Saturday, July 5, 2008

Expansions and answers to Which? Magazine's 3 page investigation.

Perchloroethelene not doom and gloom as falsely painted to divide and to rule

Post number 4: Its time to turn round corner and assure investors that Perc may have a longer life to save a chain of businesses.

1) Environmentalists have done a demolition job on Perc to scare monger and to raise more money for good cuases using Perc as the sacrificaial goat. The following letter to Greenpeace restores the balance.

2) Which? Magazine investigation showed us all that there is no UK or world dry cleaning body and organisation to take up the cause of dry cleaning. Hence, CCCC Internnational Limited can set new goal posts for others to follow as proceedings will explain from now on.


"""" Linguistic, cultural and religious barriers must not be allowed to cloud judgements.
Caroline Clinton
PA to Expertise in Toxic Division
Greenpeace International

Dear Ms Clinton,

Perchlororethelene, dry cleaning, toxicity and health issues seen from "outside the box"

Repeat mailing is due to a sorry omission of a key CCCC International partner whose inclusion in the list is important for others to note. Forwarding him a copy as an after thought would not have done him justice. I regret incontinences repeat mailing may have caused others. Crossing Ts, dotting Is, and including fresh notes will give the article more meaning. It may also qualify these proceedings worthy of passing on to Professor Bjorn Lomborg as field data for use on his work on sceptic environmentalism. CCCC International will need heavy weights in environment to take over from me because I will be engaged on the technology side. Any suggestions Bcc recipients?

A cost benefit study of environmental and health gains made by not using Perc versus financial losses suffered by a chain of businesses suffering from lack of reliable dry cleaning after care can be seen worthy of research, in my view. The chain of businesses affected are, farmers and producers of wool (all types), natural fibers such as silk, and linen, viscose, textiles, dyers, tailors and mass producers of garments, fashion, and retail.

Further to my phone calls of earlier today with a colleague of yours, Greenpeace UK, Washington DC, and San Francisco (message on 001 800 326 0959 when staff in meeting), I now confirm that the subject matter from a new perspective was touched upon. The DC office suggested I write to you owing to the gravity of the matter at hand and our imminent and global marketing campaigns to promote Perc afresh!

A website and years of getting our fact right compelled us to write this in order to avoid future harsher confrontations with Greenpeace in the interest of their very existence as campaigners. We have the know how in our field and some in theirs. Others may have it in theirs, but not in ours. Odds may be in our favour when the last 2 sentences are weighed up on a simple scale. Environmental exchanges will heavily cost the ill informed.

News we have for you will equally shock Greenpeace everywhere, and it may be no small wonder if you are in Shock & Awe when you've read this. But first, I was pleasantly in Shock & Awe myself to know that Greenpeace UK and The US no longer carry out proactive campaigns against Perc, Siloxane, and Hydrocarbon that have been found controversial subjects on ground of toxicity and other public health hazards. Other recipients whose businesses have suffered considerable setbacks and even losses will be relieved to witness constructive measures we at CCCC International Limited are taking for enhancing their business growth.

It is patently obvious that over zealous campaigns by environmentalists condemning Perc ever more and encouraging the spread of the latest replacements contributed to heavy financial losses to a chain of businesses. Latest replacement technologies especially in the UK since July 2004 failed to impress dry cleaners, fashion, tailoring and textiles. Consumers were made more aware of the questionable ill health aspects of Perc who responded by almost not using Perc dry cleaning shops. Dry cleaning after care suffered, and nearly 100,000 shop owners are up against the wall worldwide. They have very little business, cannot employ staff, and cannot sell their businesses to any one. The fashion industry is nervous. The British Fashion Council has appointed experts to advise consumers on the merits of Home Laundry and Ironing. It’s not working judging by how appalling people look out there!

It is a real business nightmare out there, and Greenpeace aught to know! CCCC International is the only option left on the table to come to rescue. A godsend to the chain of businesses, a huge business for us, and unexpectedly with huge benefits to the environment. You may bear in mind that we are talking Perc here! The following will tell you what we are on about, and may convince you never to enter environmental issues unless fully armed with all aspects of it. Obviously Greenpeace has not been. Greenpeace's decision to discontinue campaigns may have been intelligent designs (Even Intelligent Design as taught in schools? Perhaps not!). We warned them from 1997 to 2000 when a member but our prophecies fell on deaf ears:

Our research of nearly 20 years with a heavy slant on public heath and hygiene issues proved that environmental campaigns of the past have been nothing but as mere jokes! Here is how:

1) Environmental campaigns have concentrated on making dry cleaning environmentally friendly. The first joke is that dry cleaning itself is a huge and polluted environment! Dry cleaning has never cleaned anything (whether clothes, household or industrial work wear), and items have remained dirty for nearly 50 years. The suit or tie you are wearing now carries an excess amount of soiling to the tune of 20,000 nano metres! This is dirty. In fact very dirty when you will know that CCCC international will bring down this composite waste down to a mere 4 nano metres. This result is virtually as clean as laundered clothes.

2) Therefore, the conventionally “freshly” cleaned clothes carry with them the unwanted pollutants (may be more!) and travel not only locally, but regionally, and globally. Hence, like the water, waste water, and household waste environments you have a vast environment on the move. Like its’ 3 counter parts, it is polluted, gather more pollutants (may be more), is highly mobile and fulfils all requirements to make it another man made environment, desperately in need of cleaning. CCCC’s innovative technologies do just that, offer the world people clean clothes to wear for the first time in their lives, and offer much more including preventative measures for curbing the spread of pollutants and possibly (in fact highly likely) infections of the hospital type!

3) This analogy confirms the joke adequately: Imagine a bunch of environmentalists with Greenpeace deservedly winning the leader’s torch and at the very forefront, having a picnic atop a new compost heap rich with pig manure! The stench is suffocating every one, and researchers have come up with a solution: To use air fresheners! Now, as to why have a picnic atop a heap of animal waste is another joke. I best not go there or I will be all here all night providing laughter for us all including the world of fashion, Saville Row and Katie’s 12,000 business members. If the distinguished panel had to go there at all, then perhaps a delay of a few months would have solved the problem when all the anaerobic digestion would have rendered the offending waste to inert and even pleasant smelling compost to the delight of organic vegetable grower among them. Such anaerobic digestions requiring time are needed before dry cleaning and even Perc is condemned in future. Who knows, Perc may even be more an evil than painted, but we are stuck with it. Let us use it responsibly until alternatives are found.

4) Many other compelling scenarios can be cited but felt unnecessary except for one, perhaps: An example from the history of public health, namely the mini typhoid outbreak in Croydon England in 1937 proved beyond doubt that parts of the dry cleaning industry has been stuck in the 19th century on grounds of lack of hygienic practises employed day in and day out irrespective of solvents used. Readers can easily look up the case of Addington Well or contact The London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine for verification. We have related the story widely to the world and a repeat would be wasting your valuable time.

5) Item 4 above produces a joke of its’ own: It can be stated logically that you as consumers leave the 21st century on entering dry cleaning shops where 19th century practices are carried out as a matter of course. Could this explain your utter confused state of mind upon leaving the shop?! You have just travelled nearly 400 years in a time of few minutes. You could very well be a philosopher as well as an environmental campaigner but would lean against the wall and question your very own sanity! This after the poor dry cleaner, who is given the wrong tools to do his job, has given you a dose of his mind boggling stains removal skills. Sounds familiar?

We hope to have given you our version of viewing dry cleaning from “outside the box” and provided reasons to accept that solvent related campaigns have missed the point altogether. A new outlook is needed to highlight dry cleaning health risks in a more encompassing manner. At the same time, the irony of the whole issue is that world governments have accepted Perc, the black sheep of the family to remain on the scene for too many obvious reasons. CCCC International’s logic is to use Perc in such responsible ways never experienced before. We dislike Perc for reasons different than yours based on our knowledge of public health and pollution issues learnt in cleaning the water, soil, and air environments.

In fact, we would go further and state that reasons which have condemned Perc as the nasty one may be ill based. Environmentalists have never understood Perc and their findings are disjointed efforts erroneously called research! Consider this in Europe of the late eighties and early 90s: We all remember the phasing out of the Fluorocarbon solvent 113 for its damage to the Ozone Layer. Dry cleaners with F machines were getting supplies smuggled form Europe to clean F labels. What the captains of the industry (recipients here) and solvent manufacturers knew too well was that F cleaning can be done with Perc, save a few buttons and trims that could have been replaced! Pressure from dedicated but ill informed lobbyists with political muscle was so over bearing that no one could inform practising dry cleaners of this vital fact.

My solo efforts to get the major solvent manufacturer involved proved futile. I drew attention to a solvent chart issued to dry cleaners of which I may have had one of the few surviving copies. Repeated insistence resulted in the solvent manufacturer issuing a fresh chart, deleting phrases and symbols that the superseded chart contained on the suitability of Perc for F cleaning. DL, the solvent man told us in no uncertain terms that Perc made only 3% of their sales and hence they couldn't give a toss. This time around, I even convinced environmentalists that Perc dry cleaning offers benefits to the environment, and apart from cleaning it, offers benefits to recycling and the reduction of liquid wastes. The certificate of attendance attached is no way proof of our amazing environmental achievements, but it gives the uninformed reader an idea the depths to which CCCC International has delved in. When CCCC marketing attempts come your way, please bear in mind that the latest knowledge and research have been employed to use Perc while we actively seek alternative replacements. Most Greenpeace’s published health scares are based on data from the 70s and 80s when machines leaked and Perc was discharged down drains. Have you made any efforts to approach machine designers, governments, and local authorities to get the latest measures in place for the responsible use of Perc mandatory for next decade, possibly 2? We doubt it.

By the way, how much concern should such low volumes raise on the scale of the pollutants? How do solid waste volumes from machines compare with other comparable qualitative waste volumes? Figures for Perc measured in millions of pound weight used annually may raise a few dry cleaning eye brows: Perc is 1.6 times heavier than water. Weights reported represent 60% lower volumes when reckonings are made volumetrically. Figures not double checked perhaps? What else is not double checked, Greenpeace? Makes you wonder, doesn’t it?

Not known to you, this is the kind of devastating effects that shallow research coupled with stunts made our industry a nervous wreck not knowing which way to turn! Perhaps there weren’t any public health and environmental practitioners among us to tilt the balance. CCCC International can assure the industry, the world of fashion, Saville Row, retailers, and indeed consumers that gone are the days that any one can take a swipe at dry cleaning for scaring the public to donate more generously than ever before. They can find another escape goat. A recipient here may have kindly passed on relevant issues of these proceedings to Professor Bjorn Lomborg for contributing material to his theories on Sceptic Environmentalism. This issue is seen as most relevant from my view point.

First, some need to find a better suited picnic site where the stench doesn’t cloud their judgement on dry cleaning issues. Environmentalists do a wonderful job of serving other public interests. I should know. I was a paid up and active member of Greenpeace for 2 years. Peter Melchet and Steven Tyndale know me very well through my barrage of e-mails from the late 90s to 2,000. None of which you read now is new! They chose not to work together despite my condition at the time of being accepted as a member that we must work together on dry cleaning. Philosophies were the same as are now.

Embarrassments surfaced above could have been saved if one was not forced to wash our environmental laundry in public. Melchet may have lost his job as a result of my protests for being thrown out of Greenpeace and my membership money refunded. He was chased out of Iceland stores for selling his organic produce after my supporters (both of them) allegedly told Iceland that the only reason he won attention for destroying the GM crop was to publicise and market his organic stuff cheaply than otherwise possible. He used war as a business tool. So do I, you might have noticed. Thanks Peter! I have tons of incriminating and unanswered e-mails if any one is thinking libels! Even police reports with names on them!

We mentioned war once or twice. A reader of the first issue yesterday has responded already and objected that war must not used in conjunction with business. While agreeing in principle with the reader, may I suggest that I used the analogy after a Mr Leggett and Oxford University’s encouraging entrepreneurs to treat their projects as if nations going to war in the last century. 21st century… is a recipient above. (Their competition offering a cash prize may now be closed). We will be marketing CCCC International in The US, and would cite phrases from US presidents that endeared one to the world positively, and the other (incumbent) questionably, perhaps. Regan to an aide while viewing the Great Wall of China: “This is one of those walls!” on which I will take a piggy back ride and add: “Dry cleaning has been one of those things”. “We are where we are” is aptly put by GW and I can’t add to it, suffice to say that we can and we should work together for the benefit of public health, big business, and helping other voiceless ones.

The latter group brings to mind the British sheep farmers some of whom live on income support (state benefit) and find it hard to make ends meet. Think of their children who wish to have goodies others have, but can’t. Think of parents who can’t provide! Do you have children, or I am I sinking low too to add value to my business? Perhaps I am but I will buy kick starting their businesses (dry cleaning after care) and buying some toys! Currently, their wool is used as insulation and some exports to China, while Harris Tweed and Scottish Tartan have become rare commodities.

Fashion has resorted to organic wool
and recycled fabrics in efforts to keep consumers unaware of the sever bottlenecks dry cleaning has placed in terms of it’s failing to provide reliable and consistent after care. Denim and T shirt culture prevails with the world becoming moronophiles (new word but equivalent to Anglophiles and Francophiles) to wear them. Individualism and making marks through expressing selves with variant structured attires, colours and styles are sorely missed by millions. It’s high time some one did something before our university professors exposed mid rifts, sported heavy bling on belly buttons. And that’s only the men folks!

Women dons can flash huge tattoos of DNA helixes and E = MC2 on thighs and bare backs where fantastic pleated or sunray skirts drove men or women crazy not long ago. Because Thomas Pink shirts and ties were worn with suits with double cuffs with tasteful cuff links to reflect personalities, tattoos have come again on bare arms to make up for lack of intelligence. Bluntly put, man’s inability to clean and the environmentalists not letting him to, has created this moronic culture with reality and celebrity TV so that life makes some kind of sense. Roll models look like thugs and hooligans of yester years only because there is nothing suitable to wear! Will you join CCCC International change the way we think, walk and talk? Or am I getting too old? Some one will tell me, I am sure of it.

Have you wondered I meandered all over the place with my conspiracy theory just now? Well, why not? If people are allowed to publish stuff you read on the website attached, then my taking liberties to take swipes too will be justified. While remaining aware of the ladies genuine hardships, I can justify my taking swipes at others (not them) by calling my measures a mix of social engineering and “communication investment”. The latter, another brand new business tool (similar to going to war) and not widely used yet.

This has taken long. I thank you for reading it. There is a bit more to go, I am afraid. I am also delighted to note that Greenpeace’s last proactive campaign in print was that of Greenpeace US in July 2001 when Perc related cancer cases were reported in 4 US cities. It must be said that covert and highly intelligent damaging subjects float around on the web. CCCC International will keep vigil to have such articles removed as soon as possible, unless they can back their claims. One such heart rendering piece by some disabled women of New York who suffer from MCS (Multiple Chemical Sensitivity) Industrial injuries is particularly noteworthy. A copy is attached for ease of reference. While I deeply empathise with their plight of disability and resulting handicaps and shortcomings, I cannot agree with the sheer volume of terror the article must have caused New Yorkers. Greenpeace is cited as a reference, and the public has deep respect for what Greenpeace says.

We may not get involved in protracted correspondence with site owners and administrators. We will simply report damaging articles and scare mongering stories who cite Greenpeace as their reference to the county’s Greenpeace who will take corrective measures to dissociate themselves from others taking advantage of their repute.

The ladies blissfully receive ample support in terms of keeping the website professionally updated. It has been revised for the second time in 6 months and intelligently written. As readers will note, it mentions all manners of disasters such as Bhopal, and reports that sufferers give up the will to live, become homeless, live in their cars, and even become spiritually bankrupt or some such. The article starts by warning people that the pain would be as though their brains were put through a meat grinder. Perc gets an “innocuous” mention half way down, after New Yorkers were asked how close they live to dry cleaners that use Perc!!! We stress that we do not denigrate or take any import away from the article highlighting the plight of MCS EI sufferers, but would certainly feel that Perc does not qualify for the mentions it receives, and the resulting scare mongering unfairly attached to it.

These and other countless assaults on Perc, mostly unsubstantiated are ways of people having been “at it” for decades collecting millions more at the expense of frightening the daylight out of consumers, dry cleaners, the likes of Katie and her 12,000 business members who would love to wear Jaeger and Saville Row but they can’t! Two thousand pounds please Jaeger & Saville Row fro advertising you! Just joking, but it comes so easy when you know how to do things properly. I have learnt a little.

Now, after reading the attachment and if I didn’t know better I would jump under a lorry with 24 wheels and its’ trailer with even more wheels! What campaigners have endemically failed to bring to attention is the state of health of the practising dry cleaners. Take me, for example. I worked in 25 to 30 Perc shops for at least 12 years on 6 daysX8 hour shifts, and am as healthy as anyone who has not been exposed to Perc for a minute in their lives. I did receive regular check ups. I am a health man of a sort, and am aware what Perc can do if you sniff it as glue or petrol (gas).

I sincerely hope Greenpeace is not associated with the website, and you will investigate to dissociate yourselves with its’ polluting New York’s minds unless you can substantiate contents. It’s a small world and we know the likes of some who live there. Has Anna Wintour of New York’s Vogue visited the website? We will make sure she does, along with a copy of this letter if the website is not removed. Let’s watch this space, shall we? If scared witless, Anna could write effectively in Vogue advising fashion forecasters and designers to keep away from designing things that need dry cleaning. She will phone her equally influential counter part Hillary Alexander in London to follow suit. More denims, more T shirts and rubbish will be made treating intelligent consumers deprived of choice as sheer idiots. CCCC International has arrived on the scene and will not tolerate lax and irresponsible antics in future.

In case if you’ve wondered whether we have seen the potential of this letter increasing the stock market value of future CCCC International global business and brand, we can assure you that we have. Profits thus made will generously contribute to genuine environmental projects, Perc related or not. Search of better suited solvents and technologies will be addressed too.

On a more serious note, CCCC International will be pleased to work with Greenpeace and collaborate on dry cleaning related issues if Greenpeace has credible research material to exchange with the socially responsible branch of CCCC International. We will soon have a steering committee who will work with others to formulate strategies ahead. Please do not hesitate to get in touch, one and all.

Yours faithfully,

Mohammad Ahmadzai,
Founder of CleanestClean Clothes Care (CCCC) International Limited""""


No comments: