Quebec Asbestos Mine Gets Government Backing

August 31st, 2010. By janem

It’s unfathomable and despicable that the Quebec government will guarantee a $3.5-million line of credit for the Jeffrey asbestos mine in Asbestos, Quebec. Now the mine will be able to pump out more asbestos for the next month while it hunts for asbestos investors. The Jeffrey mine is looking for a cash injection of $58 million for a new underground mine at the site.

Ironically, The Canadian government recently announced it will spend C$600,000 on two studies at mining sites in the city of Thetford Mines in Quebec, to look at potential waste management strategies. Thetford was one of the world’s biggest asbestos-producing regions, until asbestos dust was linked with cancer and lung disease. Natural Resources Canada said the study “will help determine if post-mining activities can be conducted on the site to minimize waste and transform it into environmentally friendly resources for other uses.” The project falls under the federal government’s new C$8-million green mining initiative, which aims to improve the mining sector’s environmental performance and create green technology opportunities.

Who are they kidding? Does the Canadian government think we are naïve enough to believe that anything green and “environmentally friendly” can stem from asbestos?

In August, mine owner Bernard Coulombe told The Sherbrooke Record that the Jeffrey asbestos mine faces permanent shutdown if financing by the Quebec government is not granted. According to the Record, Coulombe told Economic development minister Clement Gignac that all he needed was a loan guarantee of $58 million.

Gignac agreed in principle to that guarantee, but said the mine needs another financial partner to pay an extra $15 million to the project that was not part of the loan. “The government hired industry auditor KPMG to do an audit of our operation and they stipulated that to complete work on the underground shaft would require special contractors, instead of allowing us to do the work ourselves,” he said.

Coulombe said two potential investors, one from London and another from India, will be visiting the premises next month. China already backed out.

Poor Coulombe. He says he cannot find other partners because of the negative publicity his fiber has been getting by anti-asbestos critics who want to shut down the industry in Quebec permanently. He argues that the Chrysotile-type fiber is not dangerous if handled properly.

“When you get people like (federal Liberal party leader Michael) Ignatieff saying Canada should ban all exports of chrysotile, then investors get scared that their money will be lost if the Liberals come to power,” Coulombe said.“It is difficult for me to convince them otherwise.”

Mercy! 3-Letter Word Costs Mercy Flights $30k

August 31st, 2010. By LucyC

Welcome to Totally Tortelicious—a review of some of the more bizarre legal stories making news—and there’s certainly no shortage of them.

Mercy Me! Where are these guys when it comes to apostrophe abuse? The US Department of Transportation(DOT) has fined a non-profit $30,000 for ‘incorrectly’ using the possessive personal pronoun ‘our’ with respect to sales jargon, if I understand this scenario correctly.

Short version, Mercy Flights, an air ambulance firm based out of Oregon, and one of the country’s oldest air ambulance operators, apparently broke laws, according to the DOT, that prohibit unfair and deceptive practices in the sales of air transportation by saying it is “our helicopter.” Really? How careless!

It seems that the helicopter was purchased for Mercy Flights exclusive use, but an entirely separate company

was set up for the deal, and that separate company is the owner of the helicopter—on paper.

The DOT, not without mercy themselves, apparently, have said that Mercy only has to pay half the fine, if they avoid further pronoun violations for one year. My God. What do these guys do when they read a newspaper?

Maybe they could check sentence structure on road signage sometime…

The Brownie Bandit—heard of him? He’s quite famous in his neck of the woods—which is Gonzales, Louisiana. Why? Because he steals brownies. Those delicious, gooey, chocolaty little squares of sugar, butter and flour beloved the world over. Diet food empires have been founded on the backs of these little slices of heaven. But it’s very hard to produce a low calorie version that can produce the same orgasmic effect—on your taste buds.

I digress.

Although the brownie bandit is obviously as smitten as myself—actually more so.

He was recently apprehended by the police with a bag full of brownies, after having broken into Read the rest of this entry »

How do Eggs get Recalled for Salmonella?

August 30th, 2010. By Kristine B

If recent news about egg and meat recalls has you nervous about eating, well, anything, you might be interested in learning how a food recall is initiated. These food recalls are designed to keep consumers safe and healthy, although sometimes they cause panic in people who worry that the food supply system isn’t as safe as it should be. I’m not going to comment on how safe the food system is or isn’t. All I can do in this Pleading Ignorance post is explain how the meat and egg recall process works.

The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) operates within the US Department of Agriculture. Its job is to inspect and regulate meat, poultry and processed egg products that are produced in federally inspected plants. Basically, the job of the FSIS is to make sure that any meat, egg or processed egg products are safe and properly labeled. Foods that don’t fall into the meat, egg or processed egg product categories are regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

A recall occurs when the product’s manufacturer or distributor voluntarily removes potentially hazardous food from the marketplace to protect the public’s health. All recalls are voluntary—even those initiated at the request of FSIS. If a company refuses to recall its products, the FSIS can seize the products.

Products can be recalled if they are believed to be hazardous to the public’s health (they can cause illness or death) or if they have been mislabeled (for example, if they contain ingredients not listed on the ingredients label).

According to the FSIS website (fsis.usda.gov), FSIS usually learns about hazardous or improperly labeled products from the manufacturer or distributor, from test results obtained by FSIS during its sampling program, from FSIS field inspectors or program investigators or through data submitted by other agencies. Once FSIS learns about a hazardous or improperly labeled product, the agency begins a preliminary investigation to determine whether or not the product should be recalled.

There are three classes of recall based on the risk to the public’s health:

Class I: there is reasonable probability that eating the food will cause illness or death (for example, the food is contaminated with E. coli bacterium);

Class II: there is a remote probability of adverse health affects from eating the food (for example, if a product contains an ingredient not included on the ingredients list but that can cause an allergic reaction); or

Class III: there are no health consequences from eating the food (for example, a product contains excess water, not included on the ingredients list, but the water will not cause any health problems).

People who are concerned about the lack of food safety might be happy to hear that a food safety bill is scheduled for a Senate vote in September. The bill, called the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, would give the FDA power to issue recalls and increase the frequency of factory inspections.

The USDA is not affected by the Food Safety Modernization Act; however, as of July 9, new rules gave the FDA power to inspect shell eggs once they leave the breaking facility (where they are broken and pasteurized).

Taming the Egg Salmonella Outbreak Will Take an Inside Job

August 30th, 2010. By Hunter West

It’s ironic that just a month after new rules for egg safety came into effect, the US is hammered with one of the largest eggs recalls in its history due to salmonella poisoning. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had been working on the portfolio for the better part of a decade before the rules were finally rolled out like so many Grade A extra large whites and browns.

It’s a further irony that during the 10 years or so when the FDA was mulling over the rules, a grand experiment in the UK was being met with stunning success.

And that’s where we go for the back-story.

A similar outbreak of salmonella in eggs hit Britain a little over a decade ago. While Brits stared en masse at their scrambled yellows and wondered if they were safe to eat, the British government assessed the available safety protocols—similar to what the FDA was already considering—and decided a more advanced step was required.

So they started vaccinating hens—essentially attacking the problem from the inside out, and the results were spectacular. Cases of salmonella infection have effectively disappeared. According to the latest data from the Health Protection Agency of England and Wales, salmonella infections from eggs have dropped a stunning 96 percent since 1997. That represents a caseload of just Read the rest of this entry »

Asbestos News Roundup: 8.27.10

August 28th, 2010. By LucyC

A roundup of recent asbestos-related news and information that you should be aware of.

Asbestos Lawsuits

Madison County, IL: Four men have filed an asbestos lawsuit claiming that they fear developing cancer after they helped demolish a building containing asbestos that they had been told contained none.

Jaime Chier, Mark Uzzetta, John Schilly and Myrna Bomkamp filed a lawsuit Aug. 13 in Madison County Circuit Court against Alter Trading Corp., Environmental Consultants, Midwest Asbestos Abatement Corporation doing business as Midwest Service Group, Envirotech and Talbert Industrial Commercial Services.

The plaintiffs claim they worked for Premier Demolition and began dismantling a structure at 901 South Front St. in Quincy in August, 2008. Before the plaintiffs’ work began, the defendants inspected the premises and promised it had been cleared of asbestos-containing materials, according to the complaint.

However, the plaintiffs claim they now fear such diseases because they became exposed to asbestos fibers when they demolished the Quincy building.

“When asbestos fibers from disturbed asbestos-containing materials become airborne, such as during renovations or Read the rest of this entry »