‘Don’t ignore the science on lead’ is the title of a BASC statement that ignores the science on lead.
It is quite difficult to make it up.
BASC’s Dr Matt Ellis, said: ‘BASC’s policy has always been no sound evidence, no change. There is no scientific evidence of population-level impacts outside of wetlands and we believe the current legislation effectively and proportionately targets risk.
There is no need to change the law. Science tells us that we must comply with legislation, follow official advice on consumption and process game meat effectively.’.
So at least, now, BASC accept that there is a population-level impact of lead in wetlands – that seems to be what others have been saying for quite a while – it’s good of BASC to catch up.
Is Dr Ellis really a scientist, I wonder? If so, why did he allow himself to be quoted as spouting this sentence ‘Science tells us that we must comply with legislation, follow official advice on consumption and process game meat effectively.’? I’m really at a loss to know what bit of hypothesis testing tells us to comply with legislation. Which experiment demonstrated that we should follow official advice? And which dataset leads us to hurry to process game meat effectively? It’s utter tosh.
BASC’s policy, as they say, has recently been ‘no sound evidence…’.
M&S – do you really want your brand diminished by association with such arguments? When are you going to announce that you will not sell red grouse meat in your stores this year?
PS did you notice that BASC don’t link to John Swift’s blog here – not keen for others to read the truth?