A “moral” obligation on climate means much more than being spoon-fed information and speaking as an advocate. Why Mr. DiCaprio, should anyone take your statement seriously? What moral standard is being applied here? Is it an absolute standard to be imposed on everyone on the planet? What if other “moral” obligations conflict or oppose your claims. (The same questions could be asked of the State of California climate advocates.)
Data and evidence are not neutral. It requires an interpreter. And interpretation is not possible with out making certain assumptions. Presuppositions will virtually determine the outcome of an interpretation. [And some presuppositions being made with regard to “climate change” are simply unsupportable.] Pretending to be neutral on the issue is only that, just pretending. You know, just like pretending (or acting) in a movie.
“Leonardo DiCaprio has been tapped by the United Nations to be honored with the title of Messenger of Peace, and the actor has been asked to speak on Sept. 23 at the U.N. Climate Summit to address the topic of climate change, the international organization announced on Tuesday.” click here
van Alphen LB, Dorléans F, Schultz AC, Fonager J, Ethelberg S, Dalgaard C, Adelhardt M, Engberg JH, Fischer TK, Lassen SG. The Application of New Molecular Methods in the Investigation of a Waterborne Outbreak of Norovirus in Denmark, 2012. PLoS One. 2014 Sep 15;9(9):e105053. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0105053. eCollection 2014.
In December 2012, an outbreak of acute gastrointestinal illness occurred in a geographical distinct area in Denmark covering 368 households. A combined microbiological, epidemiological and environmental investigation was initiated to understand the outbreak magnitude, pathogen(s) and vehicle in order to control the outbreak. Norovirus GII.4 New Orleans 2009 variant was detected in 15 of 17 individual stool samples from 14 households. Norovirus genomic material from water samples was detected and quantified and sequencing of longer parts of the viral capsid region (>1000 nt) were applied to patient and water samples. All five purposely selected water samples tested positive for norovirus GII in levels up to 1.8×104 genomic units per 200 ml. Identical norovirus sequences were found in all 5 sequenced stool samples and 1 sequenced water sample, a second sequenced water sample showed 1 nt (<0.1%) difference. In a cohort study, including 256 participants, cases were defined as residents of the area experiencing diarrhoea or vomiting onset on 12-14 December 2012. We found an attack rate of 51%. Being a case was associated with drinking tap-water on 12-13 December (relative risk = 6.0, 95%CI: 1.6-22) and a dose-response relation for the mean glasses of tap-water consumed was observed. Environmental investigations suggested contamination from a sewage pipe to the drinking water due to fall in pressure during water supply system renovations. The combined microbiological, epidemiological and environmental investigations strongly indicates the outbreak was caused by norovirus contamination of the water supply system.
Click here for full paper (Open Access).
Domínguez-Morueco N, González-Alonso S, Valcárcel Y. Phthalate occurrence in rivers and tap water from central Spain. Sci Total Environ. 2014 Sep 10;500-501C:139-146. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.08.098.
The aim of this study is to evaluate the presence and concentrations of the main phthalates in water from the Jarama and Manzanares rivers in the region of Madrid (RM, Central Spain), the most densely populated region of Spain, and to determine the possible oestrogenic activity based on found phthalate concentration. The presence of phthalates in major supply drinking water areas of the RM was also analysed, thus allowing a preliminary assessment of the health risks resulting from the concentrations obtained. The results of this study show the presence of the three (dimethyl phthalate (DMP), diethyl phthalate (DEP) di-n-butyl phthalate (DBP)) of five phthalates studied (dimethyl phthalate (DMP), diethyl phthalate (DEP), di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), benzyl-butyl phthalate (BBP) and di-n-butyl phthalate (DBP)). The DBP was found in both river and tap water samplers, whereas DMP and DEP were found in only drinking water samples. The DBP was found to make the highest average contribution to pollution in both river and tap water. The DEHP was not found in both the river and tap water because it is one of the most regulated phthalates. The highest phthalate contamination was found in the Manzanares river and in those areas that receive treated water from the Tagus river. The phthalates found in river and tap water in the RM do not represent a potential oestrogenic risk for the aquatic environment or humans. A preliminary risk assessment suggested that the risk of exposure to phthalates from tap water in this study is acceptable, although continuous monitoring of the presence of these substances in both drinking and river water should be undertaken to detect possible increases in their concentrations. This is the first study to analyse the presence of phthalates in both rivers and drinking water of the centre of Spain.
Click here for full paper (fee).