[PASSED] Ban on Leaded Fuel

[Normlpeople]

Most of out people have very modern cars.

In which case THEY RUN ON UNLEADED!

Jeez....

OOC: Not necessarily. After all, this nation may well RP as such where unleaded fuel does not exist, and lead remains an additive to this day...

[Jakuso]

Some people in rural areas use older vehicles as they don't have access to newer vehicles. I must ask whether this really is a matter for the WA?

[Wrapper]

Some people in rural areas use older vehicles as they don't have access to newer vehicles. I must ask whether this really is a matter for the WA?

Damn right it is. You're poisoning your people. You must be stopped!

[Jarish Inyo]

There is no actual proof that leaded fuel is any more dangerous then unleaded fuel. Many in this debate believe that it is. Many have tried to prove their point using reports from the world health organization, world bank and several other organization, none of those reports have stated conclusively that leaded fuel is as dangerous as many in this debate make it out to be. Simple fact is that lead is in soil and are still used in some common items other then fuel today. Things like solder, make up and toys.

[Wrapper]

OOC: Lead poisoning due to fuel emission exposure is no myth. People should do some fucking research (and that's just one of many examples that cite plenty of other references) before they open their mouths and spout ridiculous, stupid, uninformed bullshit statements such as this:

There is no actual proof that leaded fuel is any more dangerous then unleaded fuel.

[Jarish Inyo]

OOC: Lead poisoning due to fuel emission exposure is no myth. People should do some fucking research (and that's just one of many examples that cite plenty of other references) before they open their mouths and spout ridiculous, stupid, uninformed bullshit statements such as this:

There is no actual proof that leaded fuel is any more dangerous then unleaded fuel.

It's a myth. No organization has stated that anyone can get lead poisoning from fuel emissions. Even the source you gave does not state that one can get lead poisoning from emissions. You're source only cites one report that mentions any health risk. It states that leaded fuel emissions may cause high blood pressure. Most of the source discusses the economic impact of banning leaded fuel.

The sources can be found in this thread, posted by others trying to prove that leaded fuel is more dangerous the unleaded fuel. I've read them as they have been cited. I've done my own research. I've seen it claimed that leaded fuel exhaust causes lead poisoning to cancer in this thread. The evidence is not in the sources that everyone has claimed proves my statement wrong. As of yet, I've not seen anything in the sources that proves my statement incorrect.

[Mundiferrum]

OOC: Lead poisoning due to fuel emission exposure is no myth. People should do some fucking research (and that's just one of many examples that cite plenty of other references) before they open their mouths and spout ridiculous, stupid, uninformed bullshit statements such as this:

There is no actual proof that leaded fuel is any more dangerous then unleaded fuel.

That guy will not respond to reason. Don't fall into his trap, Ambassador Alaz!

[Wrapper]

OOC: Lead poisoning due to fuel emission exposure is no myth. People should do some fucking research (and that's just one of many examples that cite plenty of other references) before they open their mouths and spout ridiculous, stupid, uninformed bullshit statements such as this:

That guy will not respond to reason. Don't fall into his trap, Ambassador Alaz!

Er... that was most definitely OOC. From a guy with a chemical engineering degree. From MIT. With 25 years of experience, specializing in the health effects of chemicals.

My ambassador knows little to nothing about gasoline. He'd probably try to huff the fumes, or drink it, on ice, with a spritz of seltzer, a sprig of spearmint, and a squeeze of some alien tropical fruit.

(No worries, Mundy, just pointing it out.)

[Jarish Inyo]

I'll respond to reason when I see it. The sources cited do not, as of yet, support the argument that leaded fuel emissions are more of a health risk as unleaded fuel emissions. I'm basing my opinion off the sources. The sources do not support getting lead poisoning or cancer from fuel emissions. If future sources state they do, then my stance on the matter will change.

[Wrapper]

It's a myth....

"Only very recently have scientists been able to prove that low-level lead exposure resulting from automobile emissions is harmful to human health in general, but especially to the health of children and pregnant women." (EPA)

"The past use of leaded gasoline, only recently banned in this country, contributed greatly to the number of cases of childhood lead poisoning in the US during the last sixty years or so." (NSC)

"At lower levels of exposure that cause no obvious symptoms and that previously were considered safe, lead is now known to produce a spectrum of injury that causes loss of cognition, shortening of attention span, alteration of behaviour, dyslexia, attention deficit disorder, hypertension, renal impairment, immunotoxicity and toxicity to the reproductive organs. For the most part, these effects are permanent. They are irreversible and untreatable by modern medicine. When lead exposure is widespread – as happened in the 20th century when leaded petrol and lead-based paints were extensively disseminated in the environment – the health and well-being of entire societies are compromised. And when this happened, the economic costs in terms of medical care and diminished opportunity amounted worldwide to hundreds of billions of dollars a year. Prevention is the best way to deal with lead poisoning.... Lead poisoning is entirely preventable. The major sources of children’s exposure to lead [include] lead added to petrol..." (WHO)

"Because the brain has little capacity for repair, these effects are permanent and untreatable. The most recent research indicates that lead can damage the infant brain even at blood levels as low as 5 m/dl.... In the USA, the removal of lead from petrol between 1976 and 1995 resulted in a 90% reduction in mean blood lead level.... The worldwide dissemination of tetraethyllead is a classic example of our excessive willingness to adopt a promising but unproven new technology without heed to its possible consequences." (WHO)

Shall I go on?

[Mundiferrum]

It's a myth....

"Only very recently have scientists been able to prove that low-level lead exposure resulting from automobile emissions is harmful to human health in general, but especially to the health of children and pregnant women." (EPA)

"The past use of leaded gasoline, only recently banned in this country, contributed greatly to the number of cases of childhood lead poisoning in the US during the last sixty years or so." (NSC)

"At lower levels of exposure that cause no obvious symptoms and that previously were considered safe, lead is now known to produce a spectrum of injury that causes loss of cognition, shortening of attention span, alteration of behaviour, dyslexia, attention deficit disorder, hypertension, renal impairment, immunotoxicity and toxicity to the reproductive organs. For the most part, these effects are permanent. They are irreversible and untreatable by modern medicine. When lead exposure is widespread – as happened in the 20th century when leaded petrol and lead-based paints were extensively disseminated in the environment – the health and well-being of entire societies are compromised. And when this happened, the economic costs in terms of medical care and diminished opportunity amounted worldwide to hundreds of billions of dollars a year. Prevention is the best way to deal with lead poisoning.... Lead poisoning is entirely preventable. The major sources of children’s exposure to lead [include] lead added to petrol..." (WHO)

"Because the brain has little capacity for repair, these effects are permanent and untreatable. The most recent research indicates that lead can damage the infant brain even at blood levels as low as 5 m/dl.... In the USA, the removal of lead from petrol between 1976 and 1995 resulted in a 90% reduction in mean blood lead level.... The worldwide dissemination of tetraethyllead is a classic example of our excessive willingness to adopt a promising but unproven new technology without heed to its possible consequences." (WHO)

Shall I go on?

Add to that all the other sources we've already posted here.

[Separatist Peoples]

My ambassador knows little to nothing about gasoline. He'd probably try to huff the fumes, or drink it, on ice, with a spritz of seltzer, a sprig of spearmint, and a squeeze of some alien tropical fruit.

OOC: That's probably why he fits in so well here!

[Jarish Inyo]

The other sources did not state
any of that. Do go one. Also please add the links to the syatements you quoted above. I'd like to read them in their fullness before I comment again.

[Wrapper]

The other sources did not state
any of that. Do go one. Also please add the links to the syatements you quoted above. I'd like to read them in their fullness before I comment again.

Each paragraph is a clickable link. Knock yourself out. Oh, and, that last one has a couple nice offline references including Department of Health data. EDIT: fixed broken link.

[Hakio]

Leaded Petrol was banned in 1986 in Hakio. Understanding the severe health effects we give this proposal our Seal of Approval!

[Egemore]

"Given the obvious health benefits and limited economic costs, Egemore supports the current legislation. Little is to be gained by the continued health cost of these fuels, and the minimal economic cost of of a ban ought to quickly be outmatched by the increase in health, and therefore productivity. I see little to no reason that any country should vote against this act."

[The Dark Star Republic]

If you were going with my original interpretation, you would have to. But since you're going with the interpretation that mods collectively developed over time, you're fine.

This is the whole problem with that ruling. It rests on a subjective assessment, and hence is impossible for players to navigate.

Honestly, is there any chance at all of the mystery moderator who wishes to remain anonymous that overruled you in six words to a third party on Christmas Eve explaining their decision? Obviously not here, but the NEF repeal thread will be archived soon, too. There's still so much ambiguity and uncertainty. Players have a reasonable right to know what their resolutions actually do.

---

Given the author has chosen to retain their misguided implementation of exceptions based on "open warfare", we will oppose this proposal, despite our general support for the principles within.

[Jakuso]

Having seen the records of this debate, Yakus has decided to vote AGAINST this resolution in order to prevent tax raise havoc.

[Defwa]

Having seen the records of this debate, Yakus has decided to vote AGAINST this resolution in order to prevent tax raise havoc.

I'm not seeing anything in this proposal relating to taxes in any way. Could you point it out?

[Wrapper]

Having seen the records of this debate, Yakus has decided to vote AGAINST this resolution in order to prevent tax raise havoc.

So... even if this proposal were to actually increase taxes (which it doesn't), you would rather poison your people than tax them. Is this correct?

OOC: Seriously, did you read any of the links I posted above? Some of them point out that there's been an overall cost benefit of unleaded fuel over the past thirty-ish years.

[Jakuso]

Having seen the records of this debate, Yakus has decided to vote AGAINST this resolution in order to prevent tax raise havoc.

So... even if this proposal were to actually increase taxes (which it doesn't), you would rather poison your people than tax them. Is this correct?

OOC: Seriously, did you read any of the links I posted above? Some of them point out that there's been an overall cost benefit of unleaded fuel over the past thirty-ish years.

Not enough leaded fuel being used to have a severe effect on our people. We would rather leave it be.

[Defwa]

So... even if this proposal were to actually increase taxes (which it doesn't), you would rather poison your people than tax them. Is this correct?

OOC: Seriously, did you read any of the links I posted above? Some of them point out that there's been an overall cost benefit of unleaded fuel over the past thirty-ish years.

Not enough leaded fuel being used to have a severe effect on our people. We would rather leave it be.

If its not enough to hurt people then your nation must not be using any anyway so the impact should be non substantial if this is passed.
Just because its not a problem in your nation does not mean it isn't a problem in others. We've seen live examples in this discussion of governments willfully ignoring the health effects or putting miniscule profit or saving a little labor over the wellbeing of their population- especially their children.
Make the world better with this resolution.

[Jakuso]

Not enough leaded fuel being used to have a severe effect on our people. We would rather leave it be.

If its not enough to hurt people then your nation must not be using any anyway so the impact should be non substantial if this is passed.
Just because its not a problem in your nation does not mean it isn't a problem in others. We've seen live examples in this discussion of governments willfully ignoring the health effects or putting miniscule profit or saving a little labor over the wellbeing of their population- especially their children.
Make the world better with this resolution.

Forgive me, I Can't see this resolution making much difference environmentally. The atmosphere is already suffering. Yakus is an archipelago in the ocean some distance from any other country. I can't imagine Yakusan emissions making any difference to any other countries, especially at the low levels equivalent to our use of leaded fuel.

[Wrapper]

OOC:

I can't imagine Yakusan emissions making any difference to any other countries, especially at the low levels equivalent to our use of leaded fuel.

"At lower levels of exposure that cause no obvious symptoms and that previously were considered safe, lead is now known to produce a spectrum of injury that causes loss of cognition, shortening of attention span, alteration of behaviour, dyslexia, attention deficit disorder, hypertension, renal impairment, immunotoxicity and toxicity to the reproductive organs...."

You're poisoning your people. You must be stopped!

What, am I on ignore or something? Or are you selectively ignoring these points?

[Jakuso]

OOC:

I can't imagine Yakusan emissions making any difference to any other countries, especially at the low levels equivalent to our use of leaded fuel.

"At lower levels of exposure that cause no obvious symptoms and that previously were considered safe, lead is now known to produce a spectrum of injury that causes loss of cognition, shortening of attention span, alteration of behaviour, dyslexia, attention deficit disorder, hypertension, renal impairment, immunotoxicity and toxicity to the reproductive organs...."

You're poisoning your people. You must be stopped!

What, am I on ignore or something? Or are you selectively ignoring these points?

No I'm stating my point.