Why Does Plastics.com Show Anti-Plastics Viewpoints?

[greg]

Why Does Plastics.com Show Anti-Plastics Viewpoints?

Well, first and foremost, we're not anti-plastics. We're plastics professionals.

But we are not a voice of any plastics organization or association other than the voice of our staff and our members. So we are able to speak the truth about our industry.

Our industry, as we see it...

- Plastic is a miracle material that is ubiquitous to mankind and in most cases preferable to the alternatives.

- Environmentalists often provide a distorted negative image of plastics while not offering practical solutions or replacements that scale up to work on a worldwide basis.

- The plastics industry is not effectively countering inaccuracies, distortions, etc. of environmentalists who simply want plastics to go away without thinking of the environmental results of that or of the environmental results of potentially worse non-plastic replacement materials.

- There are reasonable health and environmental issues with some particular plastics or usage of plastics

- The plastics industry needs to acknowledge these LOUDLY and support studies and proposals regarding these, instead of acting as if in denial or with its head buried in the sand.

Why we publish news that may seem 'anti-plastics'...

The public is being inundated with anti-plastics info, much untrue, or distorted or without better alternatives and the industry is failing to educate the public as to plastics proper place in society. The plastics industry is losing the fight to accurately portray plastics in the environment versus alternatives. The 'fringe' environmentalist view that 'plastics are bad' seems to be moving from 'fringe' status to 'mainstream' for lack of a clear, trusted voice of reason.

The plastics industry seems generally perceived as this generations robber barons, without care of real environmental issues. The plastics industry is seen as propagandizing all plastics issues.

So we think it is important that plastics professionals coming to this site see what the public thinks of our industry. We shouldn't ignore or minimize the public perception.

It's not as simple as 'plastics are bad' or 'plastics are good'

Love to hear comments and we'll try to go into some details in future posts on this topic.

[Dr. Dick]

Well Said Greg
It is necessary to publish both sides of any question to reach a valid judgment on any subject. Greenpeacer's and other anti-technology groups often are ill informed on what they are supporting. Consider one groups' effort to ban chlorine in all it's forms. Unfortunately salt is one of those forms and with out salt most life forms could not exist. Remove salt = remove humans (and most of life on earth).

Then there is that dangerous chemical "Dihydrogen oxide" that kills hundreds of thousands each year from over and under consumption We covered that in a forum here several years ago.

What the public overlooks is that all life is based on chemistry and chemical compounds. Some are beneficial and some are not. Also no two people have identical reactions when exposed to or given chemical compounds. For some individuals aspirin is a deadly poison causing a severe allergic reaction. the same thing goes for smells, which are caused by chemical compounds, what can smell good to some can cause others to vomit.

ALSO OFTEN IGNORED IS THE VALIDITY OF A "SCIENTIFIC STUDY". Often claims are based on studies that are not conducted by a scientific method or a representative sample size. On occasions the sample has been deliberately limited to one group, which may not be representative of the human population, but is important to the group studied, but not to the general population.

In addition analytical methods have been developed that allow detection levels much lower that previously existed. It was found that some chemicals thought to be dangerous to life are actually present, produced by the human body and required for life.

As Pogo said "we have met the enemy and he is US!"

WHO'S NEXT ON THIS SOAP BOX?

[ryan3]

It doesn't help when only one side of the story is being put forward, but who wants to read about ethical companies? It just doesn't make news. This is all about educating public opinion because not all companies are haphazard in their commitment to the environment. A lot of our clients ask the right questions about environmental concerns, and we have always advocated a responsible 'green' programme such as encouraging our customers to return their waste to us to recycle. I'm sure a lot of other companies do the same but we will always be blighted by the irresponsible minority because it will always be their actions that people remember.