What a surprise that the candidates in the recent election all ranked their support for the continued existence of the Mission racetrack quite high. Would anyone expect a different result given that a politician can usually be counted on to cater to the lowest common denominator among the voters?
Of course it is always possible that every one of the candidates answered truthfully as I have heard urban legends over the years of that happening. But, like with most urban legends, those rumours are hard to verify.
As it may have been the war of words that I ignited over my comments on-line about the racetrack needing to join the other dinosaurs and go extinct that led to that question being asked, I think I`ll talk about what those candidates were actually supporting.
Harriet Hall, M.D., simply put what excessive noise does to people which is something the racetrack supporters don`t want to hear about as they only want to talk about alleged benefits of the track and not the true costs behind those benefits.
Noise isn't just annoying, it can be physically harmful which is why WorkSafe and other regulatory bodies require hearing protection in noisy working environments. Then there is `hypertension, ischemic heart disease, and tinnitus` to be concerned about. Noise, adds Dr. Hall, is known to contribute to accidents and stimulate aggression, as well as possibly causing birth defects and changes to the immune system.
Noise pollution is a real and serious threat to our environment whether the lowest common denominators want to believe it or not. Perhaps they can`t hear themselves think over the roar of the drag strip, Dodge diesel trucks, gas powered leaf blowers, modified Harley and car mufflers, and the bleating of politicians before an election.
Robert T. Rock
Mission