Hey…WOW! A doornail.
Now we are getting some where. This is the first proof of a question I have posed on this thread.
But seriously, I am glad to see Mitch chime in here and maybe some actual good will come of Mal’s position.
Surfding’s assertion toward not to bring theology into it is a good one…I tried to dilute that some with pure silliness at the expense of appearing insipid (go look it up). Having a large vocabulary is a responsibility, just as producing blanks is, regardless of the choice of material. I don’t think that Midget Farrelly has operated in the surfboard blank business for over 25 years by killing off his employees that had to be trained in order to net a good product in a highly competitive industry.
I completely agree with Mal that any effort to replace dangerous and volatile materials in the production of surfboard materials (and everything else for that matter) is the way to go. I’m all for sustainability too. I love seeing some of the stuff Patagonia and other companies come up with, and Ned and Mal’s efforts SHOULD receive respect and support.
The problem, as Surfding so clearly pointed out, is that quite a few of us are jaded by being previous supporters, throwing our hard earned dollars into MDI then having some real disappointment. Mal’s attitude comes off as…well sorry or tough shit, Clark did that to T&C for even more blanks than you guys…sorry you lost one blank, big deal kind of stuff.
Man, Mal, you sure know how to alienate people that have a bitter taste in the mouth, but are trying to get at the truth. Instead we get anecdotal stories of the past that makes me want to waste time calling Craig Sugihara or whoever and ask them if Clark actually ever screwed T&C on 100 blanks. And if so, what foam did HE end up switching to (because there sure weren’t that many choices, back then. For all we know, he might say "yeah, but I have to admit now, these were rejects we tried and Clark told us that he would not bear the responsiblity for what happens…or…yeah, we had a few problems with some of them, and ended up getting Bennett or Burford from OZ.
The problem I have with the proof provided, is that it is all hearsay…not admissable in court, ya know. The judge would shut you up as soon as he realized what was coming out of your mouth. But if you had documentation, he would tell you to give it to the bailiff or approach the bench. You mentioned you’ve been shaping for 12 years or so? Well, let me share something with you from the “Tortoise shell” dinosaur’s den…during the 80’s I was purchasing 50 to 100 Clark sailboard blanks at a pop. Some were first quality but we also started to try Grubby’s 2nds. The 2nds were classified as structurally sound but with some voids in them. Then there were rejcets with larger void or some shrinkage (I think that’s how it went), then there were rejects that were NOT structurally sound and cut up at the factory. If I had an old Clark Catalog or wherever that was printed (maybe it was small print on an invoice) I would scan and provide it here.
We used 2nds for personal boards and team boards. Ironic thing was the team boards were getting more of a pounding and work out than the first quality boards that were going out to dealers for entry level and recreational sailors. The Clark 2nds were REALLY GOOD foam withstandng 30, 40 & 50 feet of getting air launching off waves and even star team rider Brett Lickle pioneered riding Jaws off Maui (with Dave Kalama) riding some of these Clark 2nds. Yeah, Brett trusted his life exclusively on my boards during that decade on a Clark 2nd. Sixty foot waves 2-1/2 miles out to sea. I’ve got pix, but only toward the end of the ride cuz the helicopter wasn’t running the day they were breaking barriers and making history. Now Brett and Laird are out looking for the 100 ft. wave.
So now I’m done pissing a little (couldn’t resist) but to return to case in point…it’s just to say, you got one story, I have another…and it proves what?
Toluene is horrible stuff. Birth defects, asthma and you were on the cancer thing. Well the problem with stating that is proof. So since you are so good at shooting your mouth off w/o proving anything I decided I’d go looking for proof. I found one statement based on U.S. EPA 1994 report that states “Insufficient evidence to identify toluene as a carcinogenic substance in humans”. Then I looked up the lists of "known and probable carcinogens from a site by the American Cancer Society. These ratings are grouped in classes as:
Group 1 Carcinogenic in humans
Group 2A Probably carcinogenic in humans
Group 2B Possibly carcinogenic in humans
Group 3 Unclassifiable as to carcinogenic in humans
Group 4 Probably not carcinogenic in humans
It then describes how hard it can be to test most substances to determine what is carcinogenic in humans and therefore most substances tested are listed as being probable or possible or unknown risks. They then supply information as part of what they term “NTP”, or National Toxicoloy Program. The problem I have with the ACS lists is that isocynate and toluene did not show up anywhere on their lists, along with the EPA 1994 statement that there is insufficient evidence indicating that toluene is a carcinogen in humans…however, the question I have to raise concerns “Benzene” which is included as carcinogenic. My understanding is the terms are closely related or perhaps even synonymous…this demands clarifying.
I also gleaned info from the OSHA site as well as others. It gets very complicated, but some things are pretty clear. There are plenty of risks involved with toluene and other chemicals used in manufacturing products. If you drink some dangerous chemicals it will do 10 times the damage that breathing it will.
Now we might all say “what dumb shit would knowingly drink toluene or some dangerous chemical”? well…This would suggest to me that water sources, including bottled water dispensors must be set up well away in clean air environments to avoid possible absorption of hydrophilic vapor. In my surfboard factory of the 80’s I had bottled water in an area for empoyees completely separate of glassing rooms as I couldn’t assume that all the materials we were using were hydrophobic. I didn’t need OSHA to tell me that guidelines are provided requiring responsible manufacturers to provide workers safety in such environments.
At the expense of sparking another religiious inspired analogy, I maintain my position that the consumer trusts OSHA and other regulatory entities paid for by taxpayers dollars to establish and enforce regulations for the public good, including those workers that choose to seek employment in said establishments. My patronage (nor any other consumers) does not constitute an active willingness to cause harm to employees that select those jobs for their livelihood. IOW, if they don’t want to be in that job environment, they should pursue other career objectives available to them. Same thing goes for coal miners, nurses, commercial pilots, postal workers, and many others. Life is a risk.
As Mitch from OZ has indicated, in the factories in China, protection of employees around toxic or potentially toxic materials is carefully controlled. I am somewhat skeptical, but hopeful, that his statement is true. Ironically, you may even end up getting a volume of business from him that awards you with making a good living at what you have chosen to do.
This may in turn help you advance your passion domestically and beyond. But to suggest in your previous post that my patronage of TDI based blanks, and that anyone else doing so, is guilty of sending people down to the killing floor is ludicrous at best. As I suggested, and I would expect you to be included in this scenario, that would mean anyone that has ever bought just about anything at Wal Mart is just as guilty as what you accuse me of, and I find that pretty hypocritical.
http://www…cancer.org/docroot/PED/content/PED_1_3x_Known_and_Probable_Carcinogens.asp
