
Could a ban on plastic bags be fatal? - kqr2
http://www.sfgate.com/default/article/Could-a-ban-on-plastic-bags-be-fatal-4266802.php
======
speednoise
As typical for science reporting, there's no link to the paper and the issue
of it not being peer-reviewed is buried in a quote halfway through.

~~~
CleanedStar
I would go even farther than you. It's not science reportin because it's a
report by two law professors, working for the Wharton School of Economics. One
of them, Klick, regularly writes for the Cato Institute on privatization,
Austrian school economics, and so forth. It initially sounds like a scientific
report, but one just has to consider the source.

------
ctdonath
Wash the bag.

We threw out plastic bags (and found them convenient in doing so) precisely
because they were presumed contaminated.

------
jack-r-abbit
I don't mind so much the ban on plastic but I really hate that it was shackled
to a requirement that the stores charge for the paper. The two are completely
unrelated.

------
andrenotgiant
Unfortunately I cannot track down the exact PR Agency, or any details really,
so take this with a grain of salt... One of my former classmates worked a
while for a PR Agency hired by "Big Plastic" to prevent plastic bag bans like
the one in SF from spreading...

The conspiracy theorist in me would love to find a connection between these
Wharton profs and that PR Agency.

------
axlerunner
What about the negative effects of washing those bags?

1\. Extra drinking water usage in a state with known water supply issues. 2\.
More detergent residue in the ground and oceans. 3\. Electricity usage to run
the washer.

I'd suggest these come close to outweighing the plastic bag negatives.

------
readme
Looks like we need to go grab 5.4 Darwin awards for the people who couldn't
figure out how to wash a bag.

------
ahoyhere
Sloppy all around. With a difference in annual deaths of 5.4 -- no thousand,
no million, just 5.4 -- we're looking at a natural margin of error that cannot
be accounted for without a lot more rigorous study. As this article points
out, most grocers switched from plastic to paper bags, which makes the
original study authors' statement of it being an immediate and visible effect
on infection rate suspicious. Then the author of this "article" says the bag
ban should be repealed because people won't wash their reusable bags… then she
calls the bag ban a movement of the nanny state… because nanny states never
protect people from their basic lack of sanitary practices? What a confused,
badly reported, mess.

~~~
roc
> _"then she calls the bag ban a movement of the nanny state"_

There are a few (helpful) signals that people send, when they've made an
emotional decision and are merely trying to justify it after-the-fact. Using
emotionally-charged cliches and strawmen ("nanny state") is a large flashing
sign of that type.

You really shouldn't expect such a position to have any logical or
philosophical consistency. Nor should you expect it to be receptive to data.
If one of their pet justifications is refuted, the conclusion will remain
iron-clad; they'll simply fish around for a new justification.

~~~
ahoyhere
Agreed. I didn't expect anything, merely warning other people not to waste
their time.

