The Evening Standard out of Great Britian reports British supermarket chain Tesco has just announced that at the end of August disposable plastic bags they offer to shoppers for five pounds a piece will be replaced with a bag for life that will cost ten pounds.
Environmentalist groups Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth cheered when the news was released. Thanks to grocery stores reducing plastic bag availability, they claim, plastic bag pollution has been cut significantly. This policy sounds reasonable since plastic bags are allegedly not only a nuisance but they only end up polluting the environment, right? Not exactly.
The results of a study released in 2012 on municipalities in Oregon that had bans on plastic bags turned up some startling results. It was conducted by Jonathan Klick of University of Pennsylvania Law School and Joshua D. Wright of the George Mason University School of Law. The two researchers found a correlation between increased emergency room visits and even deaths in places with plastic bag bans in which foodborne bacteria like coliform and E.coli as the reason for the increases.
With the implementation of a $.5 fee two years ago, Portland, Maine and local grocery stores will encourage people to wash their bags after usage if they decide to re-use them. However, if history is any guide, people have a tendency to either forget or procrastinate. A report conducted by the Association for Food Protection discovered that in many cases shoppers rarely washed the bags. This resulted in increases in food borne illnesses and even deaths. One of the study’s researchers, Jonathan Klick, noticed the same thing.
If increased sickness or deaths related to food borne illness come to Great Britain you know who and what is ultimately responsible. To avoid this possibility, shopping at another supermarket chain that makes plastic bags available would be a better choice. If not, consider delivery of groceries to your house since many supermarkets are offering home delivery service. Plastic pollution is alleged only by environmentalist groups. Plastic bags were made available because they are stronger and more durable than paper, reduce trees being used for paper production and are biodegradable too.
The fact that environmentalists cheer this new policy despite also having knowledge of the effects of similar measures demonstrates their outright evil intent. It is clear that requiring new fees, outright bans or reducing reliance on plastic bags contributes to the spread of illness. What better way to help rid the Earth of a few more human beings by trying to modify people’s behavior in order to make people re-use plastic bags? Environmentalists know shoppers are unlikely to clean and can carry food borne sicknesses that can spread among the populace resulting in serious illness or even death.