Sat Feb 23, 2013, 01:01 PM
n2doc (33,726 posts)
China now has up to 400 “cancer villages,” and the government only just admitted it
Gwynn Guilford — February 22, 2013
China’s “growth at all costs” approach to development has meant industries can spew waste pretty much wherever they want. Drinking water sources? Sure. Farmland? Fine. That approach has poisoned entire towns, sending cancer rates soaring.
There are now so many that they’ve earned their own moniker: “cancer villages.” Conservative estimates have found more than 100 of them in China. But the number of cancer villages could be as high as 400, though, say recent reports.
At least the government is now acknowledging their existence. This admission came in its newly unveiled plan to curb the release of toxic chemicals—a major move considering these matters pose potential threats to its stability.
China’s water pollution is visibly rampant. Investigative journalist Deng Fei recently launched a top-trending campaign on Sina Weibo inviting users to upload photos of their hometown rivers.
4 replies, 996 views
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
China now has up to 400 “cancer villages,” and the government only just admitted it (Original post)
Response to Purplehazed (Reply #1)
Sat Feb 23, 2013, 01:42 PM
Gregorian (20,000 posts)
2. We're all responsible for this. But it doesn't matter where you shop. It's all made in China.
Chances are even made in USA products are only assembled here.
It's a disaster. 7 billion people. That's the root of it. So really, if you breed you're supporting it. But it's a more inconvenient truth than almost anyone is willing to admit.
Response to n2doc (Original post)
Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:37 PM
BadgerKid (3,863 posts)
3. That would be here, too (EPA funding cuts outlined by GOP)
By DAVID ROGERS | 7/6/11 12:24 PM EDT
House Republicans outlined a new round of spending cuts from environmental agencies Wednesday while denying President Barack Obama any increase for one of his top investment priorities: the National Science Foundation.
Following on April’s budget agreement, the Environmental Protection Agency is again a major target, and the reduced $7.15 billion EPA funding would mean a $1.53 billion or 18 percent cut from current spending, much of which would come at the expense of clean water programs.