Diesel Fumes Cause Cancer

[strad]

Now that is downright funny.

[Pup]

What do you feel is poorly reasoned or unqualified about the report which you haven't read?

My problem is not so much with the concept, (I’ve long been concerned that partial combustion of diesel fuel produces micro particles carrying various cyclic and other dangerous molecules and compounds) as it is with the unsupported hyperbolic and unpoliced statements specifically mentioned. The statements mentioned are an affront to technology, let alone science.

Cancer is an important threat. As far as I know the cause(s) is actually unknown- the best evidence of cause is correlation rather than sound, direct proof. My theory is that insult to the epigenome turns on harmful genes that run amuck –but I have no proof.

So, I guess, my problem is that I am a bit galled by such a serious topic being “scientifically” reported in meaningless terms. This forum does an excellent job of maintaining the level of automotive technology discussion. Why compromise the standards on a collateral topic? Be it the experts or the press, we need to challenge and keep them honest.

I couldnt imagine a more evasive response.

[olefud]

What do you feel is poorly reasoned or unqualified about the report which you haven't read?

My problem is not so much with the concept, (I’ve long been concerned that partial combustion of diesel fuel produces micro particles carrying various cyclic and other dangerous molecules and compounds) as it is with the unsupported hyperbolic and unpoliced statements specifically mentioned. The statements mentioned are an affront to technology, let alone science.

Cancer is an important threat. As far as I know the cause(s) is actually unknown- the best evidence of cause is correlation rather than sound, direct proof. My theory is that insult to the epigenome turns on harmful genes that run amuck –but I have no proof.

So, I guess, my problem is that I am a bit galled by such a serious topic being “scientifically” reported in meaningless terms. This forum does an excellent job of maintaining the level of automotive technology discussion. Why compromise the standards on a collateral topic? Be it the experts or the press, we need to challenge and keep them honest.

I couldnt imagine a more evasive response.

OK, let me try again. I’m by choice and necessity a risk taker. Life is full of risks of varying significance. Telling me that diesel exhaust fumes cause cancer does nothing to enable me to evaluate the risk of these fumes. I’ve been exposed to these fumes as well as second-hand cigarette smoke all my life. Yet, I hopefully don’t have cancer. If it’s now certain that I will get cancer from these exposures over an extended period, what is period? If not, what's the probability?

I can’t point to “what’s wrong” because the report I’ve found is a naked opinion with no data, reasoning or explanation to criticize, or accept. I expect science to be very tough on itself. Otherwise rather small risks can be presented as major threats.

Obviously these views relate only to my management of risks. Still, I expect that somewhere along the line I’m paying a bit of the cost of the WHO reports.

[strad]

OK OK...Let's say your chances are 1 in 10,000...if it increases your risk 100% then you now have a 2 in 10,000 chance. Happy? Is that why you want so badly to downplay ANY risk posed by the fumes or are you paid by Chevron?
You're spending days and pages attacking this simply because I said Diesel Fumes Cause Cancer...which they do,,Instead of saying Diesel Fumes MAY increase the chances that olefud MAY get cancer. As far as I know there is no way to know whose body will react with cancer and who won't. Only one thing I know of is guaranteed to produce lung cancer and that is Plutonium.

[xxChrisxx]

Pup, thanks for those links. It's difficult to tell precisely what is relevent to what the WHO used.

Even if they aren't exactly the ones they used they do look interesting.


Strad, it has been a probable carcinogen for some time, and legislation is driving ever increasing aftertreat on diesel cars.
Do you ever feel that there will be a level that you will deem an 'acceptable risk'?

I feel we will always fundamentally disagree about this, as I think it's an acceptable risk at the current level. But I respect your opinion on the matter.

And i'd like to apologise that I came off as a bit of an ass to you before.

[olefud]

I certainly agree that I've burned some space on an issue not really relavant here. Probably best to each of us to follow our own experience.