4 ms·

Yep. And I wonder why we don't see more childhood cancer death images linked to the multinational chemical conglomerates and industrial corps that pollute our w

Yep. And I wonder why we don't see more childhood cancer death images linked to the multinational chemical conglomerates and industrial corps that pollute our waterways and air continuously, it couldn't possibly have to do with corporate donors (sorry, advertising customers) to media or the incentive for media to only cover deaths that generate reader engagement and subscribers. Kill 10,000 people 5-15 years earlier than their otherwise natural trajectory for death by dumping PCBs in the river (ignoring that additional cohorts will have an increased disease burden going forward for....decades? Centuries? Who knows if you can un-shit this bed), no one gives a shit apart from a symbolic fine of 1% of annual revenue 20 years later. Certainly no actual punishment for those involved. Kill a couple thousand with a plane into a building and the world's most powerful country starts a war.

rightbyte 3y ago
I know nothing about the case, but you got the lurking benefit of doubt for those more abstract killings. Like the poor guy that thought it was a good idea to put Freon in refrigerators. Oh, and also put led in gasoline. Some people can more or only feel sorry for small children or animals, because they are obviously innocent, while a grown up could have done something to deserve it. I think that is a failure to the extreme of having a hard time dealing with more abstract (maybe indirect is a better word?) crimes.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- gerdesj 3y ago
  "Oh, and also put led in gasoline." Freon and lead were engineering decisions. Both had properties that fixed a burning issue at the time. Unfortunately they also had ... side effects that became apparent later. Neither involved "a guy", they involved entire countries, blocs and multi national enterprises.
  - c54 3y ago
    The guy in question knew very well about the negative effects of lead[0]. The way in which you're right is that under capitalism, the profit motive distorts and chews up any moral precepts of any individual. The machine demands efficiency no matter how many lives it consumes. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Midgley_Jr https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Midgley_Jr.
    - nearbuy 3y ago
      The article says it was widely known that large doses of lead are toxic but says they found that 0.08% lead in gasoline was safe. Today it's widely known that large doses of solanine (a compound in potatoes and tomatoes) are toxic, but the amount commonly in food is thought to be safe. So we haven't banned potatoes. But even if some insane or evil scientist invents a harmful compound that becomes widely used, I'd be mainly angry at the US Public Health Services, or the equivalent public health agency in other countries. It's their responsibility to only allow safe products. They conducted a study on leaded gasoline and decided not to ban it. And every other country allowed it as well. So we have to conclude every country's public health agency was either corrupt or incompetent, or that the harm from leaded gasoline at the dosage used wasn't obvious at the time. (Or both.)
      - throwaway2037 3y ago
        This one: the harm from leaded gasoline at the dosage used wasn't obvious at the time I think the same is true of lead in (house) paint.
        kelseyfrog 3y ago
        Reading a Thomas Midgley Jr. biography might change your mind. He was famously warned of leaded gasoline's dangers, had to take a vacation to Miami to recover from lead poisoning. And also was famously a co-inventor of CFCs. His only saving grace is that his name is also on the list of "inventors killed by their own inventions."
- 4death4 3y ago
  > Some people can more or only feel sorry for small children or animals, because they are obviously innocent, while a grown up could have done something to deserve it. Now that I've had a kid, I understand what it means when people say kinds are innocent. Children are innocent in the way animals are innocent; they don't possess the mental faculties to understand morality. That doesn't means kids are good. They can be cruel, mean, and annoying, and to a very high degree. But, just like we don't consider it a moral failure of a dog when it jumps up and steals a piece of bacon from the table, so too do we not consider the things children do moral failures. This differs from an adult. Adults understand morality, and thus can never be innocent in the same way, even if they act with the upmost character.
mcpackieh 3y ago
Children with cancer seem to get more than their fair share of coverage and attention already, although that attention generally doesn't include attributing their cancers to industry.
- haswell 3y ago
  This is just it. When the subject is children with cancer, cancer is the enemy. A faceless threat that everyone can stand “against” without hesitation. And this completely misses the critical fact that cancer is often a downstream effect. I think that cancer awareness really needs to expand to include underlying causes. As it stands, the cause and effect are so disconnected that awareness often leads only to sympathy/empathy/compassion instead of driving people to anger and to push for systemic changes.
  - mcpackieh 3y ago
    I think it's because on an individual basis, attributing cancers to a particular cause is very difficult. It's only when you're dealing with large populations that statistical trends become damning (as happened with cigarettes), otherwise it's usually very difficult to point to a specific kid and say his cancer came from a specific business.
    - haswell 3y ago
      And the twisted thing about all of this is that when we start seeing large numbers, humans tend to stop caring. We care about an individual's story, but our ability to care diminishes the moment there are two, and all but vanishes when it's a large group. So I'm not really sure what the answer is. If the individual cases chosen for awareness campaigns could be selected based on their traceability, it might provide a bridge from cause to effect. Or maybe it really needs to be a multi-pronged effort. Present individual cases to people care. Separately, present aggregate cases so people start linking those individual stories to systemic factors.
Gibbon1 3y ago
Well you got 400,000 children dying of Malaria every year. Between the time you wrote your post and I responded 400 children died. Since there isn't any way to use their deaths to further a political agenda no one cares.
- xkekjrktllss 3y ago
  >Since there isn't any way to use their deaths to further a political agenda no one cares Stats and images of sickly children have motivated (and "motivated") donations to countless non-profits and NGOs that lobby for the Democratic party, and religious organizations that lobby for Republicans. This is straight out of Contemporary Politics 101.
- refurb 3y ago
  Ouch. But accurate.

rightbyte 3y ago

I know nothing about the case, but you got the lurking benefit of doubt for those more abstract killings. Like the poor guy that thought it was a good idea to put Freon in refrigerators. Oh, and also put led in gasoline. Some people can more or only feel sorry for small children or animals, because they are obviously innocent, while a grown up could have done something to deserve it. I think that is a failure to the extreme of having a hard time dealing with more abstract (maybe indirect is a better word?) crimes.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
gerdesj 3y ago
"Oh, and also put led in gasoline." Freon and lead were engineering decisions. Both had properties that fixed a burning issue at the time. Unfortunately they also had ... side effects that became apparent later. Neither involved "a guy", they involved entire countries, blocs and multi national enterprises.
- c54 3y ago
  The guy in question knew very well about the negative effects of lead[0]. The way in which you're right is that under capitalism, the profit motive distorts and chews up any moral precepts of any individual. The machine demands efficiency no matter how many lives it consumes. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Midgley_Jr https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Midgley_Jr.
  - nearbuy 3y ago
    The article says it was widely known that large doses of lead are toxic but says they found that 0.08% lead in gasoline was safe. Today it's widely known that large doses of solanine (a compound in potatoes and tomatoes) are toxic, but the amount commonly in food is thought to be safe. So we haven't banned potatoes. But even if some insane or evil scientist invents a harmful compound that becomes widely used, I'd be mainly angry at the US Public Health Services, or the equivalent public health agency in other countries. It's their responsibility to only allow safe products. They conducted a study on leaded gasoline and decided not to ban it. And every other country allowed it as well. So we have to conclude every country's public health agency was either corrupt or incompetent, or that the harm from leaded gasoline at the dosage used wasn't obvious at the time. (Or both.)
    - throwaway2037 3y ago
      This one: the harm from leaded gasoline at the dosage used wasn't obvious at the time I think the same is true of lead in (house) paint.
      - kelseyfrog 3y ago
        Reading a Thomas Midgley Jr. biography might change your mind. He was famously warned of leaded gasoline's dangers, had to take a vacation to Miami to recover from lead poisoning. And also was famously a co-inventor of CFCs. His only saving grace is that his name is also on the list of "inventors killed by their own inventions."
4death4 3y ago
> Some people can more or only feel sorry for small children or animals, because they are obviously innocent, while a grown up could have done something to deserve it. Now that I've had a kid, I understand what it means when people say kinds are innocent. Children are innocent in the way animals are innocent; they don't possess the mental faculties to understand morality. That doesn't means kids are good. They can be cruel, mean, and annoying, and to a very high degree. But, just like we don't consider it a moral failure of a dog when it jumps up and steals a piece of bacon from the table, so too do we not consider the things children do moral failures. This differs from an adult. Adults understand morality, and thus can never be innocent in the same way, even if they act with the upmost character.

mcpackieh 3y ago

Children with cancer seem to get more than their fair share of coverage and attention already, although that attention generally doesn't include attributing their cancers to industry.

haswell 3y ago
This is just it. When the subject is children with cancer, cancer is the enemy. A faceless threat that everyone can stand “against” without hesitation. And this completely misses the critical fact that cancer is often a downstream effect. I think that cancer awareness really needs to expand to include underlying causes. As it stands, the cause and effect are so disconnected that awareness often leads only to sympathy/empathy/compassion instead of driving people to anger and to push for systemic changes.
- mcpackieh 3y ago
  I think it's because on an individual basis, attributing cancers to a particular cause is very difficult. It's only when you're dealing with large populations that statistical trends become damning (as happened with cigarettes), otherwise it's usually very difficult to point to a specific kid and say his cancer came from a specific business.
  - haswell 3y ago
    And the twisted thing about all of this is that when we start seeing large numbers, humans tend to stop caring. We care about an individual's story, but our ability to care diminishes the moment there are two, and all but vanishes when it's a large group. So I'm not really sure what the answer is. If the individual cases chosen for awareness campaigns could be selected based on their traceability, it might provide a bridge from cause to effect. Or maybe it really needs to be a multi-pronged effort. Present individual cases to people care. Separately, present aggregate cases so people start linking those individual stories to systemic factors.

Gibbon1 3y ago

Well you got 400,000 children dying of Malaria every year. Between the time you wrote your post and I responded 400 children died. Since there isn't any way to use their deaths to further a political agenda no one cares.

xkekjrktllss 3y ago
>Since there isn't any way to use their deaths to further a political agenda no one cares Stats and images of sickly children have motivated (and "motivated") donations to countless non-profits and NGOs that lobby for the Democratic party, and religious organizations that lobby for Republicans. This is straight out of Contemporary Politics 101.
refurb 3y ago
Ouch. But accurate.