[Rokenn]

Originally posted by Thorfinn: quote: Originally posted by Rokenn: quote: Originally posted by Thorfinn:Sorry if it sounds like that, but define "safe". For instance, numerous pharmaceuticals are highly toxic, and even have potentially life-threatening side-effects, but the trade-off is that the condition it is intended to treat is worse than the side-effects. Sorry, but the "safe" level of Micardis, for instance, is going to depend on whether you have high blood pressure or not...

Yes I know that many pharmaceuticals and everyday nutrients become unsafe at certain levels (even water). But can you truly say there is any safe level of tar, nicotine, carbon monoxide, formaldehyde, hydrogen cyanide, and benzene?

BTW Nicotine makes a great pesticide. [/QUOTE]Let me turn the question around. At what point does tar, nicotine, CO, etc. become unsafe? Can you say that there is any increased risk at the fractional parts per trillion detection limits we have today? Where does the risk start? [/QUOTE]The EPA website has detailed info on these and other nasty compounds here is the info on Benzene

Carcinogenicity Assessment for Lifetime Exposure Substance Name -- Benzene CASRN -- 71-43-2 Last Revised -- 01/19/2000 Section II provides information on three aspects of the carcinogenic assessment for the substance in question; the weight-of-evidence judgment of the likelihood that the substance is a human carcinogen, and quantitative estimates of risk from oral exposure and from inhalation exposure. The quantitative risk estimates are presented in three ways. The slope factor is the result of application of a low-dose extrapolation procedure and is presented as the risk per (mg/kg)/day. The unit risk is the quantitative estimate in terms of either risk per ug/L drinking water or risk per ug/cu.m air breathed. The third form in which risk is presented is a drinking water or air concentration providing cancer risks of 1 in 10,000, 1 in 100,000 or 1 in 1,000,000. The rationale and methods used to develop the carcinogenicity information in IRIS are described in The Risk Assessment Guidelines of 1986 (EPA/600/8-87/045) and in the IRIS Background Document. IRIS summaries developed since the publication of EPA's more recent Proposed Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment also utilize those Guidelines where indicated (Federal Register 61(79):17960-18011, April 23, 1996). Users are referred to Section I of this IRIS file for information on long-term toxic effects other than carcinogenicity

All these compounds are known to be bad. It's not like they are brand new chemicals that just apeared yesterday.

Unless you are going at assert that all the studies saying they are bad are based on bad science.