Your click pays for Teampembo's chocolate fund

Friday, December 29, 2006

Greenpeace Campaign against Apple

Now then. Apple's advertising and general image is one of smug superiority. Let's forget the actual experience people have of using their products (people like Apple because they're not as annoying as Microsoft), but at the arguments that Greenpeace use.

Worryingly, Greenpeace mention that: "Apple computers are full of chemicals."

I would like Greenpeace to point out a solid object that is not full of 'chemicals'. I suspect that they will have problems.

The central argument is that PVC is being used within Apple products. PVC sounds familiar, not just because of the suits some people wear on the weekend, but because it is one of the most used plastics in current use.

There are concerns due to a small number of papers linking PVC with higher rates of cancer. However, a closer look shows that this link is mainly from Monomers of PVC. In other words, if you work in a PVC making factory and don't wear breathing masks while 'stirring the PVC ingredients' you are likely to get cancer.

There has been a study that showed excessive chewing of PVC products can result in diseases. However this has not been conclusively proven. Also, I think Apple could argue that their products are not designed to be ingested.

The campaigning stance of this website really annoys me. No proof is provided. No references for any of their arguments are shown.

You just have to believe that

  • Chemicals are bad
  • Companies should obey what Greenpeace says is sensible
  • Science can only be trusted when Greenpeace says it's right

Maybe someone should ask them if they were correct in replacing leaded petrol with unleaded? They could also ask what studies might have found this link (animal testing)? They might also ask about whether the replacement plastics are actually better for the environment...



Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home