Will the EPA actually ban products containing silver nano-particles?
Several people have written to say that the rabid environmental groups now suing EPA to regulate silver nano-particles are not really out to have them “banned,” but only regulated more stringently.
While we have never claimed the EPA is out to “ban” silver nano-particles, we have pointed out that what the environmental groups are demanding amounts to a de facto ban on products containing silver nano-particles, including colloidal silver.
Of course, the rabid environmental groups pushing the EPA to regulate silver nano-particles as a “pesticide” are very careful not to use the word “ban.” They know how what kind of opposition that word automatically stirs up.
Nevertheless, their petition demands the EPA remove all nano-silver products from the market, while the potential impact of those products on the environment are investigated.
That is a de facto ban.
Here, in their own words, is what the Center for Food Safety, Friends of the Earth and other environmental groups are “demanding” the EPA do in regards to nano-silver:
“The legal petition demands EPA assess the safety of these materials to the public and the environment before permitting commercialization. The petition also calls on the agency to require safety data from manufacturers and require mandatory and approved labeling. Finally, the petition calls on the agency to stop the sale of those nano-silver products currently on the market until the agency properly assesses their impacts.” [Emphasis mine. –ED]
This is quoted word-for-word directly from the most recent email sent by the Center for Food Safety on February 24, 2009 to all of its members worldwide.
Ban, Moratorium, Delay…What’s the Difference?
I think “stop the sale of those nano-silver products currently on the market” is pretty clear language, don’t you?
Call it a “ban,” or a “moratorium” or a “delay,” or call it whatever you want. What the rabid environmental groups are demanding from EPA is that they stop the sale of any product containing silver nano-particles, “until the agency properly assesses their impacts.”
Hmmm. How long would such an “assessment” take? Three months? Three years? Thirty years? It’s not stated. What is clearly stated is that the petition sponsors want all products containing silver nano-particles removed from the market until everybody’s happy that they aren’t going to harm some poor little minnow in some stream, somewhere on the face of God’s green earth.
3 Powerful Solutions
There are three powerful solutions to this problem:
Solution #1: If you are a colloidal silver user, you can obtain a relatively inexpensive colloidal silver generator from our good friends at https://www.thesilveredge.com/ and start making your own high-quality colloidal silver. Making high-quality micro-particle colloidal silver is quick, simple and easy. And once you own the means of colloidal silver production, you will have instant access to colloidal silver for the rest of your life. And there is nothing the environmentalists and bureaucrats can do about it.
Solution #2: You can teach yourself more about the use of colloidal silver for fighting infection and disease by obtaining an inexpensive copy of the brand new, 60-minute Colloidal Silver Secrets video, or the newly revised, 547-page Ultimate Colloidal Silver Manual. By learning more now, any future action by the bureaucrats to eliminate public information on the powerful infection-fighting qualities of colloidal silver will have no effect on you.
Solution #3: You can oppose the environmentalist’s petition to have EPA regulate silver as a “pesticide” by writing the EPA, faxing the EPA, emailing the EPA and even posting your comments on the EPA’s online public comments system. NOTE: COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY EPA BEFORE THE NEW PUBLIC COMMENTS DEADLINE OF MARCH 20!
Remember, the EPA depends heavily upon public input in making their decisions. Whether they will cave in to the demands of the rabid environmentalists or not, depends largely upon whether or not youlet your voice be heard.
Here’s the necessary contact information:
Post Your Comments: Go to the brand new EPA public comments page at this link (click here) and post your comments directly to the EPA web site. Explain why you do not want the EPA to regulate silver nanoparticles as “pesticides,” which would result in a de facto ban on all products containing silver nano-particles, including colloidal silver.
Email Your Comments: Email your comments opposing the petition to regulate silver particles as “pesticides” to EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson. His email address is: firstname.lastname@example.org
Fax Your Comments: Fax your comments to EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson, at his Washington DC fax number: (202)-501-1450.
Write a Personal Letter: Send a personal letter to the Washington DC office of EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson. His address is as follows:
Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory
Public Docket (7502P)
ATTN: Administrator Stephen Johnson
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20460-0001
Personal letters have more impact than any other method of communication with bureaucrats. So if you have the extra time, print out your comments, stick them in an envelope, and mail them to the EPA administrator at the address above.
Important Note: All comments to the EPA – whether you make them by email, fax, snail mail or through the public comments section of their web site — must reference the “Petition for Rulemaking Requesting EPA Regulate Nanoscale Silver Products as Pesticides,” and must also reference the new Docket #: EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0650-0506. That way they know exactly what you are talking about.
S. Spencer Jones