"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:
Here's a scary thing, marginal to this discussion: On a Nova show last
year, they said that some killer whales' body tissue contains so much
toxic crap (by parts per million or however it's measures) that if the
animals were land-based waste, they'd be subject to special handling by
whoever needed to discard them. I'm sure the fish we eat don't have the
same issues, though, because they swim in special water, unlike the
whales.


There you go again, trying to raise some controversial political issue.
Are you trying to make the netcops chokes?

Well, admittedly, it is fun to toy with science. Some will say that since
the fish we eat are so much smaller than killer whales, they contain less
toxins, so concerns are minimal. However, we eat them regularly. So.....???

Similar reasoning here in Rochester. There are health warnings for eating
certain types & sizes of fish from Lake Ontario, and most years, the
warnings include even smaller fish because they're finding increased toxin
levels. Meanwhile, the city and some surrounding areas get their drinking
water from Lake Ontario. The water authority says not to worry because we
don't "breathe" the water, like the fish. But, we drink it and cook with it
all our lives, and it's supposed to be harmless. Yeah. OK.

Downstream, in the St Lawrence River, scientists find beluga whales with
cancer.