(Beyond Pesticides, December 10, 2004) The Supreme Court has agreed to review Bates v. Dow AgroSciences, LLC, a case involving the ability of victims to sue manufacturers for damages caused by pesticides registered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The case involves Texas peanut farmers, who allege that the Dow herbicide Strongarm (diclosulam) ruined their crops, but were prevented from suing after Dow successfully argued that registration of pesticides under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) insulates it from citizen suits.
The Bush administration weighed in the case on the side of Dow, officially reversing the position of the Clinton administration (see Etcheverry v. Tri-Ag Service, Bayer Corp, et al.). The Justice Department brief filed before the high court in late November is designed to protect pesticide manufacturers when their products cause harm. This position is contradictory to the administration's public support of state's rights.
"The Supreme Court has an historic opportunity to level the playing field and remind the administration, Congress and the lower courts that federalism is important," said Jason Rylander of the non-profit organization BushGreenWatch. "By rejecting preemption except where specifically mandated by Congress, the Court can protect the ability of states to regulate products and provide remedies to their citizens."
Essentially, if the Supreme Court rules in favor of Bates, it will ensure that injured parties have the right to compensation for damages caused by pesticide products that are registered by EPA. This additional measure of protection for citizens and states will also reinforce the guidelines that EPA is meant to follow in the registration process, including the product's ability to "perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on the environment.". Oral arguments are to be heard this fall or winter, and a judgment is expected in July 2005.
Federalism, as outlined in the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, holds that so long as no state's laws are in direct conflict with Congressionally legislated mandates, they are legal and are therefore, not categorically preempted by federal laws. To that end, the Supreme Court does not necessarily have to rule in favor of preemption, although that has been its tendency in past rulings.
Beyond Pesticides believes that the environmental community needs to take a stand on this issue. The Supreme Court must uphold the states' rights to regulate chemicals within their own jurisdiction, particularly when the flaws within the federal registration process are considered. By preempting the right to sue, pesticide manufacturers have no to pull a product if it later determined to cause harm. In so much as EPA is dependent upon data provided by industry and is not required to review efficacy data of products suggested for registration, Beyond Pesticides feels that citizens' right to compensation must be protected. Beyond Pesticides, along with Physicians for Social Responsibility and the Sierra Club, filed an amicus brief with the court in September.
TAKE ACTION: Write a letter to the editor of your local paper to share your thoughts on this important issue. Consider including the following points
http://www.beyondpesticides.org/news/daily.htm
(Beyond Pesticides, December 20, 2004) EPA is secretly negotiating a Christmas present for the Dow Chemical Company that allows continued production and use of its controversial pesticide chlorpyrifos (Dursban) for home termite use three years beyond an announced phase-out, which was to begin December 31, 2004. The agency, according to inside sources, appears poised to grant Dow Chemical a three-year extension on a planned phase-out for termite use on new homes announced as a part of a major reduction in residential uses in June 2000. The phase-out of remaining termite uses was to take effect at the end of this year, by December 31, 2004, when production was to stop, followed by a use prohibition to take effect at the end of 2005.
With much fanfare in June 2000, EPA announced the end of chlorpyrifos for residential uses because of concerns associated with neurotoxic effects in children. EPA said, "Through this review, EPA has determined that chlorpyrifos, as currently used, does not provide an adequate margin of protection for children. This action adds a greater measure of protection for children by reducing/eliminating the most important sources of exposure... Over the next several years, remaining uses, including spot and local termiticide treatments and pre-construction termiticide applications, will be phased out." (See "Questions and Answers for Consumers about Chlorpyrifos," June 8, 2000.) Since its 2000 announcement, EPA has not disclosed new data justifying continued exposure to a chemical that the agency has linked to adverse health effects, particularly in children. However, sources say that a new Dow risk assessment finds "acceptable" risks, while EPA does not have new indoor air monitoring data on treated homes, which experts say is necessary in reassessing risk and reversing its earlier agreement with Dow. Advocates question why these issues have not been resolved since the announced phase-out in 2000 and before next week's deadline.
"If EPA proceeds with this deal, it is shirking its basic responsibility to protect children and the public from hazardous pesticides like chlorpyrifos and only serving the interests of Dow Chemical," said Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides, a national environmental and public health group based in Washington, DC. "There are widely available alternatives which make this hazardous chemical simply unnecessary," he said.
A 2000 square foot home requires that 380 gallons of pesticide be pumped into the ground. In a 100-home subdivision, about 38 thousand gallons are used. Pre-construction termiticide use is estimated at 400 million gallons.
As an alternative approach, borates can be applied directly to wood during the dried-in phase of construction, saving the builder time and money and providing termite protection for as long as the wood is in service. Borate-based products exhibit low toxic exposure to humans and other mammals. Other alternatives include steel mesh barriers and steel termite shields under and around foundations.
TAKE ACTION: Contact EPA Administrator Michael Leavitt and tell him to stop the continued use of chlorpyrifos for termites and enforce the 2000 phase-out agreement. For more information on the chlorpyrifos phase-out, read Beyond Pesticides' Low Down on Dursban story that ran in the Spring 2000 issue of Pesticides and You.
November 19, 2004
Researchers in Texas are studying possible mosquito resistance to the insecticides being used.
Fragments of mosquito genes will be cloned and sequenced to determine what mutations, if any, have occurred, Pietrantonio said.
"If mutations have taken place," she said, "the insect will no longer die" when treated with insecticides. The project is similar to one she completed in the Houston area in 1998 involving the organophosphate insecticide, malathion. Pietrantonio found in some areas the southern house mosquito was resistant to the insecticide malathion being used. The district switched to pyrethroid pesticides to control the pests. Pyrethroids are chemicals that are linked with endocrine disruption, neurotoxicity, and respiratory irritation. Symptoms of acute toxicity due to inhalation include sneezing, nasal stuffiness, headache, nausea, incoordination, tremors, convulsions, facial flushing and swelling, and burning and itching sensations.
In 2003, the Mosquito Control Division in Harris County sprayed 2 million acres with pyrethroid insecticides in an effort to control disease-bearing mosquitoes, said Ray Parsons, division director. "History has shown that overuse of pesticides will lead to resistance in insects," said said Dr. Jim Olson, Experiment Station entomologist.
The project was started with a federal U.S. Department of Agriculture Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service grant, Olson said. "This is serving as a model for similar problems that could arise anywhere in the state of Texas or the United States," he said.
"We have to develop new methods of controlling mosquitoes," Parsons said. "We know we can control them with insecticides, but it's very expensive and it only works to a certain degree. It's going to take people going out into the field and learning more about the mosquitoes: the biology of the mosquito and how to control it." The resistance project is part of a larger program investigating the frequency of mosquito-borne diseases and other possible control methods for mosquitoes, he said.
http://www.cwwg.org/men11.19.04.html
Manchester Online
Friday, 19th November 2004
SCIENTISTS need to develop new antidotes to prepare for possible terrorist chemical attacks in the West, researchers urged today.
The antidotes are also needed to tackle pesticide poisoning in developing countries where it is a leading cause of premature death, according to the study in the British Medical Journal.
But despite the severity of the situation, neither the pharmaceutical industry nor the military have attempted to test new remedies to deal with the danger from organophosphates, according to experts from Canberra Hospital in Australia.
Organophosphates are used in some pesticides, but have also been used in chemical weapons and nerve gas attacks, such as the sarin attack in Japan.
But despite the concerns, no new antidotes have been tested in clinical trials in the last 30 years.
The current treatment involves giving victims atropine and benzodiazepines, but these are only moderately effective.
"Newer, more effective antidotes are needed," the researchers said.
"The currently recommended antidotes are the tip of a therapeutic iceberg that could be mobilised."
The researchers said animal studies had revealed the potential for new treatments.
"Information on these potential treatments has been available for years, but neither the military nor the pharmaceutical industry has attempted to test them or develop new drugs," they said.
The researchers pointed out that every year hundreds of thousands of people were dying from pesticide poisoning in the world's poorest countries.
"The pharmaceutical industry has little incentive to develop new drugs for use primarily in developing countries.
"However, on humanitarian grounds alone, research into organophosphate pesticide poisoning in developing countries should become an international priority," the researchers added.
They also said that given government concerns about having the means to respond to victims of chemical warfare and terrorist attacks "the time is ripe to break this drug development impasse".
Copyright 2004
(Beyond Pesticides, November 12, 2003) A first-of-its-kind survey of top U.S. hospitals finds that many major hospitals are regularly spraying toxic pesticides, unnecessarily risking the health of patients, staff and visitors. The survey results are detailed in a new report, Healthy Hospitals: Controlling Pests Without Harmful Pesticides.
The report, released today by health advocate groups Health Care Without Harm (HCWH) and Beyond Pesticides, offers tips and resources for how hospitals can manage pests while also protecting the health of people and the environment. It is available here and on the Health Care Without Harm website.
"Hospitals are intended to be places of healing, yet many are using hazardous pesticides unnecessarily in a 'spray and pray' approach to pest management, when safer and more effective methods are available," said Ann McCampbell, M.D., of HCWH.
"Obviously patients and staff should be protected from pests, but they also need to be protected from pesticides," said Ted Schettler, M.D., a practicing physician in Boston and science director of the Science and Environmental Health Network.
"Pesticides can cause an array of health problems, particularly in developing children, people with asthma, chemical sensitivities or with compromised immune systems. Some pesticides being used on hospital grounds are linked to cancer and birth defects, as well as neurological and reproductive disorders," Dr. Schettler said. "Alternative approaches that reduce or eliminate exposures can and should be used."
The survey also offered good news: Some hospitals are having great success managing pests with no or very few hazardous pesticides by using proven, safer Integrated Pest Management (IPM) techniques.
A good IPM program includes reducing pests' sources of food, water and shelter; proper maintenance of buildings, lawns and landscapes; using a least-hazardous pesticide only when other options have failed; and notifying patients and staff of any pesticide use.
"There is an urgent need for more hospitals to protect people's health by using safer pest management practices, in keeping with the medical profession's commitment to 'First, do no harm.'" said Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides. "Our report gives hospitals all the necessary tools to implement a successful IPM program."
By Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, November 10, 2004; Page A06
Environmental Protection Agency has suspended a controversial study aimed at exploring how infants and toddlers absorb pesticides and other household chemicals, officials said yesterday.
Several rank-and-file EPA scientists had questioned the ethics of the two-year experiment, which would have given the families of 60 children in Duval County, Fla., $970 each as well as a camcorder and children's clothing in exchange for having the children participate. The critics said low-income Floridians might continue to use pesticides -- which have been linked to neurological damage in children -- in their homes to qualify for the project. Environmentalists had also criticized the study because the industry-funded American Chemistry Council had agreed to pay $2 million of the project's approximately $9 million cost.
EPA spokeswoman Cynthia Bergman said officials had asked a group of independent experts to reexamine the study design, which has already been reviewed by several independent panels of academics, officials of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and representatives of the Duval County Health Department. The new panel is set to give the EPA its assessment next spring.
"Since the study was announced last month, many have raised concerns, including scientists within EPA. We want to be responsive to those concerns," Bergman said.
Jeff Ruch, executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, said, "Regardless of the number of reviews, paying poor parents to dose their babies with commercial poisons to measure their exposure is just plain wrong."
Administration and industry officials said it was important to pursue the study to give regulators better information on how harmful chemicals get into children's bodies.
At the American Chemistry Council, spokeswoman Marcia Lawson said the group "continues to strongly support the study because of the great importance of increasing understanding of the exposures of young children to pesticides and other chemicals they naturally encounter in their daily lives."
© 2004 The Washington Post Company
Pollution in the United States poses health risks for everyone, regardless of race, ethnicity, language, or country of origin. A large percentage of U.S. Latinos, however, live and work in urban and agricultural areas where they face heightened danger of exposure to air pollution, unsafe drinking water, pesticides, and lead and mercury contamination. These hazards can cause serious health problems, including an increased risk of asthma and cancer; waterborne diseases such as giardiasis, hepatitis, and cholera; and neurological and developmental problems. This October 2004 NRDC report underscores the urgent need for government action on these environmental health threats.
For printed copies of this report, see our Publications List. [En Español]
OVERVIEW & QUICK REFERENCE
Press Release
FULL REPORT IN PDF
Adobe Acrobat file (size: 2.5 MB)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Links indicate sections available as individual webpages)
Executive Summary
1: Introduction
2: Air Quality
3: Water Quality
4: Pesticides
5: Lead
6: Mercury
Endnotes
Click here if you need a copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader (free)
By Juliet Eilperin Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, October 30, 2004; Page A02
An Environmental Protection Agency proposal to study young children's exposure to pesticides has sparked a flurry of internal agency protests, with several career officials questioning whether the survey will harm vulnerable infants and toddlers.
The EPA announced this month that it was launching a two-year investigation, partially funded by the American Chemical Council, of how 60 children in Duval County, Fla., absorb pesticides and other household chemicals. The chemical industry funding initially prompted some environmentalists to question whether the study would be biased, and some rank-and-file agency scientists are now questioning whether the plan will exploit financially strapped families.
The Environmental Protection Agency proposes to study the effect on children of pesticide exposure. (Tracy A. Woodward -- The Washington Post)
In exchange for participating for two years in the Children's Environmental Exposure Research Study, which involves infants and children up to age 3, the EPA will give each family using pesticides in their home $970, some children's clothing and a camcorder that parents can keep.
EPA officials in states such as Georgia and Colorado fired off e-mail messages to each other this week suggesting the study lacked safeguards to ensure that low-income families would not be swayed into exposing their children to hazardous chemicals in exchange for money and high-tech gadgetry. Pesticide exposure has been linked to neurological problems, lung damage and birth defects.
Suzanne Wuerthele, the EPA's regional toxicologist in Denver, wrote her colleagues on Wednesday that after reviewing the project's design, she feared poor families would not understand the dangers associated with pesticide exposure.
"It is important that EPA behaves ethically, consistently, and in a way that engenders public health. Unless these issues are resolved, it is likely that all three goals will be compromised, and the agency's reputation will suffer," she wrote in an e-mail obtained by The Washington Post. "EPA researchers will not tell participants that using pesticides always entails some risk, and not using pesticides will reduce that risk to zero."
Troy Pierce, a life scientist in the EPA's Atlanta-based pesticides section, wrote in a separate e-mail: "This does sound like it goes against everything we recommend at EPA concerning use of [pesticides] related to children. Paying families in Florida to have their homes routinely treated with pesticides is very sad when we at EPA know that [pesticide management] should always be used to protect children."
Linda S. Sheldon, acting administrator for the human exposure and atmospheric sciences division of the EPA's Office of Research and Development, said the agency would educate families participating in the study and inform them if their children's urine showed risky levels of pesticides. She said it was crucial for the agency to study small children because so little is known about how their bodies absorb harmful chemicals.
"We are developing the scientific building blocks that will allow us to protect children," Sheldon said, adding that the study design was reviewed by five independent panels of academics, officials of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and representatives of the Duval County Health Department.
Families can remain in the study even if they stop using pesticides, Sheldon said, as long as they were using them before the experiment started. It was unlikely that any family would volunteer for the study out of financial need, she added, because researchers will require parents to invest time in monitoring their children's activities and diet.
"Nobody can go into this study just for that amount of money," Sheldon said.
R. Alta Charo, a professor of bioethics at the University of Wisconsin at Madison's law and medical schools who co-authored a National Academy of Sciences report last year on the use of pesticides for research, said EPA officials were struggling with how to balance the need to protect the individual child's interests against the goal of pursuing a broader scientific agenda. While she said the agency's approach was reasonable, Charo said it did raise ethical questions.
"Where is the line between enticement and a godfather offer" that impoverished families would find hard to refuse, Charo said. "That is really troubling. We make these decisions over and over in public policy. This is one of those moments."
Several EPA officials, all of whom asked not to be identified for fear of retaliation, also questioned why the agency removed the study design and its recruitment flier from the EPA's Web site once some scientists started to complain about the project. Sheldon said the agency is rewriting how it portrays the research.
"We removed it so we could modify it, so it would make more sense," she said.
(Beyond Pesticides, October 27, 2004)
Westchester County in New York has teamed up with a local environmental group, to dramatically reduce local pesticide use on private property by offering safe alternatives to homeowners, landscapers and businesses. The groundbreaking initiative is designed to reshape the market forces of supply and demand that fuel the addiction to lawn pesticides.
County Executive Andrew Spano today announced the new initiative – The Grassroots Healthy Lawn Program – that will help protect the health of Westchester County residents by reducing their exposure to aesthetic pesticides, particularly those used on lawns. The program is being conducted by Grassroots Environmental Education, a non-profit educational organization, and is being funded entirely from private sources.
"Pesticides can affect our health and contaminate our water supply – it's as simple as that," said Spano, who has spearheaded the County's efforts to educate citizens about the risks of pesticide exposure and the need for water quality protection. "The goals of the Grassroots Healthy Lawn Program is to reduce the use of pesticides by offering healthier alternatives for keeping lawns green. The fact that we can do all this at no cost to the taxpayer makes this an ideal program, and one I'm proud to support."
Westchester County, just north of New York City, is among the more progressive counties in New York State on the issue of pesticides. The County committed in 1996 to phase-out the use of pesticides on County property, and in 2001, the Board of Legislators adopted the Neighborhood Notification Law requiring commercial applicators to inform abutting neighbors in writing 48 hours in advance of an application. Despite these efforts, pesticide use on residential and institutional properties in the County continues to grow.
The Grassroots Healthy Lawn Program will employ a unique multi-lateral approach that includes working with local landscapers to establish and sustain a non-toxic alternative lawn care program that they can offer to their customers, encouraging local merchants, from Home Depot to local garden stores, to carry and promote a full line of non-toxic lawn and garden products, and educating the public about the inherent dangers of pesticides and the safe alternatives now available to them.
TAKE ACTION: To learn more about the Grassroots Healthy Lawn Program, visit the project website at www.GHLP.org. For more information about lawn care initiatives and pesticides, see Beyond Pesticides Lawns and Landscapes issue pages.
By Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, October 26, 2004; Page A23
The Environmental Protection Agency has agreed to accept $2 million from the American Chemistry Council to help fund a study exploring the impact of pesticides and household chemicals on young children, prompting an outcry from environmentalists.
The Children's Environmental Exposure Research Study -- known by its acronym CHEERS -- does not mark the first time the agency has accepted chemical industry money to conduct research; the Clinton administration signed similar agreements. But it represents the most money the chemical trade group has given the EPA. The chemical industry council represents about 135 manufacturers and spends $20 million a year on research.
Paul Gilman, who serves as science adviser and assistant administrator for the EPA's office of research and development, said the money will help the agency conduct "groundbreaking work" on how chemicals are absorbed by infants and children as old as 3.
"We will seek their opinions, but we're in control of the project," Gilman said. "We're comfortable with the fact that it's our study design."
Environmental Working Group President Kenneth A. Cook questioned why an agency with a $572 million research budget needed to accept industry contributions to conduct scientific research.
"It simply is not credible that a $7.8 billion agency that employs almost 18,000 people has to go to the chemical industry to get $2 million for a crucial study to see if chemicals hurt kids," he said. "This is a government function; we should be investing government funds to be absolutely sure it's independent."
The study will survey 60 children over the next two years in Duval County, Fla., and collect information on their exposure to pesticides and household chemicals, such as flame retardants and perfluorinated chemicals, a family of substances in products such as Teflon and Scotchgard. Some of these chemicals have come under scrutiny for possible links to health problems.
Carol Henry, vice president for science and research at the American Chemistry Council, said her industry wanted to promote a better understanding of the risks associated with chemical exposure. Teaming up with a preexisting federal study gives her group financial leverage, she said.
"Exposure has been ignored for many, many years. It's the wasteland of risk assessment," Henry said. "We'd like the regulatory framework to be based on a very firm scientific foundation."
Henry said her association had set up a board of academics and industry officials to be "a resource to investigators" on an occasional basis, but added her group would not get advance notice of the results and the government would retain control over its findings. "We'll give them our guidance, but they don't have to take it," she said. The EPA's Gilman said it was reasonable to accept industry money in light of the gravity of the situation. Researchers still don't know how these compounds "are getting into our blood," he said, adding that young children are rarely studied, making the survey especially valuable.
In late September, Linda Sheldon, acting director for the EPA's human exposure and atmospheric sciences division, said the agency has "very little information about how children may be exposed to chemicals in household products, whether it's through the air they breathe, food they eat or the surfaces they touch."
Gilman said the chemical manufacturers imposed no conditions to their contribution: "They said, 'Who do we make the check out to?' It's $2 million in additional support with no strings attached."
But Cook said he remained concerned industry officials could still influence a study that could lay the groundwork for future regulation. "To have industry sponsoring the government to do it, to us, doesn't seem like a good idea, to say the least," Cook said.
© 2004 The Washington Post Company
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH
NIH News
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS)
http://www.niehs.nih.gov/
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Thursday, October 21, 2004
Doctors and nurses need more environmental health training to prevent, recognize, and treat diseases caused by environmental exposures, according to a new study funded by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.
Experts recommend that medical and nursing schools add environmental health topics to training programs.
"We know pediatricians want to provide the best care possible," said Dr. Allen Dearry, NIEHS associate director. "We want them to have the tools they need to protect their patients against environmental hazards."
A group of experts made up of physicians, nurses, and educators issued recommendations to incorporate environmental health into pediatric medical and nursing education. The study, conducted by the National Environmental Education and Training Foundation, also identifies key medical and nursing organizations that could help promote environmental health training, such as the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Association of Faculties of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners. The study results will be published in the December 2004 issue of "Environmental Health Perspectives."
The expert group studied the medical and nursing education systems from undergraduate education through continuing education courses. The experts identified places in the educational systems, such as licensing exams and field work for nurses, where environmental health could be incorporated. The group also recommended that government organizations should focus on advancing children's environmental health issues.
The study reviewed ongoing evaluations of medical and nursing training programs. Previous studies have shown that pediatric residency and undergraduate medical and nursing education programs do not routinely include comprehensive pediatric environmental health training in their curricula. Few pediatricians are trained to ask their patients questions on environmental exposures or give advice on environmental poisons, although most see patients with health issues related to the environment, and the majority of parents have expressed worry about their children's exposure to environmental poisons. Furthermore, childhood diseases related to the environment in American children, such as lead poisoning, asthma and cancer, cost Americans billions annually.
The group of experts included representatives of National Academy of Sciences, Institute of Medicine, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Association of American Medical Colleges, American Public Health Association, Children's Environmental Health Network, George Washington University, Medical University of South Carolina, Children's National Medical Center, Temple University, Oregon Health Sciences University, Rutgers School of Nursing, Northeastern University, Drexel University, Howard University, and the University of North Carolina School of Public Health.
"It's essential that we give more priority to pediatric environmental health," said Leyla Erk McCurdy at the National Environmental Education and Training Foundation. "By following our recommendations, pediatric health care providers will be better equipped to recognize, treat, and prevent diseases related to factors in the environment."
CONTACT:
John Schelp
919-541-5723
schelp@niehs.nih.gov
Associated Press
AUSTIN - The annual migration of monarch butterflies that crosses Texas en route to Central Mexico is the smallest in 14 years, experts say.
Hundreds of millions of the large, colorful butterflies migrate to near Mexico City from the United States and Canada each fall. But herbicides, changing farming practices and weather are apparent culprits in reducing the numbers.
"We've had very few reports outside that narrow band," Texas Parks and Wildlife Department biologist Mike Quinn told the Austin American-Statesman. "The biggest single report was 5,000 in San Angelo. All along Interstate 35 from Dallas, we've primarily had reports of single ones."
The migration funnels through a 300-mile-wide corridor from Oklahoma City to Del Rio before crossing the border.
The leading wave of migrating monarchs has fluttered into Mexico by now, dependent on northerly winds to help them soar as far as 80 miles a day, close to the ground or thousands of feet in the air, Quinn said.
He said that, in addition to a hard freeze last February that killed many monarchs in Mexico, the insects have been harmed by biotechnology. They depend on nectar from wild milkweed plants, which are being killed by herbicides that farmers can apply more abundantly thanks to herbicide-resistant varieties of crops such as soybeans.
Chip Taylor, an entomologist and director of the Monarch Watch program at the University of Kansas who has followed the migrations for 16 years, said that the butterflies -- weighing less than half as much as a dime -- are not strong fliers despite their 3- to 5-inch wingspan.
Last summer's weather, which was colder and wetter than usual up north, may have delayed monarchs' reproduction cycle so more winged travelers could be seen for several weeks, he said on the group's Web site, monarchwatch.org.
Monarchs are not an endangered or threatened species, despite their diminished numbers this year. Each female lays up to 400 eggs.
"They have been introduced around the world," said Quinn. "The migratory phenomenon is potentially endangered, but I don't know how you could separate the phenomenon from the species."
News Release: Thursday, October 7, 2004
Download the Report:
Low Resolution Version (464 K)
High Resolution Version (1.8 MB)
SAN FRANCISCO - A new report on environmental links to breast cancer concludes that exposure to synthetic chemicals and radiation has contributed more than previously thought to the rising incidence of breast cancer.
The report, "State of the Evidence 2004: What Is the Connection Between the Environment and Breast Cancer?" was jointly released today by the Breast Cancer Fund, a non-profit environmental health organization, and Breast Cancer Action, a non-profit national education and advocacy organization. It also offers policy recommendations to help reduce the risk of breast cancer.
According to the report, fewer than one in 10 cases of breast cancer occurs in women born with a genetic predisposition for the disease. As many as 50 percent of breast cancer cases remain unexplained by personal characteristics and other traditionally-accepted risk factors; epidemiologists and other scientists increasingly believe many cases are linked to environmental factors.
This third edition of the report amasses new evidence from 21 research studies published since February 2003, adding to existing evidence linking toxicants in the environment to breast cancer. This year, 40,000 women in the United States will die from breast cancer-one death every 13 minutes. The new report was peer-reviewed by six leading scientists, including a noted scientist from the International Agency for Research on Cancer, a division of the World Health Organization.
Among the new research findings reported:
"Far too many chemicals are unleashed on our environment without first being tested for long-term effects," said Jeanne Rizzo, executive director of the Breast Cancer Fund. "We call on both government and industry to rethink the process by which new chemicals are authorized for use."
Barbara Brenner, executive director of Breast Cancer Action, said, "We need to take action to promote public policy that will reduce and eventually eliminate our exposures to toxic chemicals in the air we breathe, the water we drink and the food we eat."
In the past fifty years, a woman's lifetime risk of breast cancer more than tripled in the United States, to one in seven today. This trend parallels a staggering increase of chemicals in the environment: the report says that "compelling scientific evidence" points to some of the 85,000 synthetic chemicals in use today as contributing to breast cancer by altering hormone function or gene expression.
"This new report offers the clearest evidence yet that the rise in breast cancer incidence is linked to exposure to radiation and toxic chemicals," said Nancy Evans, a health science consultant for the Breast Cancer Fund and the editor of the report. "Medical X-rays, pesticides, household cleaning products, personal care products and some pharmaceuticals-these are just a few of the multiple and chronic exposures contributing to this epidemic."
The report details how exposure to certain common chemicals known to increase the risk of breast cancer occurs often in the home and the workplace. These chemicals, known as xenoestrogens because they mimic or act like estrogens in the body, include: Bisphenol-A, used in plastic food containers and baby bottles; polyvinyl chloride (PVC), used extensively in food packaging, as well as in medical products, appliances, cars, toys, credit cards and rainwear; pesticides used on lawns and in commercial agriculture; and diethylstilbestrol, a drug prescribed for millions of pregnant women from 1941 to 1971 that doubled the risk of breast cancer for women who were exposed to it in the womb and who are now over 40.
A 2003 U.S. study by the Centers for Disease Control revealed the presence of 116 chemicals-some of them banned for more than two decades because of toxicity-in people of all ages.
In addition, the report also highlights the effects of exposure to ionizing radiation, the best-established cause of breast cancer. Paralleling the dramatic increase in exposures to toxic chemicals, an increase in radiation exposure from X-rays, CT scans, fluoroscopy, nuclear fallout and other sources may have contributed to a rising incidence of breast cancer between 1950 and 1991, the report says. During the same period, the incidence of breast cancer in the United States increased by 90 percent.
The new report offers a "Six-point Plan to Help Reduce the Risk of Breast Cancer and Ultimately End the Epidemic." Among those recommendations:
Scientists alarmed as number of cases triples in 20 years
Juliette Jowit, environment editor
Sunday August 15, 2004
The Observer
The numbers of sufferers of brain diseases, including Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and motor neurone disease, have soared across the West in less than 20 years, scientists have discovered.
The alarming rise, which includes figures showing rates of dementia have trebled in men, has been linked to rises in levels of pesticides, industrial effluents, domestic waste, car exhausts and other pollutants, says a report in the journal Public Health.
In the late 1970s, there were around 3,000 deaths a year from these conditions in England and Wales. By the late 1990s, there were 10,000.
'This has really scared me,' said Professor Colin Pritchard of Bournemouth University, one of the report's authors. 'These are nasty diseases: people are getting more of them and they are starting earlier. We have to look at the environment and ask ourselves what we are doing.'
The report, which Pritchard wrote with colleagues at Southampton University, covered the incidence of brain diseases in the UK, US, Japan, Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands and Spain in 1979-1997. The researchers then compared death rates for the first three years of the study period with the last three, and discovered that dementias - mainly Alzheimer's, but including other forms of senility - more than trebled for men and rose nearly 90 per cent among women in England and Wales. All the other countries were also affected.
For other ailments, such as Parkinson's and motor neurone disease, the group found there had been a rise of about 50 per cent in cases for both men and women in every country except Japan. The increases in neurological deaths mirror rises in cancer rates in the West.
The team stresses that its figures take account of the fact that people are living longer and it has also made allowances for the fact that diagnoses of such ailments have improved. It is comparing death rates, not numbers of cases, it says.
As to the cause of this disturbing rise, Pritchard said genetic causes could be ruled out because any changes to DNA would take hundreds of years to take effect. 'It must be the environment,' he said.
The causes were most likely to be chemicals, from car pollution to pesticides on crops and industrial chemicals used in almost every aspect of modern life, from processed food to packaging, from electrical goods to sofa covers, Pritchard said.
Food is also a major concern because it provides the most obvious explanation for the exclusion of Japan from many of these trends. Only when Japanese people move to the other countries do their disease rates increase.
'There's no one single cause ... and most of the time we have no studies on all the multiple interactions of the combinations on the environment. I can only say there have been these major changes [in deaths]: it is suggested it's multiple pollution.'
Pritchard's paper has been published amid growing fears about the chemical build-up in the environment. A number of studies have pointed to serious problems. TBT is being banned from marine paints after it was blamed for masculinising female molluscs, causing a dramatic decline in numbers. A US report linked neurological disorders to pesticides. And testing by WWF (formerly the World Wildlife Fund) found non-natural substances such as flame retardants in every person who took part.
WWF has named chemical pollution as one of the two great environmental threats to the world, alongside global warming, and is particularly worried about 'persistent and accumulative' industrial chemicals and endocrine - hormone distorting - substances linked to changes in gender and behaviour among animals and even children.
'We've started seeing changes in fertility rates, the immune system, neurological changes [and] impacts on behaviour,' said Matthew Wilkinson, the charity's toxics programme leader.
Pesticides and pharmaceutical chemicals must now undergo rigorous testing before they can be used. But there are an estimated 80,000 industrial chemicals and the 'vast majority' do not need safety regulation or testing, said Wilkinson.
However, the chemical industry strongly rejects what it claims are often unproven fears. Just because chemicals are present does not mean they are at dangerous levels.
But critics are not reassured. 'It is true that just because we find a chemical does not mean it is dangerous,' said Wilkinson. 'But it is equally true that for the vast majority of chemicals we have so little safety data that the regulatory authorities have no idea what a safe level is.'
The Royal Society of Chemistry also said quantities of pesticides were declining. 'Improvements in analytical chemistry mean that lower and lower levels of pesticides can be detected,' said Brian Emsley, the society's spokesman. '[But] because you can detect something doesn't necessarily mean it is dangerous.'
A last minute addition to an unrelated piece of legislation has created a tool for attacking the sicence used by federal agencies as a basis for new regulations. Industry has embraced the Data Quality Act to challenge 32 major proposals, includinfg a successful assault on efforts to restirct the use of the herbicide atrazine which has been shown to function as an endocrine disruptor in frogs. Click here to read the article.
(Beyond Pesticides, August 6, 2004) Researchers have identified that a specific point in the genetic code appears not only to control an organism's resistance to a class of pesticides but also to significantly influence the ability of an organism to evolve such resistance at all. Identifying such specific and strong constraints on short-term evolutionary change are likely to help ecologists and public-health experts understand, and potentially predict, the ability of particular species to quickly develop resistance to substances such as insecticides. The new work also illuminates the kind of genetic technicality that can shape evolution.
The work, performed by an international team led by Mylene Weill of the Université Montpellier II (France), concerned the ability of mosquito species to develop resistance to two major classes of insecticides, carbamates and organophosphates (OPs). Previous work had shown that a single base-pair alteration, G119S, within the mosquito's version of the AchE1 gene conferred high levels of resistance to these insecticides. Not all mosquito species exposed to high levels of carbamates and OPs develop resistance, however. For example, Anopheles gambiae, the mosquito vector for malaria, is able to develop resistance in this way, whereas Aedes aegytpi, the vector for yellow fever and dengue fever, has never developed high levels of resistance.
The new study, "Insecticide resistance: a silent base prediction," published in the July 27, 2004 edition of Current Biology reveals the reason for this striking discrepancy in adaptation. First, the researchers determined that the G119S version of the Ae. aegypti AchE1 protein was indeed resistant to insecticide action in the test tube, suggesting that the mutation would confer resistance to the mosquito in principle but that for some reason the mutation does not appear in Ae. aegypti populations. Looking more closely at the Ae. aegypti gene sequence for AchE1 revealed the answer. The researchers found that in this species, the three-letter DNA code at glycine position 119 is different from that found in the other mosquitoes studied thus far. The difference is "silent," that is, the gene still codes for the same amino acid at the 119 position. But it means - critically, as it turns out - that a single mutation of the site cannot result in the G119S change needed for resistance. In A. gambiae, it only takes one base mutation to alter the code in the right way; in Ae. aegypti, it takes two adjacent base mutations - a far less likely event.
The researchers went on to sequence the 119 position in 26 natural populations of Ae. aegypti in 12 countries and found that in all cases the three-letter codon at this position was the same, fitting with the lack of AchE1-based resistance in this species observed worldwide. They also showed that the "constrained" codon is present in 31 of 44 additional mosquito species, almost all of which indeed appear to have failed to develop resistance. Among those species with the codon version that easily mutates to confer resistance, about 50% have already developed high AchE1-based resistance. Most of the others are not insecticide-controlled.
Insecticide resistance does occur in mosquitoes that carry West Nile virus. A 2003 study published in Nature, "Comparative Genomics: Insecticide Resistance in mosquito vectors" found that mosquitoes carrying West Nile virus and malaria developed resistance to organophosphate and carbamate insecticides as a result of a single genetic mutation. Such resistance renders the broadcast spraying of mosquito adulticides an inefficient form of control that puts public health and the environment at risk to the chemical¿s adverse effects.
(Beyond Pesticides, July 22, 2004) A recent study published in the July 14 issue of the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry found that cinnamon oil is an effective way to kill mosquito larvae.
Researcher Peter Shang-Tzen Chang and colleagues tested eleven compounds in cinnamon leaf oil for their ability to kill emerging larvae of Aedes aegypti, the mosquito responsible for transmitting yellow fever. They found that four compounds, cinnamaldehyde, cinnamyl acetate, eugenol, and anethole, exhibited the strongest activity against the mosquitoes.
Cinnamaldehyde is the major constituent of cinnamon leaf oil and provides the distinctive odor and flavor associated with cinnamon. It is used worldwide as a food additive and flavoring agent, and the FDA lists it as "Generally Recognized as Safe." A formulation using the compound could be sprayed like a pesticide, but without the potential for adverse health effects of many insecticides - plus the added bonus of a pleasant and familiar smell. Other common essential oils, such as catnip, have shown similar promise in fighting off mosquitoes, but this is the first time researchers have demonstrated cinnamon's potential as a safe and effective pesticide.
Although the team only tested the oil against one species of mosquito, they believe that cinnamon oil should prove similarly lethal to the larvae of other mosquito species. In further studies they plan to test cinnamon oil against other types of mosquitoes as well as different commercial pesticides.
So far, the research has only concentrated on killing mosquito larvae, and not adult mosquitoes. Yet the researchers hope that cinnamon oil will prove equally as effective for the adults. "We think that cinnamon oil might also affect adult mosquitoes by acting as a repellant," Chang says. The researchers haven't yet tested this theory, but they plan to find out in the near future.
Besides being a summer nuisance, mosquitoes pose some public health problems, particularly West Nile virus. While conventional pesticide application is often effective in controlling mosquito larvae before they hatch, repeated use of these agents has raised serious environmental and health concerns. Targeting the mosquitoes at the larval stage is generally more effective and requires fewer chemicals than adulticiding (killing adult mosquitoes) does.
ATLANTA and BLACKSBURG, Va., July 15, 2004 - A recent study by Atlanta-based pest management company Orkin, Inc. and Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech) found that Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is far more effective in controlling cockroach populations than conventional spray-based methods over a one-year period, regardless of sanitation practices.
IPM is the method by which many highly pest-sensitive environments such as food processors, hospitals, hotels, restaurants and schools prevent pests. It combines multiple pest management practices, starting with non-chemical methods, to bring about pest prevention and suppression in an environmentally sound manner. Unlike prior studies, this study compared IPM and conventional pest control methods without altering sanitation practices in the test site.
Carried out jointly in 2003 and published in the April 2004 issue of the Journal of Economic Entomology, the study was conducted at a low-income housing development in Eastern Virginia.
"Any pest expert can tell you that it is difficult to control pests in this type of facility, particularly cockroaches," said Dr. Dini Miller, a professor in the Department of Entomology at Virginia Tech and co-author of the study. "We chose this setting because we knew any differences in the effectiveness of the two methods would be obvious within a couple of months."
The team selected 100 units with the highest cockroach populations. Fifty of these units were treated with conventional pest control methods for one year. The other 50 were treated with IPM-based procedures for the same period. During this time, neither group of residents was asked to alter their sanitation practices in any way.
The conventional units received liquid and dust pesticide treatments applied in the primary rooms of concern. The liquid application was repeated monthly and the dust replaced as needed.
In the IPM units, technicians used vacuums equipped with HEPA filters in areas that obviously harbored cockroaches to remove the insects and the organic debris that served as their food source. The units were then treated using non-volatile, least-toxic methods such as cockroach baits and insect growth regulators (IGRs). The bait material was placed in areas where roaches populated and the IGRs were applied underneath kitchen cabinets. The technicians replaced the IGRs every three months.
"By the end of the study, the technicians using IPM-based procedures had almost completely eradicated the roach population in their units," said Frank Meek, technical director for Orkin and co-author of the study. "In fact, by the end of the sixth month, 40 of the 50 units had trap counts so low that they were placed on an every-other-month service frequency."
As for the conventionally treated units, the number of cockroaches caught in the traps never dropped significantly, despite monthly service.
"Our results are proof of IPM's superior effectiveness, even when sanitation practices are variable," Meek added. "The message is clear to the thousands of businesses that have yet to implement strict IPM principles to prevent pests - the old 'spray and pray' approach is simply outdated."
(Beyond Pesticides, July 14, 2004)
EPA's Science Advisory Board suggests that EPA protections for children from carcinogenic chemicals should apply to all carcinogens, not just those that cause genetic damage, according to a July 9, 2004 article in InsideEPA.
On March 3, 2003, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released a draft of their guidelines for cancer risk assessment which includes a children's health supplement with specific information on assessing cancer risks to children. According to EPA, "These guidelines provide a framework for EPA scientists to assess possible cancer risks from exposures to environmental pollutants."
For children up to age two, the new risk assessment guidelines sets chemical risk limits ten times higher, or more stringent than they currently are and three times higher for children aged two through fifteen. However, the important protection would only apply to carcinogenic chemicals that are known to be genotoxic, or cause harm to genetic material.
The Advisory Board has encouraged EPA to broaden the stricter guidelines to include all carcinogenic chemicals, stating that there is no difference in the data available for genotoxic and non-genotoxic carcinogens. Therefore there should be no reason for the two groups to be treated differently and the new safety factors should apply to all carcinogens.
EPA is not planning to follow the SAB's recommendations, according to InsideEPA, due to time constraints and pressure from industry. EPA claims they do not have the data to justify stricter guidelines and they would not be able to meet their goal in releasing the guidelines by this summer if they were to add new information. Industry is pleased with the agency's decision to not include stricter regulation on more chemicals.
TAKE ACTION: Let EPA know it is in the public's best interest to adopt the recommendations of the Scientific Advisory Panel. Please contact Mr. William P. Wood by email: risk.forum@epa.gov, phone: 202-564-3361, or fax: 202-565-0062 and Mr. Michael Leavitt, EPA Administrator, by e-mail: leavitt.michael@epa.gov, phone: 202-564-4711, or fax: 202-501-1470 and tell them that while the timely release of documents is important, it should not preclude the overall safety of children.
(Beyond Pesticides, June 28, 2003) Anne Arundel County Public Schools (AACPS) was awarded the IPM STAR certificate on June 16, 2004 from the Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Institute of North America in recognition of its comprehensive school pest management program. AACPS is the fourth school system in the country to achieve this recognition.
IPM STAR certification is a rigorous process that includes an on-site inspection by an independent professional trained in IPM. The inspector examines the history of pest problems, the condition of buildings and grounds, as well as any pesticides used in the past three years. Schools must have an IPM policy and plan in place to guide administrators and staff as they respond to pest issues, including preventing and avoiding problems before they occur.
The certification program is operated with funding from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Pesticide Environmental Stewardship Program through the National Foundation for IPM Education. The EPA officially recognized the AACPS Division on Operations and Maintenance on June 16, 2004 in Annapolis, MD.
For reports on other STAR Certification awards see: Second School System in Nation Certified IPM and Pittsburgh School District's Pest Management Program Gets Certified IPM. To learn more about AACPS's school IPM programs, contact Daniel La Hart at (410) 360-0138.
Anne Arundel County Public Schools' pest management program is one of the 27 school districts in 19 states that are successfully implementing IPM programs featured in Safer Schools: Achieving A Healthy Learning Environment Through Integrated Pest Management, a report by Beyond Pesticides and the School Pesticide Reform Coalition.
(/Beyond Pesticides,/ June 9, 2004)
A new nationwide study of streams and groundwater by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) finds that a majority of the nation's fresh water sources, particularly in agricultural and urban development areas, are contaminated with low concentrations of chemicals.
The USGS study found pesticides in 94 percent of all the water samples and in 90 percent of fish samples, according to a May 22 article in Science News. In urban areas, insecticides such as diazinon and malathion which are commonly used on lawns and gardens were found in nearly all of the streams that were sampled. Streams in agricultural areas were more likely to contain herbicides-especially atrazine, metolachlor, alachlor, and cyanazine.
While the report conceded that such widespread contamination is cause for concern it highlighted that the concentrations found were well below the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) recommended limits in most places, writes Science News. However, USGS Chief Hydrologist Robert Hirsch added that, "Concentrations of contaminants in water samples from wells were almost always lower than current EPA drinking-water standards and guidelines. However, the possible risk to people and to aquatic life can only be partially addressed because of the lack of criteria for many chemicals and their degradation or 'breakdown' products. In addition, criteria were developed for individual chemicals and do not take into account exposure to mixtures or seasonal high pulses in concentrations." EPA also does not collect adequate information to determine the impacts on human health and the environment of constant low-level exposure to pesticides over time.
A recent study of synthetic pyrethroid accumulations in creek sediments at levels toxic to freshwater bottom dwellers (often used as quality indicators) further calls into question the sufficiency of some of EPA's contamination limits. (See Beyond Pesticides Daily News story.)
The data, which is considered the most comprehensive yet, was gathered by more than 400 scientists over a 10 year period under the auspices of the National Water-Quality Assessment program. Using the collections from thousands of rivers, aquifers, wells, fish, and sediments across the country, scientists analyzed as many as 11 million samples for more than 600 chemicals.
The report also added weight to the problem of containing pesticidal contamination. Various insecticides usually associated with rural agricultural areas surprised researchers by showing up in urban water sources, the study found. "We didn't expect to see such a difference," says Timothy L. Miller, chief of the USGS Office of Water Quality. According to Science News, Miller speculates that insecticides are being applied more extravagantly to lawns and golf courses than to croplands.
Of the 51 areas studied in the first phase of the program, the USGS has already launched a second round of studies in 42 areas to determine trends, fill critical gaps, and increase understanding of natural and human factors that affect water quality.
Free copies of the NAWQA reports are available from 1-888-ASK-USGS, by fax 303-202-4693 or online at http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/nawqasum/. For an overview, goto http://water.usgs.gov/pubs/circ/2004/1265/.
by Kerry Tremain
A frog biologist battles an agrichemical giant
A blow-up of a Gary Larson cartoon signals that I've found the right steel door. It depicts a nightclub where a frog is croonin' the "greens" he's got so bad: "My baby's just left my lily pad, my legs were both deep-fried; I eat flies all day and when I'm gone, they'll stick me in formaldehyde." Below, in large block letters, a sign reads, "Hayes Lab."
Tyrone Hayes, the renowned biologist whose experiments have linked the nation's most widely used herbicide to deformed sex organs in male frogs, waits at the door. He greets me brightly but briefly, and then starts speed walking down a long hallway at the University of California at Berkeley. He's lugging the suitcase he carries everywhere containing his two computers and his data. Despite being a foot taller, I struggle to keep up.
It's only when we climb into an elevator next to a student balancing a pint jar of tadpoles that I get a good look at this man who four years ago went to war with, as he puts it, "the number-one-selling product of the largest agrichemical company in the world, sold to the largest agricultural economy in the world and sprayed on its largest crop to kill the most common weed in the world." That product is atrazine, produced by the Swiss chemical giant Syngenta. Beyond defects in frogs, atrazine has been linked to human infertility as well as to muscular degeneration, heart disease, and cancer in animal studies. The European Union banned atrazine last year, but roughly 75 million pounds are sprayed in the United States annually, mostly on corn crops.
In the last month, Hayes has flown to four cities to give lectures to sanitation managers, water-quality specialists, herpetologists, and integrated pest managers to speak about his frogs, atrazine, and human health. Tonight, it's a breast cancer group in San Francisco. His inexhaustible cheer and energy make me wonder if he's undergone some Spider-Man-type lab accident. Although he whisks around the lab in running sweats (he jogs or bikes at least ten miles a day), he wears a suit to his lectures.
The one he's wearing now is black, with a black shirt and a very wide electric-blue tie. His hair is parted into two pigtails, each tied with a lime-green band. He has four ear piercings, two per ear, and each represents one of four values he's assigned them: independence (pierced on his first day at Harvard University), perseverance (pierced on Halloween 2002, when the prestigious journal Nature published his paper on hermaphroditic frogs), prudence (pierced in sympathy with his daughter after he botched her ear piercing), and balance (pierced, well, to balance out the other earlobe).
In recent years, Hayes has called heavily on those values as he endured a high-profile attack on his work and character by Syngenta. Although he's a wunderkind among biologists--at 36 he has an endowed chair at Berkeley and publishes in the top scientific journals--Hayes says the dispute is not about science. "When I began my studies, I learned that science was about finding truth," he says. "Now science is being done to undo science." Attacks that might have felled others have invigorated Hayes. He has intensified his frog experiments.
His lab is breaking new ground in understanding the combined hormonal effects of multiple chemicals--experiments that make current limits on toxic substances look woefully inadequate. He has also metamorphosed into a kind of public scientist, taking his findings out of the cloistered world of professional scientists and explaining their relevance for human and environmental health to the wider world. As a biologist, Hayes once spoke mostly to endocrinologists and herpetologists. "Now," he says, "I get the opportunity to talk to broader audiences and be what some would consider more political. It's not really political, though. It's bringing science to people who might not otherwise have access."
Tyrone Hayes grew up in a neighborhood built on a drained marsh in Columbia, South Carolina. After heavy rains the area would flood, filling his backyard with snakes, turtles, and frogs. From the first, he was hooked. "You can watch a newly fertilized egg; you can see the cleavages as it divides and becomes multicellular," Hayes says. "In a stage called morulation, the animal develops an inner core and becomes a living, breathing organism. These processes occur in everything from fish on up to mammals, but they're often behind eggshells or inside moms. I could watch these things happening in the frogs in my backyard."
Hayes's parents encouraged his interest. His mother had one rule: no frogs in the house. So he raised them on the porch, and collected grasshoppers in cages to feed them. As a high school freshman, he got interested in what caused certain lizards to change color. He kept them in the dark in a doghouse on the porch, and then shined lights on them. He heated them with blow-dryers to see if temperature made a difference. He woke them at varying hours.
The doghouse and grasshopper cages drew the derision of neighborhood toughs. But Hayes's wife, Kathy Kim, says he's never backed down in the face of attacks. "His mother and father told me he always stood up for kids in the neighborhood who were unpopular or poor and were being bullied." Asked about it, Hayes says, "Yeah, well, I got my ass kicked a few times."
After scoring high on his SATs, Hayes was courted by several colleges, but applied only to Harvard. Acclimating there was difficult. "I came from an all-black neighborhood to a place where there was only a tiny percentage of African Americans," he says. Hayes found a home at Harvard in Bruce Waldman's amphibian lab and then met Kim. They married two days after his graduation with departmental honors, in 1989, and moved to Berkeley for graduate school.
Hayes finished his PhD work in three and a half years, at 24. "He'd already started some frog research as an undergrad at Harvard, so when he came to Berkeley he hit the ground running," says Paul Licht, a comparative endocrinologist who became Hayes's dean, professor, and friend during his doctoral studies. "We clicked. We both wanted to study endocrinology in an environmental context--real animals in the real world."
Since childhood, Hayes had dreamed of going to Africa, and after finishing his doctorate, he made the trip. There he encountered a frog that changed his life, Hyperolius argus, an African reed frog. The male and female of most frog species share the same coloration, but in Hyperolius the genders are different: The female is spotted, the male is plain. Hayes hypothesized that this quality might make them ideal for testing the effects of chemicals that stimulate estrogen. He was right.
Increased estrogen produced spots in male frogs. He also discovered that increasing testosterone caused female voice boxes to grow, and increasing thyroid hormones sped up the metamorphosis of tadpoles to frogs. This African reed frog, in other words, offered a quick way of testing endocrine disruption--hormonal malfunctioning linked to birth defects and cancer in lab animals and humans.
Back from Africa, Hayes told his wife about his test, and Kim suggested they patent it. With help from UC Berkeley, where Hayes had been hired as an assistant professor, they did, calling it the Hyperolius Argus Endocrine Screen test, or HAES test. The HAES test soon caught the attention of other scientists, including a Syngenta-funded panel of researchers called Ecorisk.
In 1999, Ecorisk asked Hayes to examine the effects of atrazine on frogs as part of the chemical company's reporting requirement to the EPA. Years earlier, a television reporter had asked Hayes if someday some company might shake in its boots over whether his reed frog changed sexes. "I told him that if a big company had a chemical that was potentially harmful, I would think they would be happy to get the data," Hayes says. "That's how naive I was."
What he found was that at doses as low as one part per billion (or 1ppb), atrazine shrank the larynges of male frogs--an animal that uses vocalization to mate. EPA rules put the safe level of atrazine in drinking water at three times that level, or 3ppb--and many water systems in the Midwest exceed even the EPA standard.
In follow-up experiments, Hayes found a still more shocking effect. At levels one-tenth the rate of the earlier study, or 0.1ppb, atrazine turned significant numbers of male frogs into hermaphrodites. Multiple nonfunctioning ovaries and testes appeared in the same frogs. Male testes produced eggs rather than sperm.
When Ecorisk failed to report his data to the EPA and dragged its feet on funding new studies to confirm the results, Hayes grew concerned. Like amphibian biologists everywhere, he knew that frog populations were declining or disappearing worldwide. Could endocrine disruption caused by pesticides be part of the explanation? Although toxicologists traditionally worry about high doses of chemicals, endocrinologists know that hormonal effects can occur at low doses; birth control pills, for example, contain minuscule amounts of estrogen.
By late 2000, Hayes became convinced that Ecorisk was burying his findings. He quit the panel and pursued the experiments independently. It was then, Hayes says, that Ecorisk's Ron Kendall offered him $2 million to do the studies "in a private setting"--meaning one where Ecorisk and Syngenta could control the release of the results. Hayes refused; Kendall denies it happened at all.
But Syngenta then funded Ecorisk to perform over a dozen studies to discredit Hayes's data, all of them, according to Hayes, badly or even ludicrously conducted. In one, frogs were left in open tanks, leaping freely among tanks containing atrazine and those without. But the result, that the study "did not support Hayes findings," was dutifully reported to the EPA and the press.
The EPA acknowledged the Ecorisk studies were flawed. Nonetheless, in a decision last October, the agency put no new restrictions on atrazine use. The ruling called only for Syngenta to monitor the herbicide's levels in drinking water, a project that could trigger regulatory action if levels rose. And it called for more studies. "Who's going to do those studies?" Hayes asks. "Syngenta."
But so is Tyrone Hayes.
Above one of Hayes's lab tables, a series of 20-foot shelves is stacked with green slide boxes from recent experiments. Others are stored downstairs. In a rough count, I calculated those shelves hold 3.6 million tissue samples. Hayes sits at a small table and sink nearby where he uses a single-edged razor to dissect each frog. "I've looked at tens of thousands of animals. And at least three people read every one of these slides," he says. "I don't publish a paper unless I'm sure."
To care for and study the frogs, Hayes attracts and rigorously trains teams of student lab assistants, most of them undergrads. Each one completes an SOS--a semester of service--that requires a 4 a.m. wake-up to feed the frogs and change their water on a three-day cycle. Still, competition for the lab slots is fierce. Hayes runs a lab known for its diversity of students--not only in racial or ethnic terms, but also in scientific interests.
Remembering his own tough years at Harvard, he also picks one student each year who struggles in his endocrinology class. "I look for how eager they are, not their SATs," he says. "When people rub me the wrong way, I take them. They help correct my biases."
Come summer, the team hits the road to collect frogs and water samples. Their surveys are extraordinarily ambitious. Gathering frog and water specimens every ten miles down the entire North Platte River, which runs from Colorado through Wyoming to Nebraska, Hayes's team and a scientist from the U.S. Geological Survey are comparing atrazine levels with levels of hermaphroditism.
One of Hayes's students, Virginia Ngo, calls him a good candidate for Survivor. Barefoot much of the time, he would wake up at 4 a.m. to run, then get the students up an hour later for breakfast so they'd be collecting frogs by six. He sometimes caught fish for dinner, once frying a carp in a sputtering campfire skillet in the rain.
Used to treating his team almost like family, Hayes grows angry when talking about students elsewhere who get caught in the middle of unethical relationships between industries and university professors. "In one study a PhD student killed 90 percent of her frogs due to bad husbandry, but her advisor, who works for Ecorisk, submitted it to the EPA anyway." To Hayes, that's not only bad science, it's educational malpractice. "Or look at this one!" he says one day while we're sitting in his lab.
The study, sent to the EPA by Ecorisk, claimed to find hermaphroditic frogs in both corn-growing and non-corn-growing regions in South Africa, supposedly disproving that atrazine causes the effect. But in the "control" region that didn't grow corn, the water contained more atrazine than Hayes uses in his experiments. "I'm reviewing this paper next to my ten-year-old--and granted I think he's a very special ten-year-old--and he says, 'Dad, they don't have any controls.' If my ten-year-old knows they are doing bad science, so do they. But they're pushing it with their students' names on it. They're throwing their students' futures away."
Watching him speak to the breast cancer organization's attentive members in San Francisco, it occurs to me that Hayes, who won Berkeley's Distinguished Teaching Award, is simply expanding his classroom outside the university. He guides the group through a dazzling amount of information, seamlessly combining data from molecular biology, endocrinology, population ecology, and public policy. At one point, he asks the group members to close their eyes and "imagine there's a potent chemical that disrupts hormones."
Hayes prepared them by explaining how atrazine turns on an enzyme called aromatase that stimulates estrogen production, a process shown to occur in frogs, reptiles, rodents, and human tissues. He tells them that one study found an increase in breast cancer in women whose drinking-water systems are contaminated with atrazine, and that another study in the Midwest associated poor semen quality with atrazine contamination.
He continues, "Then I want you to imagine what the world would be like if the EPA required these companies to report these effects, so it could make regulatory policy based on the science. And now I want you to open your eyes and I want you to join me in reality."
In the real world, Hayes says, Ron Kendall was working for Syngenta and running Ecorisk while chairing a scientific advisory panel to the EPA. He was also editing the only journal to publish a paper challenging Hayes's findings, by one of Kendall's colleagues at Texas Tech University who was under contract to Ecorisk.
According to Hayes, industries sponsor studies that go on for years but aren't reported to the EPA because they're "unfinished." That way, if they find something bad, the company buys time to look for a replacement product.
Hayes also explains to the group that while the EPA regulates toxics based on a safe dose for individual chemicals, his findings question whether a safe level exists if several chemicals are interacting in the environment at once. "We've found that frogs are counting the number of chemicals in the water. If you expose them to two chemicals, there's a slight delay in metamorphosis; if you expose them to ten, there's even more of a delay. No single compound will do this."
With drugs for humans, that's a routine assumption: You know not to take a dose of aspirin, ibuprofen, and acetaminophen at the same time. If this routine assumption were applied to toxics, the traditional framework for regulating them could collapse.
For such a revolutionary shift to occur, it will take more than scientists debating among themselves. On the way to San Francisco, Hayes had told me about an epiphany he'd had. When his paper on hermaphroditic frogs was published in Nature, he'd called his mom to tell her. The next day, she called back and said, "Honey, I don't want to hurt your feelings, but I went down to the Barnes & Noble and they've never heard of that magazine."
"She made me realize that the things that counted the most for me--getting tenured and published--are the least relevant," Hayes says. "Here you have this important information, but so very few people have access to it." In his new role as a public scientist, he wants to change that. He speaks to groups all over the country and beyond--his recent favorite was the Used Oil and Household Hazardous Waste Conference.
"Look, the people who we're poisoning are our country; they're our economy. They're paying my salary. But they're not at that EPA hearing. They're not invited to any scientific conferences." So this summer, he's planning a scientific conference on atrazine that will include farm laborers and others directly affected by the herbicide.
Academics are known for narrowing their vision to a tiny field of study, but Hayes has expanded his fascination with frogs into a window on the world. "I like frogs, but amphibians are a marker," he tells the breast cancer group. "Living organisms are all connected to the environment, the water especially. We're using an animal that develops in an aquatic environment to tell us something about another animal that develops in an aquatic environment." As Hayes speaks he points to a slide of a human fetus in the womb.
"I don't know why we're continually surprised that pesticides, which are designed to take away life, create these kinds of effects," says Hayes. "It's not just that environmental health is related to public health. They are one and the same."
By Charlie Savage, Globe Staff | June 1, 2004
WASHINGTON -- Homeland Security watchdogs call them "prepositioned weapons of mass destruction" for terrorists: huge tanks of concentrated deadly gases that the chemical industry stores near densely populated areas and that railroads bring through cities en route to somewhere else.
The United States harbors more than 100 chemical facilities where an accident would put more than a million people at risk, according to documents filed with the Environmental Protection Agency. One is in Boston: A chemical distributor acknowledged in its filing that in a worst-case scenario if a tank holding 180,000 pounds of vinyl acetate -- a highly flammable liquid -- ruptured, it would send a 4.9-mile-long toxic cloud through the city.
As federal security officials warn that Al Qaeda is poised to strike the United States again, the presence of these highly toxic chemicals in the midst of cities may be the most vulnerable point in the nation's defenses. But proposals to reduce that risk by requiring the use of alternative chemicals or rerouting hazardous tankers around a city have faltered.
Fear of such an attack on a chemical facility prompted bipartisan momentum in Congress after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks for requiring the chemical industry to switch to less dangerous processes where possible. Although many Republicans supported the measure initially, many changed their minds after intense industry lobbying, and the bill died on the Senate floor.
Nearly three years later, the laws regulating chemical plants remain the same as before Sept. 11 -- a striking exception to an otherwise transformed security landscape. Similarly, support has emerged for new regulations on railroads that carry dangerous materials such as chlorine through urban areas. Rupturing a chlorine rail tanker would produce a 40-mile-long cloud of the same deadly gas used as a weapon in World War I. But a first-in-the- nation proposal by the District of Columbia City Council to reroute tankers carrying such hazardous cargo around the nation's capital has been stalled for months: The chemical and rail industries objected, with backing from the Bush administration.
According to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan group, both industries heavily back the Republican Party. In the two election cycles since the Sept. 11 attacks, the railroad industry has given $9.5 million to political campaigns -- 77 percent of it to Republicans. The chemical manufacturing industry has given $11 million -- 78 percent of it to Republicans.
"It's a problem of political will," said Rick Hind, the toxics campaign director for the environmental group Greenpeace, which has lobbied for greater regulation. "The technology is there. Here in D.C., the water treatment plant got rid of its chlorine tanks eight weeks after 9/11 at a cost to the public of 50 cents more a year. Heck, I'd pay a dollar for that. I'd even pay $10 a year for the complete elimination of that facility as a potential target."
For example, proponents of greater regulations say, plants should use ozone as a disinfectant instead of chlorine. They could switch to making water- based paints to avoid a need for flammable organic solvents. Instead of making large batches of pesticides in open vats, manufacturers should use a continuous-flow process in a closed system.
The American Chemistry Council, the main lobbying arm of the $460 billion industry, has argued that promoting "inherently safer" approaches is too complicated a task for government regulation and could lead to harmful consequences: Requiring plants to keep less toxic chemicals on site, for example, might mean more delivery trips and a greater risk of accidents.
Marty Durbin, the council's security team leader, said companies should be allowed to decide for themselves which processes are best. He supports only legislation that would require chemical plants to evaluate their own site security threats, as those that are members of the ACC already do, and file them with the Department of Homeland Security.
"That's not running away from a regulatory regime," Durbin said. "We think we set the standard."
But Nicholas Ashford, director of the Technology and Law Program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said even if a plant's facilities are well engineered to prevent an accident, they cannot prevent sabotage. A tank may have walls thick enough to withstand pressure, but it could still be penetrated by a shoulder-fired missile or a truck bomb that plows through a fence.
Ashford also contended that the industry is being disingenuous when it says it is already switching to less dangerous chemicals where it can. Many firm owners, he said, resist investing in modernization and need to be told to identify whether there are safer ways to accomplish the same goals.
The owner of the chemical facility in Boston, which the Globe is not identifying for security reasons, said he could not switch to inherently safer processes because he is a distributor, not a manufacturer. He said the company had an excellent safety record, noting it has never had a fire or major spill.
Chemical plant security could become an issue in the presidential campaign. Presumptive Democratic nominee Senator John F. Kerry recently started criticizing Bush on the issue, saying the president is failing to address the problem of chemical plant terrorism and is too closely tied to the industry.
"I wish their policies were as tough as their words," the Massachusetts lawmaker said in a speech last month.
A Bush campaign spokesman told reporters that Kerry was calling for measures the president has advocated -- measures that are already in legislation before the Senate. But the details of what's before Congress contradict that assertion.
In 2002, Senator Jon S. Corzine, Democrat of New Jersey, filed a bill that would have required chemical plants to submit security plans to the Environmental Protection Agency. And it would have required plants to consider whether using inherently safer alternatives was feasible. If so, they should switch over. If not, they had to explain why they wouldn't to the EPA.
That bill unanimously passed out of committee in July 2002.
But the chemical lobby -- with help from other industries that use stockpiled chemicals, such as oil and agriculture -- contended that the bill would empower the EPA to micromanage business. Two months later, seven Republicans who had voted for the bill sent a letter to their colleagues urging that the bill be stopped. It died on the Senate floor.
When Congress reconvened in 2003 under Republican control, Corzine reintroduced his bill with Kerry as a cosponsor, switching the regulator from the EPA to Homeland Security. Still, it has gone nowhere. Meanwhile, a former GOP supporter of the bill, Senator James M. Inhofe, Republican of Oklahoma, introduced a rival measure that passed out of committee last fall on a party-line vote. It focuses almost exclusively on mandating that firms assess their own perimeter security.
Critics say the Inhofe bill doesn't require plants to prove to the government that safer technologies weren't feasible. It only asks that they consider them. But even that limited requirement met opposition from the industry.
Durbin, the chemical lobbyist, says chemical companies want the bill changed to define "consider" in such a way that companies are not required "to fill out four three-ring binders to describe how they considered alternative approaches."
In any case, few give even this bill much chance of becoming law before this session ends at the end of the year. Companion bills to both the Inhofe and the Corzine proposals haven't gotten a subcommittee hearing in the House of Representatives, where US Representatives William J. "Billy" Tauzin and Joe Barton, Republicans of Louisiana and Texas, staunchly oppose regulation.
The Bush administration has made little effort to promote either measure. In October 2002, Homeland Security director Tom Ridge and then-EPA director Christine Whitman issued a joint statement saying that voluntary chemical plant security measures were not enough. But since then, the administration has not pushed Congress to move on the issue.
Asked what the administration's position on mandating consideration of inherently safer technology is, Robert Liscouski, the assistant Homeland Security secretary for infrastructure protection, would say in an interview only that the administration was reviewing the various proposals. He acknowledged that it is "a very sticky area."
But Liscouski emphasized the department was "not waiting for Congress to act" and was sending agents out to the most dangerous chemical plants to work with them to improve their security, to develop ties with law enforcement, and to plan for extra policing or even National Guard assistance if a threat arises.
And, he warned, the problem of what to do about the danger of chemical facilities inside cities was not a simple one, given the industry's importance to the economy and the benefits of its products. It's an industry that depends upon infrastructure built over 40 or 50 years that happens to be inside major cities, he said.
"Do you want to legislate the chemical industry out of business? I don't think so," he said. "So what you want is to provide better ways for the industry to secure itself along with partners at the state and local level."
The nascent debate over rerouting hazardous rail cars appears to be starting down the same path as that of chemical facilities. The potentially landmark bill in the District of Columbia council has stalled for five months while Homeland Security reviews it, and a spokesman said the department had not yet taken a position on the matter.
But the Bush administration's chief rail official, Federal Railroad Administration chief Allan Rutter, gave firm backing to the rail industry's position at a House railroads subcommittee hearing this month,
"While it might be tempting to simply reroute around cities," Rutter said, that would "jeopardize high-wage jobs" in cities with factories that use chemicals and could lead to "increased transit time and shipping costs."
At the same hearing, Association of American Railroads president Ed Hamburger argued against allowing local communities to force freight trains carrying hazardous materials around major cities, saying it would create a patchwork of laws that would drag down interstate commerce.
"Rerouting would lead to an increase of miles traveled, increasing switching and handling of cars, thereby increasing public exposure, and [it would] only transfer that exposure to other communities," Hamburger said.
But Washington-based environmentalist Fred Millar said terrorists want to attack the nation's capital, not Luray, Va. -- the town on the Norfolk & Southern rail line that is 50 miles west of the CSX line that runs past the Capitol.
"We have not had a disaster with rail security yet," he said. "But just wait until a terrorist does attack a chlorine tank car in a city. Everyone will pay attention to this."
Representative Edward J. Markey, Democrat of Malden, is drafting legislation that would give Homeland Security the authority to regulate when hazardous rail cargoes must be rerouted around population centers and require better background checks for people handling toxic materials.
"Obviously, [the rail industry] is not pleased that legislation is going to be introduced," he said. "We're trying to work with the industry to deal with their concerns, but I think it's something that has to be done just as a matter of ensuring that Al Qaeda does not have this as a way of creating a catastrophic terrorist event."
However, he said, he's not optimistic his bill will pass.
© Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company
(Beyond Pesticides, May 26, 2004) In agricultural and urban areas, the quality of our nation's water resources has been degraded by contaminants such as pesticides, nutrients, and gasoline-related compounds, according to Water Quality in the Nation's Streams and Aquifers-Overview of Selected Findings, 1991-2001 released earlier this month. Based on a series of 51 United States Geological Survey (USGS) reports on the health of major river basins across the country (15 of which were also released earlier this month), the overview states that insecticides such as diazinon and malathion were found in nearly all of the streams that were sampled in urban areas. Streams in agricultural areas were more likely to contain herbicides-especially atrazine, metolachlor, alachlor, and cyanazine.
For more than a decade, USGS hydrologists have looked at three questions related to ground and surface water quality. What are the conditions of our nation's streams and ground water? How is water quality changing over time? And how do natural features and human activities affect the quality of streams? According to the USGS Chief Hydrologist Robert Hirsch, "By evaluating and assessing our nation's water resources, we have a better understanding of water quality and this gives us a comprehensive picture of the long-term health of America's rivers and aquifers. We have analyzed the effects of agricultural, urban, and forest land use practices on water quality, habitat, and biota."
Hirsch noted that, "Concentrations of contaminants in water samples from wells were almost always lower than current EPA drinking-water standards and guidelines. However, the possible risk to people and to aquatic life can only be partially addressed because of the lack of criteria for many chemicals and their degradation or "breakdown" products. In addition, criteria were developed for individual chemicals and do not take into account exposure to mixtures or seasonal high pulses in concentrations."
The 51 reports on water quality were conducted since 1991 by the USGS National Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA) program. Of the 51 areas studied in the first phase of the program, the USGS has already launched a second round of studies in 42 areas to determine trends, fill critical gaps in the characterization of water-quality conditions, and increase understanding of natural and human factors that affect water quality.
(Beyond Pesticides, May 12, 2004) Many U.S. residents carry toxic pesticides in their bodies above government assessed "acceptable" levels, the highest being children, women and Mexican Americans, according to a report, Chemical Trespass: Pesticides in Our Bodies and Corporate Accountability, released May 11, 2004 by Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA). The report makes public for the first time an analysis of pesticide-related data collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in a study of levels of chemicals in 9,282 people nationwide. The report reiterates on a larger scale what numerous other studies have found and reveals that government and industry continue to fail at safeguarding public health from pesticide exposures.
"None of us choose to have hazardous pesticides in our bodies," said Kristin Schafer, PANNA Program Coordinator and lead author of the report. "Yet CDC found pesticides in 100% of the people who had both blood and urine tested. The average person in this group carried a toxic cocktail of 13 of the 23 pesticides we analyzed."
Many of the pesticides found in the test subjects have been linked to serious short- and long-term health effects including infertility, birth defects and childhood and adult cancers. "While the government develops safety levels for each chemical separately, this study shows that in the real world we are exposed to multiple chemicals simultaneously," explained Margaret Reeves, Ph.D., Senior Scientist at PANNA. "The synergistic effects of multiple exposures are unknown, but a growing body of research suggests that even at very low levels, the combination of these chemicals can be harmful to our health."
Chemical Trespass found that children, women and Mexican Americans shouldered the heaviest "pesticide body burden." For example, children-the population most vulnerable to pesticides-are exposed to the highest levels of nerve-damaging organophosphorous (OP) pesticides. The CDC data show that the average 6 to11 year-old sampled is exposed to the OP pesticide chlorpyrifos at four times the level U.S. Environmental Protection Agency considers "acceptable" for a long-term exposure. Chlorpyrifos, produced principally by Dow Chemical Corporation and found in numerous products such as Dursban, is designed to kill insects by disrupting the nervous system. Although U.S. EPA restricted chlorpyrifos for most residential uses in 2000, it continues to be used widely in agriculture and other settings. In humans, chlorpyrifos is also a nerve poison, and has been shown to disrupt hormones and interfere with normal development of the nervous system in laboratory animals.
The report also found that women have significantly higher levels of three of the six organochlorine (OC) pesticides evaluated. This class of pesticides is known to have multiple harmful effects when they cross the placenta during pregnancy, including reduced infant birth weight and disruption of brain development, which can lead to learning disabilities and other neurobehavioral problems. This ability of organochlorine pesticides to pass from mother to child puts future generations at serious risk.
PAN's analysis found that Mexican Americans carry dramatically higher body burdens of five of the 17 evaluated pesticides in urine samples, including a breakdown product of methyl parathion, a neurotoxic, endocrine-disrupting, insecticide. Mexican Americans also had significantly higher body burdens of the breakdown products of the insecticides lindane and DDT than those found in other ethnic groups.
Chemical Trespass argues that pesticide manufacturers are primarily responsible for the problem of pesticide body burden. "The pesticides we carry in our bodies are made and aggressively promoted by agrochemical companies," stated Skip Spitzer, Corporate Accountability Program Coordinator at PANNA. "These companies also spend millions on political influence to block or undermine regulatory measures designed to protect public health and the environment."
The report introduces the Pesticide Trespass Index (PTI), a new tool for quantifying responsibility of individual pesticide manufacturers for their "pesticide trespass." Using the PTI, the report estimates that Dow Chemical is responsible for at least 80% of the chlorpyrifos breakdown products found in the bodies of those in the U.S.
"The fact that our children carry dangerous pesticides in their bodies represents a dramatic failure in the way our government protects us from toxic pesticides," said Monica Moore, PANNA Program Director. "We must stop this toxic trespass by shifting the burden from our bodies back to the corporate boardroom where it belongs."
Chemical Trespass provides recommendations for government, industry and the public including:
BY BRYAN SABELLA
Staff Writer
INDEPENDENT
Holmdel, NJ Community Newspaper
Front Page - April 28, 2004
(photo: MIGUEL JUAREZ staff Gov. James McGreevey high-fives student Kandie Hartwell-Lawrence during his Earth Day appearance at the Campbell School, Metuchen.)
On a sunny Earth Day afternoon, Gov. James E. McGreevey appeared Thursday at the Campbell School in Metuchen to announce that an initiative to protect schoolchildren from pesticide exposure is slated to take effect in June.
The School Integrated Pest Management Act of 2002 aims to severely restrict use of pesticides on school grounds, and puts forth a strict set of criteria for times when use cant be avoided, officials said.
Accompanied by Metuchen native state Sen. Barbara Buono, (D-18), who sponsored the legislation, McGreevey said, "I believe this is the strongest law in the nation," and took aim at the Bush White House, claiming, "This administration is literally rolling back" every environmental regulation successfully implemented during the Clinton years.
Both McGreevey and Buono cited research statistics linking pesticide exposure at an early age to increased risks of developing childhood asthma, learning disabilities and cancer.
Both also cited National Research Council studies that show childrens bodies take in larger doses of pesticides than adults because their metabolisms are able to process airborne elements faster.
McGreevey pointed to National Cancer Institute findings showing an 11 percent increase in childhood cancer rates between the 1970s and the 1990s, calling it "a very disconcerting statistic," and noted that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has classified 148 pesticides, many of which are commonly used on school grounds, as likely carcinogens.
Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner Bradley M. Campbell said that when it comes to pesticide use the law boils down to "three simple rules: avoid, minimize and notify. They should be common sense, but they havent been law until today."
The law encourages the use of low-impact pesticides such as baits, gels and pastes and requires that written notification of school pesticide use and access to toxicology information be provided to all parents, students and staff 72 hours in advance.
McGreevey praised the Metuchen school district for "adopting these practices ahead of the curve," and said the Campbell School was the first in New Jersey and possibly the first in the nation to do so.
"If we can get every school in the state of New Jersey to do what the Campbell School has done, well be in very good shape," DEP commissioner Campbell said.
Schools Superintendent Theresa Sinatra vowed that borough schools will go even further than the law requires when it comes to pesticide policy.
"I like to think we have one of the most progressive [environmental] agendas in the country," McGreevey said. "Were fighting overexposure to chemicals on every level, whether it be our air, our water or our soils."
Wednesday, April 21, 2004
WASHINGTON -- A study that links lawn chemicals to bladder cancer in Scottish terriers could help shed light on whether they cause cancer in some people, U.S. researchers said Tuesday. Purdue University researchers surveyed 83 owners of Scottish terriers whose pets had recently been diagnosed with bladder cancer for their report, published in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medicine Association. "The risk ... was found to be between four and seven times more likely in exposed animals," said Larry Glickman, professor of epidemiology and environmental medicine in Purdue's School of Veterinary Medicine. "While we hope to determine which of the many chemicals in lawn treatments are responsible, we also hope the similarity between human and dog genomes will allow us to find the genetic predisposition toward this form of cancer found in both Scotties and certain people."
Glickman and his colleagues earlier found that Scotties are about 20 times more likely to develop bladder cancer than other breeds.
"These dogs are more sensitive to some factors in their environment," Glickman said in a statement. "As pets tend to spend a fair amount of time in contact with plants treated with herbicides and insecticides, we decided to find out whether lawn chemicals were having any effect on cancer frequency."
The National Cancer Institute says about 38,000 men and 15,000 women are diagnosed with bladder cancer each year. Humans and animals often share genes that can predispose them to cancer.
"If such a gene exists in dogs, it's likely that it exists in a similar location in the human genome," Glickman said. "Finding the dog gene could save years in the search for it in humans and could also help us determine which kids need to stay away from lawn chemicals."
Glickman's team plans to survey children, as well as dogs, in households that have treated lawns and compare the chemicals in their urine samples with those from households with untreated lawns.
"It's important to find out which lawn chemicals are being taken up by both children and animals," he said.
Source:Nancy Alderman, President
Environment and Human Health, Inc.
1191 Ridge Rd.
North Haven, CT 06473
203-248-6582l
(fax) 203 288-7571
http://www.ehhi.org
TORONTO, April 23 /CNW/ -The Ontario College of Family Physicians (OCFP) is strongly recommending that people reduce their exposure to pesticides wherever possible after releasing a comprehensive review of research on the effects of pesticides on human health. Released today, the review shows consistent links to serious illnesses such as cancer, reproductive problems and neurological diseases, among others. The study also shows that children are particularly vulnerable to pesticides. The review found consistent evidence of the health risks to patients with exposure to pesticides. "Many of the health problems linked with pesticide use are serious and difficult to treat - so we are advocating reducing exposure to pesticides and prevention of harm as the best approach", said Dr. Margaret Sanborn of McMaster University, one of the review's authors.
Principle Findings of the Review:
- Many studies reviewed by the Ontario College show positive associations between solid tumours and pesticide exposure, including brain cancer, prostate cancer, kidney cancer and pancreatic cancer, among others.
- Previous studies have pointed to certain pesticides, such as 2,4-D and related pesticides, as possible precipitants of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL), and the findings of the College's review are clearly consistent with this.
- It is clear from the review that an association exists between pesticide exposure and leukemia. According to the College, the implication of pesticides in the development of leukemia warrants further investigation and also, political action.
- The review team uncovered a remarkable consistency of findings of nervous system effects of pesticide exposures.
- Occupational exposure to agricultural chemicals may be associated with adverse reproductive effects including: birth defects, fetal death and intrauterine growth retardation.
Pesticide Effects and Children:
Children are constantly exposed to low levels of pesticides in their food and environment, yet there have been few studies on the long-term effects of these exposures. Nevertheless, the College reviewed several studies that found associations between pesticide exposures and cancer in children. Key findings include:
- An elevated risk of kidney cancer was associated with paternal pesticide exposure through agriculture, and four studies found associations with brain cancer.
- Several studies in the review implicate pesticides as a cause of hematologic tumours in children, including non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and leukemia.
- Some children have overall increased risk of acute leukemia if exposed to pesticides in utero or during childhood, especially for exposure to insecticides and herbicides used on lawns, fruit trees and gardens, and for indoor control of insects.
What the Public Should Do:
Given the wide range of commonly used home and garden products associated with health effects, the College's overall message to patients is to avoid exposure to all pesticides whenever and wherever possible. This includes reducing both occupational exposures, as well as lower level exposures that occur from the use of pesticides in homes, gardens and public green space. The College also advocates exposure reduction techniques such as:
- Researching and implementing alternative organic methods of lawn and garden care and indoor pest control.
- Proper use of personal protection equipment, including respirators for home and occupational exposures.
- Education on safe handling, mixing, storage and application when pesticide use is considered necessary.
What Family Physicians Should Do:
In the wake of this systemic review, the College is advocating that family physicians take the following measures:
- Screen patients for pesticides exposure at a level that may cause significant health problems, and intervene if necessary.
- Take patient pesticide exposure history when non-specific symptoms are present - such as fatigue, dizziness, low energy, rashes, weaknesses, sleep problems, anxiety, depression.
- Focus efforts on prevention rather than on researching the causes of chronic or terminal disease.
- Consider high-risk groups (e.g. children, pregnant women, seniors) in their practices.
- Advocate reduction or pesticide risk/use to individual patients.
- Advocate reduction of pesticide risk/use in the community, schools, hospitals and to governments.
The Ontario College of Family Physicians is a provincial chapter of the College of Family Physicians of Canada and is a voluntary, not-for-profit association that promotes family medicine in Ontario through leadership, education and advocacy. The OCFP represents more than 6,700 family physicians providing care for remote, rural, suburban, urban and inner-city populations in Ontario. The OCFP is the voice of family medicine in Ontario. At the heart of the organization is the building and maintenance of high standards of practice and the continuous improvement of access to quality family practice services for all residents of Ontario.
NOTE TO EDITORS: The OCFP Study is available on the Ontario College's website at www.ocfp.on.ca
For further information: Contact: Josh Cobden or Jennifer Casey, Environics Communications, (416) 920-9000, jcobden@environicspr.com; Jan Kasperski, Ontario College of Family Physicians, (416) 867-9646, jk_ocfp@cfpc.ca
For the full release go to the following url:
Ontario College of Family Physicians
PRESS RELEASE
Pesticide Hazards
http://www.ocfp.on.ca/English/OCFP/Communications/CurrentIssues/Pesticides/default.asp?s=1
Pesticide Hazards: Family Doctors to Release Comprehensive Review of Research Today
Join us today for the results of Canada's most comprehensive review of research on the effects of pesticides on humans.
Canada News-Wire
Fri 23 Apr 2004
Section: GENERAL NEWS
Time: 08:00 (Eastern Time)
TORONTO, April 23 /CNW/ - TODAY, the Ontario College of Family Physicians (OCFP) will release the results of Canada's most comprehensive review of research on the effects of pesticides on humans, and the implications for family physicians.
The results of the systemic review cover studies done since 1992, and describe the findings regarding major adverse pesticide health effects, including:
- Solid tumours, including brain cancer, prostate cancer, kidney cancer and pancreatic cancer, among others
- Leukemia
- Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma
- Genotoxic effects
- Skin diseases
- Neurological diseases
- Reproductive effects
- Vulnerable patient groups, including children
Who: Margaret Sanborn, MD, CCFP, FCFP, McMaster University Donald Cole, MD, FRCP(C), University of Toronto
Cathy Vakil, MD, CCFP, Queen's University