Replies to post #101079 on Liberty Star Uranium and Metals Corp (LBSR)

[daleb2130]

EWG looks like one of those wacko groups from California

[daleb2130]

Yup !!!!!!!!!! wacko's that are are hurting business.


Environmental Working Group
Environmental Working Group (EWG) Skin Deep Sketchy information that is harming businesses. Internet
18th of Apr, 2011 by User568992
The Environmental Working Group (EWG) claims to be an American environmental organization that specializes in environmental research and advocacy in the areas of toxic chemicals, agricultural subsidies, public lands, and corporate accountability. EWG is a non-profit organization (501(c)(3)) whose mission, according to their website, is "to use the power of public information to protect public health and the environment."EWG was founded in 1993 by Ken Cook and Richard Wiles and is headquartered in Washington, D.C. in the United States. A sister organization, the EWG Action Fund, is the lobbying arm (501(c)(4)) of the organization and was founded in 2002. A lot of the information listed on their website is in accurate & just flat out lies. The organization claims to be a non profit for the good of the people, however they have lobbyists in DC, so how honest can they really be? Anyone with the money to pay lobbyists has an agenda, in this case, to promote products that they receive money for and report false information on the companies that do not give in to their blackmail Industry experts have called much of their research and claims inaccurate. EWG's website even states the following- "The conclusions and findings of EWG reports reflect EWG's research as of the publication date reflected in the report's executive summary, and may no longer be current". If the information is not current, they do not retract or correct it. For Fiscal Year ending December 2006, EWG raised nearly $3.6 million and spent $3.2 million. As of March 2008, EWG reports 30 staff members with its president Ken Cook earning $192K per year in 2006. That is quite a nice sum for a "non-profit". Most (78%) of the funding comes from foundations, and a partial list of 25 major funders is available on the organization's website. 18% of the budget comes from individuals, with the rest stemming from interest, small sales, and consulting for other organizations. It should come as no shock that the companies that are investing money and bankrolling the company have shining reviews while companies that do not contribute money to EWG are falsely accused of many bad business practices. This "non profit" is a scam and it is about time that is is investigated deeper and exposed for what it really is.

[daleb2130]

Actually. These guys are scary

Environmental Working Group
SCARE: In March 2004 the Environmental Working Group (EWG) held a press conference to proclaim that "unsafe" mercury levels in fish were endangering pregnant women and their children. That same month, in cooperation with the political group MoveOn.org, EWG produced and distributed a television advertisement claiming that mercury "gets into the air, the water, and then into the fish we eat, causing brain damage in children." The spot warned that without political changes in Washington, children will "go on eating mercury in their tuna, risking brain damage."

FACT: The 2004 EWG press event and the subsequent TV ads were developed and organized by Environmental Media Services, an advocacy arm of the Washington, DC public relations firm Fenton Communications. This firm used the phony 1989 "Alar-on-apples" food scare to make money for the Natural Resources Defense Council, one of its paying clients.

SCARE: EWG operates an online "tuna calculator" that needlessly scares Americans (particularly women of childbearing age) away from eating tuna. EWG has promoted its calculator in newspaper and magazine articles, and on daytime talk shows viewed disproportionately by women.

FACT: There is no scientific consensus to support the opinion that mercury, in the tiny levels that naturally occur in tuna fish, causes brain damage. EWG purposely confused the Environmental Protection Agency's mercury "Reference Dose" with a level that might actually cause harm. But that Reference Dose is ten times lower than the real harm threshold. Dr. David Acheson, the Food and Drug Administration's chief medical officer, told The Washington Times: "We know there will be people above the Reference Dose, above the tenfold safety factor. But not far above it. They will be in the zone of safety."

SCARE: In 2001 EWG issued a report called "Brain Food," claiming that pregnant women should not eat "any quantity" of 13 types of fish, and strictly limit consumption of 10 others, including canned tuna.

FACT: The Environmental Working Group's "tuna calculator" conveniently uses the EPA's mercury "Reference Dose" as its measuring stick. EWG undoubtedly knows that the EPA standard has a built-in ten-fold margin of safety, but the group continues to mislead Americans by claiming that this Reference Dose defines what is "safe" and "unsafe." This may be one reason why some in Washington refer to EWG as the "Environmental Worrying Group." Click here to test-drive a calculator that uses a more realistic definition of "harm" from mercury in fish.

SCARE: In December 2004, EWG claimed publicly that mercury in fish was putting American children at increased risk of developing autism.

FACT: Many studies have shown no link between mercury (from both fish and routine immunizations) and autism, including a comprehensive 2004 report from a U.S. Institute of Medicine committee. One member of that committee, Johns Hopkins Medical School professor Dr. Steven Goodman, told the Reuters News Service that EWG's claim about mercury and autism "doesn't remotely establish what is cause and what is effect."

[bishai]

We should be promoting wild salmon and not farm raised. Farm raised salmon have PBC,s and other toxins and the balance of Omega 3 is low while having higher Omega 6.

Leif's brother! :)