Absorption of arsenic by edible plants
freilly at mail.vt.edu
Thu Mar 23 10:35:56 EST 2000
"This is an issue that requires a responsible posture to the
subject---PROVIDE CITES OR REFRAIN FROM POSTING UNSUBTANTIATED
Personally, I don't wish to have the health and safety of another
indivdual on my conscience by advising that the use of wood that
contains a preservative---the subject of long term continuing
controversy and lack or reliable testing---is safe. Far better to err
on the side of caution by avoiding the material entirely in fruit and
vegetable gardening applications while the issue is resolved beyond
I HAVE read the studies. I read them WITHOUT PRE-CONCEIVED BIAS. The
studies HAVE been cited in this thread. The use of CCA treated lumber HAS
been tested, and found to pose risk below the de minimus level. YOU CHOOSE
to ignore the studies ( I can't read them for you.). The safety of CCA
lumber has been scientifically tested, and the testing has the force of law
in that CCA treated lumber is listed for use in vegitable gardening by the
You may choose for yourself to ignore the studies. You may choose for
yourself to avoid using the lumber. You may even choose for yourself to
continue to ignore the studies that have been cited, and to note with great
excitement that the sky is falling.
That is why it is so ludicrous that YOU invoke the use of science. Your last
sentance in the snippet above shows your absolute lack of familiarity with
the scientific method. You say..."while the issue is resolved beyond
doubt. " No one with ANY familiarity with the scientific method would
pretend that anything could be established beyond doubt. The negative can
never be proven, because just one exception disproves the negative. My
advise to you is to crawl back beneath the bridge where you and the other
trolls live, and let this one drop.
> Chris Owens wrote:
> > Mesas wrote:
> > >
> > > You don't understand. Has anyone examined the methodology of the
> > > scientific studies done?
> > Yes, Theresa, they have. Essentially, the methodology consists of
> > burying pieces of treated wood in various types of soils, exposing the
> > soils to the elements for various lengths of time, then sampling the
> > soils at specified distances from the wood and testing for the presence
> > of arsenates. It's exactly the same methodology that is used for
> > testing for all sorts of leaching, and is very difficult to screw up.
> > And, since as with all EPA testing, the work is done by an independent
> > laboratory -- NOT the manufacturer -- there isn't a great liklihood of
> > result bias.
> > Just out of curiosity, I replicated this test for myself, and got
> > exactly the same results -- no leaching detected over a five year
> > perios.
> > Chris Owens
> No you don't understand!!! Quite your idle banter and quote references
> and studies. All I've been reading on this subject thus far is just
> plain BS!
> This is an issue that requires a responsible posture to the
> subject---PROVIDE CITES OR REFRAIN FROM POSTING UNSUBTANTIATED
> CLAIMS---DO SCIENCE!
> Personally, I don't wish to have the health and safety of another
> indivdual on my conscience by advising that the use of wood that
> contains a preservative---the subject of long term continuing
> controversy and lack or reliable testing---is safe. Far better to err
> on the side of caution by avoiding the material entirely in fruit and
> vegetable gardening applications while the issue is resolved beyond
Extension Associate - Urban Nutrient Management
Virginia Cooperative Extension - King George County
P.O. Box 410
King George, VA 22485
Internet: freilly at vt.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Plantbio