STOPPING THE POPs: Part 3


© Linda Little

In my last article we discussed the possible consequences for POPs on human health. As I said, it is difficult to get verifiable evidence with reguar to humans as it is unethical to do experiments on human subjects. However, as you may have seen, a number of agencies have voiced the opinion that there is enough evidence to put the precautionary principle into practice and look at way to avoid the production of POPs in the future.

The Challenge

As already stated, POPs are a global problem effecting every area of the earth and every creature. Since these chemicals are toxic and build up in the fatty tissues of animals, it is vital to stop their production at source. Trying to manage these chemicals once they are produced will only continue to allow them to build up within nature.

Enough evidence has been produced that POPs are polluting air, water and soil and that they create a distinct hazzard for wildlife. There is also a good amount of evidence to indicate that the wildlife health problems will be replicated in humans. Since large quantities of a lifetime's contamination can be passed on to young animals thought their mother's milk, the problem is only likely to get worse with future generations. This includes future generations of human beings as well as animals.Evidence has linked these chemicals with learning difficulties, immune deficiencies and reproductive abnormalities.

What needs to be done?

  • A Ban on the Production of POPs
    Set clear guidelines to eliminate the production of POPs at source and outlaw the factory production of POP chemicals.
  • The Precautionary Principle
    Take action at source before there is conclusive environmental proof, and do not let lack of such conclusive proof be used to delay actions. Shift the burden of proof to the polluter; make him/her prove that POPs are conclusively harmless.
  • Ban DDT by 2007
    This should provide the global incentive to find alternatives to DDT to combat malaria; ones that do not threaten biodiversity or human health.
  • Equitably Share the Cost of Banning POPs Make those most responsible for POP production, most responsible for the cost of phaseout and cleanup. Ensure that Third World Countries are helped to meet their financial obligations.
  • Dispose of Pre-Existing POP Stockpiles
    Work out ways that pre-existing stockpiles of POPs, many found in Third World Countries, can be disposed of quickly and safely.
  • Support the Development of More Appropriate

Go To Page: 1 2


The copyright of the article STOPPING THE POPs: Part 3 in Green Home is owned by . Permission to republish STOPPING THE POPs: Part 3 in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.

Post this Article to facebook Add this Article to del.icio.us! Digg this Article furl this Article Add this Article to Reddit Add this Article to Technorati Add this Article to Newsvine Add this Article to Windows Live Add this Article to Yahoo Add this Article to StumbleUpon Add this Article to BlinkLists Add this Article to Spurl Add this Article to Google Add this Article to Ask Add this Article to Squidoo