ShareThis Page

Letter to the editor: Study links fracking, infant mortality

| Saturday, July 22, 2017, 9:00 p.m.

Fracking is a deadly process, as revealed in the newest scientific study showing an increased correlation between fracking for shale gas and infant mortality, authored by Christopher Busby and Joseph Mangano and published in the Journal of Environmental Protection.

Previous studies have shown links between fracking and low birth weights, miscarriages and birth defects. But this latest study finds fracking alarmingly connected to neonatal mortality, caused by its toxic pollution of air and water. The study reveals a new culture of death targeting the least able to defend themselves.

An alarming disconnect exists, however, among those in the “right to life” movement, who abhor infant death associated with abortion but are unwilling to acknowledge the same lethal end when fracking is the perpetrator. Their obsequious promotion of shale gas precludes them from condemning this newest threat to life.

Maryland, New York and Vermont have all banned fracking because its deleterious health effects far exceed any economic benefit. How can anyone still condone this industry that epitomizes a culture of sickness and death, especially for the newborn?

The “right to life” movement must include the babies dying because of fracking's harmful effects. This new antithesis to life must be recognized for what it is.

Fracking is not only an abomination against creation; it is now an affront against God's most vulnerable. Make no doubt about it, fracking kills.

Ron Slabe

Upper Burrell

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.