in seeing  through the hype of statistics. But be skeptical about this source as well.  One article actually quotes an "expert" who tried to diminish the  "perceived" danger of DDT while disarming certain misused statistics  showing the biological impact of a world overrun with pollutants.  * APHA 1 American Public Health Association's legislative factsheet.  * APHA 2Actual Legislation on health issues currently in the House.  * APHA 3Advocacy Links, such as:  * Electronic Activists All 50 states elected representatives who are  enlightened enough to maintain email. By the way, this is brought to us by:  * The Institute for First Amendment Studies Apparently an organization that  makes it's sole purpose to study the religious right. Hence from somewhere  left.

(Current Document Location: http://www.navi.net/~rsc/editori2.htm)
RETURN TO INDEX|   Go to first editorial   For contact by mail, send an email with your mail address, and receive a  sample Newsletter "SOURCES", or write to:

Roger Cathey, Associate, Director ROBERT CATHEY RESEARCH SOURCE
113 S.E. 61st Avenue Portland, 15, Oregon
e-mail:  rsc@navi.net     Immediate Comments  :rsc@navi.net