Reader's view: Sulfide mining supporters don’t do homework

I have a particular problem when sulfide mining supporters essentially accuse others of not researching while they seem to feel free to leave out crucial information.
The March 10 letter, “Lack of research in health providers’ PolyMet letter,” stated, “I have a particular problem with the mention of the study of mercury in infants born in the Minnesota side of Lake Superior. I would think that these health care providers would have looked at the Minnesota Department of Health website, which states, ‘This is the first study to use bloodspots to report mercury levels in newborns, a group vulnerable to the neurotoxic effects of mercury,’ and, ‘However these results may not be representative of the newborns in the Lake Superior Basin or in Minnesota.’”
It’s true the results may not be representative; they may be just the tip of the iceberg.
The letter went on to say, “In other words, we don’t know what the mercury levels are in infants from Wichita, Kan.; Miami; Phoenix; or Bellingham, Wash. This is the first study and there’s nothing to compare it to.”
Either the letter writer did not do her “homework first” or she was being deliberately deceptive. The results of the Minnesota Department of Health study also stated, quite clearly, that 10 percent of newborns tested in the Lake Superior Basin of Minnesota had unsafe levels of mercury. In Wisconsin it was 3 percent. In Michigan it was 0 percent. Anyone who cares about children should recognize and be alarmed at the comparative disparity.
Was the letter writer saying that if the results are just as bad in Wichita, Miami, Phoenix or Bellingham, we should all be OK with our newborns being damaged?
Carla Arneson
Ely, Minn.