Just so you know, I wouldn't even have brought up my family's history in this area. It was your assumption that I was some kind of an outsider and a play on that false belief to try and put me in my place that I decided to let you know you didn't know what you were talking about.

I don't blame Dow for all the problems here. They are, however, responsible for the majority of contamination to the soils and river. I have an issue with the public being deliberately manipulated by the omission of information and spin on existing studies to keep people uninformed and ignorant (lies of commission and omission).

Until next time, Rivermink.

Corporations are entitled to citizen rights, that is the law. Most of them are schizophrenic people according the demands of their will, the wills of a unmanaged child.

Those afflictions you mention have been higher in this area but are decreasing on their per capita rating. There are more factors involved than just one that is the cause of these serious issues.

I would never say that Dow has atoned, but I will say that they are working for it to be better.

If honesty and integrity are on your side then the cause will come forward and penance will be served.
Follow your heart and you will win.

As for me, my family, my friends, we will remain happy and serve a justice that is in front of us. All is good, and good is a matter of perspective.

I have read two voices with the tag Inform on this blog. You can hide behind these blogs, that is your choice, clearly you are the writer with your defense of info and what you want to present.

So I am correct.

As for now this is a dead issue.
The news rests in your hands if you are so aware of this information that is being with held. If you know then it is your responsibility to bring it forward for justice, it may be yours alone.
I will wait for this news to arrive. If it is intentionally being mis represented then the law will be on your side.
Rivermink out!

I am well aware of the Natural Resource Damage Assessment being completed for the region secondary to contamination of a variety of toxins and adverse effects on the environment as a result from Dow. I'm also quite aware of the health stats in this area and also their limitations in missing people who die out of the area after retiring or moving. I'm familiar with the Midland Health Department's flawed study that had issues with cohorts and dilution-in essence validity.

I'm also familiar with soil samples that are being kept from the public in the City of Midland by being sequestered at a private attorney's office not subject to FOIA. Oh, I've seen the Dow studies from decades ago, as well, that have been misrepresented.

So while you may feel Dow has atoned for the damage they wrought on this area, I do not. They've dragged their feet in cleaning up the dioxin contaminated watershed for decades-all with politician approval and support. I will say that Dow most certainly has improved their emissions and waste practices as a result of requirements by the EPA and DEQ.

This area has higher breast cancer and diabetes rates. Lymphoma rates are also interesting. A certain zipcode has higher overall cancer rates (priority one area). I'm actually in the process of doing a comparative analysis from the stats available. There isn't reportable miscarraige information so that data is unavailable for analysis.

The report from U of M was a completely different study than was done by MSU so I don't even understand how you can logically possibly compare them. The U of M study looked at the dioxin blood levels between two populations-those in the Midland Plume/Floodplain and those in Jackson/Calhoun and not health impacts. The MSU study evaluates wildlife of the floodplain and whether they have problems that have been identified in other studies i.e. lesions in mink, weights, etc.

I really resent your implications of my being a newcomer to this area in your preceeding post (where I come from, if your family hasn't been here for at least 150 years, you're considered a newcomer) and also your accusation that shame should come to me secondary to fearmongering when I present facts. I also find it interesting you assigned an arbitrary number of years my family has been here along with an ethnicity and I believe a slam on Native Americans by mentioning reservations and free education. I also resent your questioning my honesty, when I present facts vs gobblygook and lies on what studies demonstrate. I suspect I have much more information than you, who wishes to minimize the contamination of the area and shame people into not promoting public health and accountability for a solution to this mess which has essentially been allowed to languish for decades.

I'm glad that you follow fish advisories by the way. Personally, I wouldn't eat a thing from that river down from the Dow Dam. Dow has an obligation to post accurate signs at that park with respect to fish consumption advisories and dioxin. Your justifying them not doing so is abominable to me and others who value science and the public's right to information protective of their health.

You speak of Dow as though it a person with a conscience. It is a corporation not a person. It's interests are in making money for stockholders. That corporation has been heavily involved in lobbying and protecting it's financial interests. The longer cleanup is delayed, the better for their pocketbook. It is unacceptable that this contamination has existed for decades without a remedy.

It doesn't matter what the answers are if the wrong questions are being asked.

Your questions are old hat, yesterdays news…
The right question is what we can do about this info?
Then look to Dow and the state and see that they are working to improve what has been done.
Then ask the people if they have seen the result of these data stats upon their families or their land. Are they just responding to numbers or what the numbers mean.
Are they allowed to define what those numbers mean to them instead of the state who again is interested in gaining wealth from a very successful corporation and the life source of this area and its people whom they employ to make this area a place where people want to live.
Not to defend Dow as my employer because they are not, but to defend them on everything they have done for this area good and bad. I know about their history, but I live in the present and I see all that they are doing in the here in now to ammend that history and make tomorrow a better place for everyone.
Maybe your next interview should be with the state and ask them how they have mishandled the money that Dow gave them to their speciffic request to put signs on the river and they didn't achieve that goal and came back and asked Dow for more money…
Dow said no and rightfully so…
Again another exposed spin in your article that has been misrepresented by yourself and the state…
So we all have more of this poison than other people, but maybe we are immune to it by now?
Maybe that is why we aren't dropping like flies in the sun according to these numbers presented.
This as it stands is not an assumption, because as it stands it is more true to the life that lives than the fear that is presented.
Prove me wrong…

I'm not as well versed in the Michigan State studies. However, am aware of other peer reviewed scientific studies showing abnormalities in various wildlife with respect to dioxin/furans. What would be interesting to see would be if the Michigan State studies are considered an anomaly with a review of the scientific literature.

I do not recall stating that the river had not improved from decades ago so don't quite understand why you brought up such a defense. Furthermore, I do not recall stating there aren't other contaminants in that river/watershed.

I note the following from your post and am amazed at the assumptions you made (there's a saying about assumptions, you know):
You wrote: “So don't even pretend that you KNOW more than we do, do not talk about OUR area as if YOU know and we don't.

My family has been in this area, your area, for hundreds of years-before Dow came to visit by the way. So don't get all holier than though regarding my not knowing this area.

Shame on the Lions Clubs for donning those hats which read dioxin my ass. Veterans are compensated for diabetes and subsequent blindness from exposure to agent orange/dioxin during service in the Vietnam War. We all know the good work Lions Clubs do for the blind- they are to be commended. Too bad the Freeland's Lions Club is so short sighted because it undermines the good work I am sure they do.