> We speak together and offer our ideas at the same time. Six individual

> contributions to Digest Numbers 882 and 883 don't show much support for the

> idea of list-serve members as "this crowd." Nice job and thanks to Chris

> for starting this off. I enjoyed the reading exchange.

>

> Keith V Bletzer

> Medical Anthropologist

Indeed.  I don't know whether the grower, Chris, is on this list or not, but he has done a service to anyone who is willing to cite literature without first scrutinizing its meaning.  So the "factoid" is bogus.

I think its fair to say that Chris crows about finding the information on Google, so I thought it only fair game to Google him.  I found he is formally trained in media, and, as a representative of farmers in his area, has successfully lobbied for millions of federal relief dollars following drought in the Lower Hudson Valley, and has been on electronic and print media repeatedly.  He knows how to burst a bubble, and is angry about misinformation used against the farming industry.  The spread of misinformation he notes is exactly the type of thing that he's passionate about combating (and who can blame him?), and it's understandable that he makes his point at length.  Dealing with misinformation makes an intelligent discussion so much more difficult.   

However, as David shows, there is good information.  While not inviting contention, I would respond to Chris (or anyone from "this" or "that" crowd) by asking the question, "How much morbidity and mortality due to pesticide is OK?"  "Why don't farmers, researchers, and policy makers put their energy into finding alternatives to using poison?"  “Is there an adequate venue for discussion on these topics?”