--- The real deal underneath all this is that nobody CAN tell the truth. The manufacturers have to exaggerate warning labels because of potential liability problems, then back it up in all even potentially quotable conversations. Hazardous waste disposal companies make their money on it, so *everything* (including cool clean mountain water) is a risk, best to be treated with a one-layer-more serious protocol than the current public norm, because there is a chance they might sell it to you. Schools exaggerate threats to students because only 10% of it sticks (as we well know) - it's a method of manipulating people into the behavior they ought to choose rationally for themselves. Public officials are motivated to polarize towards extremes - either it is a Big Problem and We are Doing Something About It, or it is "not a problem, not a risk, everything is under control". Even non-alligned individuals (like the general member of alt-photo-processes) overstate the "truth" (if we can know it - see below), mostly to make the point through the surrounding fog, but maybe to conform or avoid being called stupid. The "we use nasty, dangerous stuff - isn't that exciting!" quotient is probably at work here as well. Every now and then someone will individuate by declaring, "Hey, I eat asbestos flakes in a formaldehyde cocktail for breakfast every morning, and I'm just fine!!". Shocked gasps abound, but it communicates .... something.My point is that WE (all caps) aren't set up to have a rational discussion about risk. You can't trust what officials say because they can't help but color it, and individuals can bring attachments to the discussion of their own. This makes it very hard to come to an independent opinion about risk which you can then share with others (via the list). *Communicating* it without hyperbole is the next problem.
My conjecture as to the deep reason is that the statement "you have a 1% chance of formaledehyde induced toxicity 15 years in the future" doesn't communicate anything about action. It doesn't even communicate much about how to *think* ... whether to frame the problem into or out of our minds. People "Get It" when the choices are clear, and not so deeply probabilistic... meaning when the discussion shifts to other realms.
Dan Shapiro