Birth defects near oil and gas wells

A study of 125,000 births in Colorado: “What we found was mothers with the most [oil or gas] wells around their homes, and closest to their homes, had a 30 percent higher chance of having congenital heart defects than mothers with no wells around their homes”.

good news: American Petroleum Institute will be funding health studies:

http://www.alleghenyfront.org/story/more-study-needed-fracking-and-...

primary source:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3984231/

Views: 5351

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Frank Walker on November 2, 2014 at 1:31am

You people need to stop jumping all over the poor OP, Mr. Heckbert, who is "this" close to proving his thesis.  Only hurdle remaining for him is presentation of proof he was born near to an oil or gas well:

Bingo!  Cranial defect.  Instant Q.E.D.!!

Permalink Reply by craig on November 2, 2014 at 4:28am

Haha, good one Frank

Permalink Reply by Den on November 2, 2014 at 9:48am

I wonder if Carnegie Mellon supports his political views that he posts on their web site?

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~ph/politics/

Permalink Reply by Frank Walker on November 2, 2014 at 12:54pm

It's a reasonable question.  Actually there could be a measure of validity to the OP's concerns.  But if there is, it's an historical validity.  Fact is, left to their own volition, drillers will not necessarily do the right thing when it comes to public safety.  That's why we need strong drilling laws.  That's also why we need air-tight enforcement of those laws.  And in these most recent years, thank goodness, things have tightened up a good bit when it comes to drilling law.  So if you perform a study that includes an interval of time prior to things being tightened up, revelation of bad outcomes is a possibility.

The OP, of course, is not interested in mitigating factors.  The OP wants a world free of fossil fuel use, one filled with 400 foot tall windmills, massive solar farms, and mangled birds.  I'm willing to wager, though, that the OP does not want to live next to any of that stuff.  But he would not mind in the least if I, and other rural-dwelling folks, were forced to do so!!  I wish I had the power to inflict on the OP and his family some windmill infrasonic on a 24/7/365 basis.  It would be fun to watch his liberal views melt before my very eyes!!  And I'd be merciful and turn off the infrasonic before they all went stark raving mad!!

Permalink Reply by Frank Walker on November 3, 2014 at 2:45am

No flame from me, dude.  I agree with you!  We do need tight government oversight of corporate activity potentially dangerous to the public.  But "tight oversight" does not mean "shut down drilling and go over to windmills and solar".  That is flat out nuts!!  It's insane!!

And BTW just for the record, global warming or global climate change or whatever the flavor is this week, simply does not exist.  This is true regardless the fraudsters use it to defend their extremest agenda.

Permalink Reply by Dan on November 3, 2014 at 11:46pm
It seems fracking anywhere in the world causes some to suffer from ignorance, lying and most obvious "Sever Squinting"
Permalink Reply by Dan on November 4, 2014 at 1:50am

look closer at Paul's pic.

0ym9x5ag7ury2Permalink Reply by 0ym9x5ag7ury2 on November 4, 2014 at 2:32pm

Paul,

   Hows about a study on high blood pressure, stroke and heart attack in areas where Chesapeake is paying royalties. I'm sure the rate of increase will be unusually high. Most people don't know how to take theft, and when it appears to be sanctioned by the state it makes living with it month to month more difficult.

Prove me wrong and I'll give you the $57 per month per acre for our first 3 months of production. A royalty in Tupperware Sales would make more money for me than oil, gas, and NGLs.

Permalink Reply by Utica Watcher on November 4, 2014 at 3:45pm

Ron,

The same could be said for the nausea your repetitive posting of CHK bashing creates.  Anyone who reads this site gets it, you're upset.  Nowhere at all in this thread was CHK or royalty deductions mentioned, yet you feel compelled to just throw that out there.

I know many people personally who are quite satisfied with CHK.  It is unfortunate to hear what is happening with you and your property, because I do believe your situation and story.  However, I respectfully request for you to try and keep on topic with the original posting thread instead of always having to throw in your slant and bias against CHK.  Thank you.

0ym9x5ag7ury2Permalink Reply by 0ym9x5ag7ury2 on November 5, 2014 at 6:01am

Utica Watcher,

    Don't worry, I'll start my own discussions from here on out.

CHK bashing is not really the point, it's reigning in CHK to Ohio's Revised Code so we don't get short changed in Royalties and the BILLIONS in tax dollars that PA, TX, SD, LA, NC, and "We The People" lost when the Dept Of Interior was cheated by CHK.

Hey, you can change your name and no one will notice UW, I use my name since I stand behind what I say. My intent is to protect the landowners of Ohio. What is your intent?

Permalink Reply by Utica Watcher on November 5, 2014 at 8:08am

Thank you for being willing to start your own threads.  I know you have in the past, and you contribute many good posts and comments to this site.  As for my intent, it is to gather as much information possible about the play, and companies operating in the play, to become more educated as a landowner myself.  In a previous post elsewhere, I've debated selling minerals.

I, like most on here I believe, am quietly trying to get up to speed as best I can. 

0ym9x5ag7ury2Permalink Reply by 0ym9x5ag7ury2 on November 5, 2014 at 1:12pm

UW,

     I saw some of the things you said about Ron Eiselstein and I notice he no longer posts.  That's sad.  I hope he is doing well.

RSS

© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service