The polypharmacy argument for the application of the precautionary principle to guide public policy on WDBs!

[Guest guest]

I was just thinking about the concept of polypharmacy as it applies to water

damaged buildings and their effects..

Polypharmacy is defined (Wikipedia-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polypharmacy )

as: * " the use of multiple medications by a patient. The term is used when

too many forms of medication are used by a patient, more drugs are

prescribed than clinically warranted,[1] or even when all prescribed

medications are clinically indicated but there are too many pills to take

(pill burden). Furthermore, a portion of the treatments may not be

evidence-based. The common result of polypharmacy is increased adverse drug

reactions and higher costs. Polypharmacy is most common in the elderly.[2] "

*From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Redirected from Precautionary

Principle<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Precautionary_Principle & redi\

rect=no>

)

Jump to:

navigation<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_Principle#column-one>,

search <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_Principle#searchInput>

The *precautionary principle* is a moral and political principle which

states that if an action or policy might cause severe or irreversible harm

to the public or to the environment, in the absence of a scientific

consensus that harm would not ensue, the burden of proof falls on those who

would advocate taking the

action.[1]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_Principle#cite_note-0>But

in some legal systems, as the European Union Law, the precautionary

principle is also a general principle of law. This means that it is

compulsory.

[2]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_Principle#cite_note-1>

*The principle aims to provide guidance for protecting public health and the

environment in the face of uncertain risks, stating that the absence of full

scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason to postpone measures where

there is a risk of serious or irreversible harm to public health or the

environment.*

Well, although people seem to want to occupy years or even decades more

with arguments about dosages of this or that toxin (when new ones are being

discovered all the time)

Its NOT A MATTER OF DEBATE, THOUGH, THAT MANY SUBSTANCES FOUND IN WATER

DAMAGED BUILDINGS ARE BIOLOGICALLY ACTIVE..

They ARE, in that sense, DRUGS.. and there are many of them in the water

damaged building.. many that act in different ways, many of them dangerous..

MANY HAVE DRUG INTERACTONS ALSO.. creating a problem with an almost infinite

number of variables, an UNSOLVABLE MATHEMATICS PROBLEM..

Thereby, the polypharmacy argument APPLIES TO WATER DAMAGED BUILDINGS AS A

FORM OF FORCED APPLICATION OF MULTIPLE DRUGS...

The dangers of polypharmacy are well known. The more drugs a person takes,

the more the danger of dangerous interactions - with even small doses of

drugs..

*Toxins are PARTICULARLY STRONG drugs.. let me repeat that..

Toxins are PARTICULARLY STRONG drugs..

Toxins are PARTICULARLY STRONG drugs..

*

So, logically, the dangers of *water-damaged building induced

polypharmacy*is a VERY strong MATHEMATICALLY PROVABLE argument for the

application of the

precautionary principle to water damaged buildings and prohibition of forced

bodily trespass with WDB-manufactured xenobiotics, perhaps one of the

strongest arguments to date.

Please read up on polypharmacy.. Addition of additional drugs to the body

burden of people who may already take other drugs is particularly dangerous.

In UNAVOIDABLE situations, a requirement for full analysis and physician

notification, as well as medical monitoring on a case by case basis for any

person who takes any prescription drugs or has any illness seems appropriate

until the building can be vacated.

*This is an important argument for applying the precautionary principle to

broadly prohbit cavalier exposure of people to water damaged buildings.

*

*

*