Banning 1080 is in the same family of conspiracy as anti water fluoridation & anti-vaxers

ByMartyn Bradbury

Banning 1080 is in the same family of conspiracy as anti water fluoridation & anti-vaxers – good people who are utterly ignorant of the science & whose position is more a spiritual belief than anything to base actual social policy on.

These people burn books to ‘save’ the library.

How do we debate these issues though as a democracy that prides itself on inclusion?

I believe there are 4 factors in the knee-jerk reaction to 1080, fluoridation in water and anti-vaxxers.

1: The decline of scientific literacy: If you push activists on the science behind their accusations, it’s all pseudo-junk with a side serving of outright quackery. The internet has killed knowledge. Once upon a time you went to higher education to gain the tools to be able to test and counter test theories and ideas, now you just google it or ask Siri. We have an electorate who think they know truth without having any ability to ascertain and decide what is truth.

2: The decline of public broadcasting: The pent up fury of activists hits boiling points when much of their unchallenged mythology becomes standard orthodoxy within their own group. Public broadcasting should be there to take up that challenge and host debates on these contentious issues so that the wider populace can see how much of those untested assumptions stand up to critical challenge.

3: The decline of debate: Now everyone is so focused on deplatforming and screaming down dissent, we have an environment where free speech has been attacked as white privilege and that anyone advocating for it is a Nazi. In such an environment the quality of debate has died and gone to Twitter feed hell.

4: The failure of MMP: One of the greatest failures of MMP is the rule that any win below 5% gets zero representation. If the Ban 1080 Party was allowed representation, it would quickly find itself confronted by counter arguments and facts that they couldn’t continue to pretend weren’t real. The electoral system itself could expose these groups to scrutiny they currently don’t get and force them to become better stewards for their cause.

Christine Rose today does a devastating critique of many of the arguments you may have seen re banning 1080, and it seems embarrassing that so many of the lies being spun by Ban 1080 proponents are allowed to stand.

What we need to be doing now is engaging more, not shutting down or blocking or muting. Public Broadcasting has an obligation to start opening up these debates and allowing them to be challenged because we need to win each other over with the truth and reason, not misplaced anger and ignorance.

Similar Posts

- Advertisement -

83 Comments

  1. I am opposed to fluoridation of our water supplies as I do not believe the science supports it. Also , while I am not per se opposed to vaccination, I do have deep reservations about the vaccination process as it is conducted at present.I believe it has been hijacked by the pharmaceutical Industry and young children are being over vaccinated in the interests of maximising profits.These subjects are serious issues that deserve to be seriously debated, not spuriously dismissed in a ” the science is proven” blather!!!

    1. “…as I do not believe the science supports it”

      I wasn’t aware science is based on ‘belief’, Pete?

      If you step of a cliff, Pete, unsupported, I don’t need to watch to know what will happen next according to the science of gravity.

      Science is based on observation, not ‘belief’. If you put your hand over an exposed flame, heat-transfer will burn you. That’s not ‘belief’ – that’s a scorch-mark on your skin.

      2. Our “uncorrupted” scientists in the Western world have marched in lockstep with Monsanto for the last 30 years as they peddle their poison. All the scientists involved have gone along with this/averted their eyes/ gone through the revolving door from the toxic industries to the regulating authorities [like the FDA] and back again. People like you Frank have a touching faith in our Western science. No amount of revealed corruption will sway you.Your faith is touching , but misplaced.

          1. No Frank. The question is what do you do when our Western civilization takes a wrong turn and the scientists start serving the multi- national corporations/ 1% instead of the people. It was not like this in 1960. You could largely trust Western scientists then. They appeared to have integrity. That was when the U.S. could build rockets that reached the moon and back. Then you did not have 60,000 doctors who have over prescribed their patients pain killers that have caused an opioid epidemic that has addicted them. You could trust news media reporters like Walter Cronkite to absolutely tell the truth. What happened Frank? Why did a civilization that appeared to be largely on course to bring greater prosperity,equality , and democracy turn diametrically to do the exact opposite? Instead it brings us continuous war , a manipulated news media owned by the super rich, and endemic corruption.Why did a civilization that appeared to be a shining light upon the hill turn into one predicated on unsustainable greed?When I took my son to see Star Wars when it first screened,little did I know that the U.S. Empire would become the Death Star, dragging us all into a perfidious future.The question is -is it too late to change course ?

          2. Pete, you haven’t answered the simple question: where do you get your facts from?? If not science, then where?? Because if you eliminate science, theres not much left as a sourse.

            Before we consign our native birdlife and forests to extinction by invasive pests like possums, cats, stoats, rars, mice, and hedgehigs, I’d like to know what facts and evidence you base your beliefs on. Your ideology isn’t enough to go on.

          3. I don’t think Pete ruled out science.

            As for consigning our native species to extinction, we have done a pretty good job so far.

            It is not the lack of 1080 that has caused our woeful vandalism, neglect ignorance and greed.

      3. As an academic researcher and a published author in peer reviewed journals I find your “faith” in science touching. Science is first and foremost about ego, quickly followed by greed. Ever been to a scientific conference? Sometimes its like a bunch of gorillas stamping their feet marking out their territories. The mainstream scientific establishment is no better than than the Catholic Church was in the Dark Ages. Whoever had the money could buy their way into heaven. Sounds a lot like science today. Scientists have been for sale from the beginning and corporates and governments say what will be researched and what will be covered up. Monsanto is a prime example:

        https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-07/bayer-beware-lawyers-claim-have-explosive-monsanto-documents

        Guess what vaccinations kill and maim far more people than they help, but why listen to the real independent scientists doing the real research:
        https://www.amazon.com/How-Autism-Epidemic-J-B-Handley/dp/1603588248/

        The question is who will actually read it? Not the scientists in the pay of the corporates or the government thats for sure.

        1. Published academic researcher who is yet too timid to put his/her name behind his opinion.

          If you are arguing from authority you should have the guts to identify yourself.

          As it reads your comment is more konspiracy nonsense and serves only to frighten little children and the feeble minded.

  2. The point is, the 1080 program is unaspirational towards becoming more humane science, unaspirational to move past what we know is unethical, the infliction of mass chemical suffering indefinitely. This unaspirational quality over time means it is not science. There is no research or refinement. Only implementation of the favored chosen weapon, the poison. Like a deeply inferior unaspirational inhumane toxic false god. That no compassionate human being would put up with. What tries to normalize this scale of sadism? What is nonchalance about mass killing? Something there must be defeated.

    1. ironically there are farmers who would agree with you….as well as hunters and fishers and trampers and skiers…and conservationists and scientists ( especially overseas)

      1. Yes I feel particularly for farmers forced to have this on their land. What rational farmer would want 1080 air raids anywhere in their context. But they standover and intimidate even them. Chem gangsters

      1. My (first class honours) degrees are in political science and philosophy, which rely on scientific inquiry, ethics and logic.

        1. political science…hmmm….philosophy….hmmm… political science and philosophy have been used to advocate for all sorts of things…(they are not hard natural sciences)

          hard empirical science?
          statistics ?…analysis of statistics?

          ….empirical on the ground bird counts?…longitudinal studies?….decline in kea numbers stats?…kea and kiwi
          and other birds dead from secondary poisoning stats?

          surveys from hunters and fishermen?….surveys of farmers?….surveys of anecdotal evidence from NZers who have lived on the West Coast or other forested areas or frequented the mountains all their lives?
          ….analysis of overseas data from overseas scientists as to why 1080 has been discontinued

          http://1080science.co.nz/

          2. So what are the science credentials of anti-1080 activists, Mr Buzzard? You decry science but demand science credentials from pro-1080 advocates.

            Not very consistent. And showing an inclination to personalising the debate. Which seems the inevitable strategy of anti-1080 proponents. Not a convincing argument RB.

          3. Don’t talk utter nonsense. Far and away the vast majority of the attacks and avoidance of the actual debate is done by the pro poison idiots. Because they have had 60 years of this stupidity without achieving squat, except to get even more money for even more poison.
            I would presume most people here are anti intensive farming practices because of the damage it does to our waterways and our overseas image. How the hell do you think the dropping of hundreds of tonnes of deadly toxins into our environment is going to impact when more and more tourists get wind of our not so clean and green poisoned and polluted environment?
            I won’t even go into the fact DOC are deliberately killing native species in their attempts to play God. Somewhere between 200 and 400 native weka deliberately poisoned by DOC on Rakitu Island a couple of weeks ago. Not accidental bykill. Deliberately exposed to poison. Is that acceptable?

          4. +100 KAYA3…and now DOC is talking about introducing dogs to our National Parks!….so the doggie lovers can take them for walkies

            Has DOC gone absolutely mad?

            Dogs kill kiwi and native birds

          7. I would believe this ex DOC scientist expert, who says DOC’s science for 1080 has been flawed and woeful…as do other international scientist experts

            NZ Department of Conservation’s own former Chief Entomologist, Mike Meads, whose work showed that more than 50% of invertebrates (including insects, spiders, worms etc.) are killed by aerial 1080 drops:

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixvo1DemwE4&feature=share

          8. Christine you are asking for a black and white , yes or No answer and if you have actually worked in science, then such demands are quite inadequate as a response to complex discussion.

            Poor logic breads false argument.

          9. @ CHRISTINE ROSE…How would you answer these real scientists?

            ‘TWO SCIENTISTS WHO REVIEWED MORE THAN 100 OF DOC’S SCIENTIFIC PAPERS SAY: “THERE’S NO CREDIBLE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE SHOWING ANY SPECIES OF NATIVE BIRD BENEFITS FROM 1080 DROPS” ‘

            https://envirowatchrangitikei.wordpress.com/2018/04/28/two-scientists-who-reviewed-more-than-100-of-docs-scientific-papers-say-theres-no-credible-scientific-evidence-showing-any-species-of-native-bird-benefits-from-1080-drops/

            ‘Quinn and Patricia Whiting-O’Keefe: Poison facts belie the claims’

            https://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10448063

            KEY POINTS:
            There is now a familiar litany of scientifically insupportable claims about what great things aerial 1080, a universal poison, is doing for our forest ecosystems. The people of New Zealand have a right to know the truth about what the scientific evidence shows.

            We have audited Department of Conservation scientific research and produced an 88-page monograph reviewing more than 100 scientific papers.

            The results are startling and belie most of the department’s claims.

            First, there is no credible scientific evidence showing that any species of native bird benefits from the dropping of tonnes of 1080 into our forest ecosystems, as claimed by the department and Kevin Hackwell. There is certainly no evidence of net ecosystem benefit.

            We have repeatedly challenged DoC and Mr Hackwell, a representative of the Forest and Bird Society, to come forward with the hard scientific evidence for their “dead forest” claims. They have not.

            Second, considerable evidence exists that DoC’s aerial 1080 operations are doing serious harm, as one would expect, given that 1080 is toxic to all animals. It kills large numbers of native species of birds, invertebrates and bats.

            Moreover, most native species are completely unstudied. In addition considerable evidence shows there are chronic and sublethal effects to vertebrate endocrine and reproductive systems, possibly including those of humans.

            Third, DoC claims that one can drop food laced with 1080, a universal poison (World Health Organisation classification “1A extremely hazardous”) indiscriminately into a semi-tropical forest ecosystem and only negatively affect one or two target “pest” species. That is counterintuitive and scientifically improbable.

            Fourth, as far as we can determine no other country in the world is doing (or has ever done) anything remotely similar – mass poisoning of a semi-tropical ecosystem on the scale that the department is now doing to ours.

            Fifth, and perhaps most disturbing, is that what the department-sponsored research shows has been habitually misrepresented – entirely unjustifiable assertions regarding 1080’s benefits and lack of harm.

            Statements like those of Mr Hackwell that the forests will be “dead” without poisoning them with 1080, and from John McLennan (Landcare Research) and Al Morrison (Director General of DoC) that 1080 is existentially necessary to Kiwis is pure demagoguery and scientific nonsense.

            What is at risk by continuation of this extraordinary practice – and it is unique in the world – is the ecological integrity of our forest ecosystems, our reputation as an environmentally sane and responsible country, and our existence as a society in which reason and rationality can triumph over bureaucratic prerogative and budgetary gain.

            Since Galileo Galilee first discovered the moons of Jupiter in the 17th century, the way to resolve this kind of disagreement has been to do the experiment and examine the evidence, and that is precisely what we urge everyone to do.

            Don’t believe DoC. Don’t believe Mr Hackwell. Don’t believe us – believe the evidence. To that end we will provide a copy of our report and the source scientific research papers to all who would like to read them.

            * Quinn and Patricia Whiting-O’Keefe are retired scientists.

  4. As someone with a higher education – thanks for the insult.

    I don’t know anyone in the anti-vaccine area who is threatening people like some members of the anti-80 crowd so that’s the first thing that makes the comparisons nonsense. And if you’re looking for reasoned debate then good luck convincing the Ministry of Health with that.

    It’s been so long since we made the decision around vaccination in our family that I can’t remember all the research we did but what I do remember was that anti vaccine sources offered the information and said make up your own mind while the pro vaccine sources were basically saying; we’re the experts and we say you should do it. At that time it was very hard to find detailed arguments as to why people should vaccinate.

    The Ministry of Health avoids all debate on this issue. I know anti vax campaigners who have had debates on current affairs shows cancelled at the last minute because the Ministry has convinced the TV people that giving the public information will just confuse them.

    I was also disgusted when the Ministry started turning up at schools and freaking out small children by telling them what would happen to them if they didn’t get vaccinated.

    If the medical establishment is so confident of it’s scientific accuracy why do they need to resort to propaganda campaigns (aimed at 5 year olds!)and suppression of debate?

    A woman in my local town organised for an anti-vax speaker to come to town and it was the pro-vax people who started harassing the venue organisers – as happens in every town where they try to organise public meetings around the country. It seems that it is the pro-vax people who have more in common with anti-1080 protesters.

    The worst thing is that as a parent I was trying to make dispassionate decisions about my child’s health and all the time I’m surrounded by emotive discourse. Your decision to grouping violent anti-1080 protesters in with parents trying to figure out what is best for their children makes me realise nothing has changed.

    1. re “violent anti-1080 protesters”

      …while I agree with your reservations about blanket vaccinations of very young babies and children

      …it should be pointed out to you that most of those “anti- 1080 protesters” are also non- violent, quite scientific and empiricist minded

      …they would probably share your views on blanket vaccinations of very young children and babies promoted by the multi billion dollar industry of by BIG PHARMA ( so dont believe the propaganda)

      1. @Red Buzzard and Rickoshay; I’m aware that most anti 1080 people are not violent – I was trying to point out that for Martyn to put anti-vax people in the same category as 1080 protesters who he gives the impression of being quite unhinged, was inaccurate and inflammatory, particularly as it is the pro-vax people who are the ones harassing people for their views.

        This is just another sign of what happens in these debates, you two are perfectly rational but have easily become side tracked by a perceived slight.

    2. mate there have been exactly 6 threats since 2016 all spoken too by police, how is that violent threats? no arrests made, its just a reason for big brother to start watching them all, they will be the next victims of the surveillance state if they arnt already, they are peaceful protesters, dont drink the Kool Aid of the state sponsored nay Sayers

    3. The tactics you talk of used by MOH are exactly the same tactics used by DOC and Forest and Bird.
      It is irrational nonsense all so the latte set in the Wellington Beltway can see kiwi and weka in the suburbs. It is idiotic, moronic and pathetic. Whoever came up with the idea of Predator Free 2050 should be locked in a padded room and given sedation. As should anyone who thinks it is remotely feasible.

  6. 1080 is banned in several countries, including Brazil, Belize, Cuba, Laos, Slovenia and Thailand, as well as in some states of the United States where aerial distribution and its use on all mammals but coyotes is prohibited.

    ‘Independent scientific reviews
    and official documents on 1080’

    http://1080science.co.nz/

    ‘Maker of Lethal Chemical Fights a Ban’

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2004/12/19/maker-of-lethal-chemical-fights-a-ban/f4103ea0-4390-4c34-8929-2ef667f570a2/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.af532236afb7

  7. Fuck 1080 possums are tasty, my Neighbors got Chronic fatigue syndrome from handling that shit, science is constantly corrupted bye Government, which is why folks no longer beleave in it, ie” Cannabis, the Media constantly lies to us all, the Government spies on us all, why the fuk would you trust them?

  8. Crickey. “We have an electorate who think they know truth without having any ability to ascertain and decide what is truth.” Seems most of those posting here are resident in that electorate. Somewhat depressing.

    1. And as depressingly boringly as usual, the pro poisoners resort to abuse of anyone who dares question their “higher” intellect. I can only presume it is higher because of the meds they are on.

  12. The case against Roundup[glyphosates]:”However the so called evidence supporting the human and safety of the broad-spectrum herbicide Roundup is based on research conducted or paid by Monsanto itself, and internal documents obtained during legal discovery in lawsuits against the company revealed Monsanto never actually tested the roundup formula for carcinogeniaty.Evidence also reveals the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency[ EPA]has colluded with Monsanto to protect the companys interests by manipulating and preventing key investigations into glyphosates cancer causing potential.”
    Extract from Dr.Mercola website 10/9/2018.
    There is a whole swag of “scientists” in NZ who are extolling the virtues of Roundup as of this morning[NZ Herald]. What price their data? Non-Lymphona Hodgekins Disease and /or lung cancer anyone? Enjoy!!!

      2. Its interesting to see a brainwashed mind up close.Richard Christie refuses to check out if the allegations I have made about Monsanto and the EPA are correct as they have been published by Dr.Mercola. Thus Richard will always have a closed mind. His ilk would have refused to listen to Gallileo’s message, as it was prescribed by the Catholic Church of the day. Its called metaphorical book burning!!!

          1. Aha! Another boggle eyed book burning zealot! There are more of them on this site than you can poke a stick at!!!

  14. If it’s so vital to add fluoride to drinking water, why doesn’t it get added to bottled water?

    Actually, that’s one way the NZ government could kill off the ridiculously exploitative Chinese-owned bottled water export industry. First, make the fluoridation of all bottled water for export mandatory on “health and safety” grounds. Then we could then watch as the industry dies overnight and we could stop this madness of shipping one of our most valuable resources offshore for nothing.

  15. These days there is just ‘so much” information from a world of sources, that it’s hard to know who’s been paid, bribed or is genuine in their voice, so much so it’s hard to know who to trust.
    Just have to go with the unscientific gut most times.

  16. +100 MELINDA…that is absolutely damning!

    DOC ignored its own science expert, virtually forced out of his job , and ignores other scientist experts as well as the science

    Everyone should watch this….as well as the videos that follow !

  17. TDB you should have done your homework. And rather than bow to the directive of Forest & Bird which was delivered to all media on Wednesday last week and told you to ‘do your duty and support the poison rather than the protesters’, I and other New Zealanders believe that you should have aimed for balanced reporting. We expect better.
    Ive changed this to direct it at you TDB shame you made up your minds to combat the protesters, you drunk the Kool-Aid guess you need money more than morals, have you got the balls to admit this to your readers?
    Or have you succumbed to fear of the GCSB are you just another online rag dedicated to crumbs from the Stasi style state Table?

    1. …on the positive side the airing of this issue has brought forth some very interesting comments and information

      (imo New Zealanders should withdraw support of ‘Forest and Bird’ and DOC….and support NZF)

  19. Christopher St Johanser – Flat Organisations ( re opposition to 1080 poisoning)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EH4Qaaf_WIY

    A comment: “Social network theory – very articulate explanation thank you Chris – and I like -“that’s why I am holding on to a residue of optimism about our situation..” the kind of residues we like!”

    (one could also argue that the The Daily Blog provides an example of a flat organisation for social change through dialogue and education and political action…so thank you Martyn Bradbury)

Comments are closed.