http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/03/AR2006120300992.html
Evidence Such as Eggs In Male Fish Spurs Push
By David
A. Fahrenthold
Monday, December 4, 2006; B01
Growing evidence
that chemicals in the environment can interfere with animals' hormone systems
-- including the discovery that male
A decade
ago, the very idea that pollutants could interfere with a body's chemical
messages was near the fringes of science. But now, it is an urgent topic for
lawmakers and researchers around the world, and especially in the
In recent
years, researchers have linked some common chemicals to troubling changes in
laboratory rodents and wild animals, including reproductive defects,
immune-system alterations and obesity.
For now,
no connections to human ailments have been proved. But some studies have
provided hints that people might be affected by crossed hormones, and activists
wonder if this kind of pollution could contribute to diabetes, birth defects
and infertility.
"There's
a lot of concern that a lot of chemicals to which we are exposed routinely, and
without our knowledge, are interfering with the way hormones work," said
R. Thomas Zoeller, a professor of biology at the
The
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments is planning to host a public
forum about hormone-disrupting pollution this spring. U.S. Reps. James P. Moran
Jr. (D-Va.) and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) have said they plan to press the
Environmental Protection Agency about its failure to develop a program to test
chemicals for hormonelike effects, as ordered by Congress in 1996.
The idea
that natural hormone messages can be tampered with is not new; for decades,
women using birth-control pills have been counting on a man-made chemical to do
just that.
But the
current concern is much wider: Some fear that modern chemistry might have
unwittingly created other compounds with hormonelike effects and that they
might have spread widely around the globe.
In the
past few years, scientists working with animals have found potential problems
with several pollutants, among them rocket-fuel components, pesticides and
additives to soap. Among the most heavily researched:
?
Phthalates, a family of additives used to make vinyl plastic flexible and
prevent perfume from evaporating, have been linked to lower sperm counts and
other sexual problems in male rats, as well as to heightened allergic reactions
in the animals. Chemical industry officials have said that these tests used
unrealistically high doses and that the results are not likely to translate to
humans.
?
Bisphenol A, used as a building block for hard plastic goods like bottles and
as a resin to line food cans, has been connected in some experiments to
abnormal sexual development in male lab rodents, as well as a predilection for
obesity. Officials from the chemical and pesticide industries have vigorously
criticized these results, saying that other studies have shown the chemical to
be harmless.
? Treated
sewage, which carries human estrogen and birth-control pill components excreted
in waste, has been linked to "feminized" male fish in waters around
the world. In the St. Lawrence River in
The study
of endocrine disruptors began in the late 1980s and early 1990s, with
scientists struggling to add up such oddities as male birds with female organs
in the Great Lakes and sexual defects in
They
eventually found that some chemicals were turning on hormone switches in the
body's endocrine system that trigger biological processes. Others blocked the
switches so natural hormones couldn't get through.
That
revelation meant that a pollutant could be harmful even if it wasn't poisonous
and didn't cause cancer. Even small doses could cause major damage, if they
came at a key time when hormones were guiding pregnancy or early development.
"We
have to ask different questions," said John Peterson Myers, an activist
and former scientist based in
Today,
despite the wealth of studies in animals, the implications for human health are
unclear. One of the most dramatic studies examined the sons of mothers whose
bodies contained phthalates. It found no major birth defects but did show that
the higher the phthalate level, the greater chance that the boys' bodies would
show subtle signs of being "undermasculinized," according to
researcher Shanna Swan, director of the Center for Reproductive Epidemiology at
the University of Rochester.
Still,
that falls well short of a smoking gun: Humans are not laboratory rats, so
scientists say it is exceedingly hard to craft a study that shows a particular
chemical caused a particular problem, and not genetics, diet or some other
factor.
"They're
nowhere near cause-and-effect," L. Earl Gray Jr., a senior research
biologist at the EPA, said of human studies. "We're showing correlations
and associations" between pollutants and human health effects, he said,
but no indisputable sign that one causes the other.
Officials
from the chemical and pesticide industries have vigorously defended their
products, saying they see no reason for concern about products in the
environment interfering with human hormones.
Some
scientists have also pointed out that human diets have always included some
estrogen-like compounds: They occur naturally in wine and soy-based products,
for example.
Stephen
H. Safe, a professor of veterinary physiology and pharmacology at
Still,
concerns that human health might be in danger have led to recent bans on
certain phthalates in young children's toys imposed by the European Union and
the City of
Activists
in the
Some
activists fear that damage is already being done. They caution avoiding plastic
baby bottles, which could contain bisphenol A, and reducing consumption of
animal fat, where some environmental pollutants can concentrate.
"I
feel terrible because we haven't moved on this faster," said Colborn, the
activist who has served as an unofficial leader among endocrine-disruptor
researchers. "This is a transgenerational problem that is undermining the
integrity of humans."
But Paul
Foster, an official who evaluates risks to human reproduction at the National
Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, said it was hard to give useful
advice at this point because the chemicals being investigated are so
ubiquitous.
"There's
very little that they can do," said Foster, whose agency is part of the
National Institutes of Health. "That's why you can't be too alarmist about
it, because you can't stop people living."
H.JOSEF HEBERT
Associated Press
Tue, Nov. 21, 2006
WASHINGTON - The Environmental Protection Agency announced Tuesday
that pesticides can be applied over and near bodies of water without
a permit under the federal Clean Water Act. The decision brought
immediate criticism from an environmental watchdog group and from a
senator involved in environmental issues. They said it would make it
easier to pollute the nation's lakes and streams.
But the EPA said the two specific circumstances in which clean water
permits no longer will be needed will add to public health by
allowing for better eradication of pests.
"This clean water rule strengthens and streamlines efforts of public
health officials and communities to control pests and invasive
species while maintaining important environmental safeguards," said
Benjamin Grumbles, the EPA's assistant administrator for water-
related issues.
Under the rule, pesticides can be applied directly into water or
sprayed nearby or onto foliage over water without a pollution permit
if the application is needed to control aquatic weeds, mosquitoes or
other pests.
Sen. Jim Jeffords, I-Vt., the ranking member of the Senate
Environment and Public Works Committee, said the permitting exemption
will lead to more toxic pollution getting into lakes and streams. He
said a billion pounds of pesticides are used annual in the United
States "and much of it ends up in our waterways."
"We must strengthen, not weaken, our policies and laws that prevent
pesticides from polluting rivers, streams, lakes and our underground
water supplies," Jeffords said in a statement.
Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides, a private
public health and environmental advocacy group, called the ruling a
weakening of federal protection because the Clean Water Act set
limits on the maximum contamination levels that would be allowed to
protect waterways.
"More protection is need from pesticides, not less," said
Feldman.
http://www.belleville.com/mld/belleville/news/politics/16070426.htm
---_
On the Net
Environmental Protection Agency:
http://www.epa.gov/
Beyond Pesticides:
http://www.beyondpesticides.org
(Beyond Pesticides, November 13, 2006) Bed bugs have made a comeback of epic proportions in the United States and around the world lately, and in cities around the country are reported to be major nuisances. Reports of growing resistance to pesticides and evidence of toxicity of conventional bed bug products has led to the production of new least toxic bed bug products.
For example, the company K4 Products, L.L.C., has released a new least-toxic product called EcoBugFree for Bed Bugs claiming to kill bed bugs on contact. EcoBugFree for Bed Bugs qualifies as an EPA exempt minimum risk pesticide, and therefore is considered a low-risk product.
Bedbugs are tiny reddish-brown insects, about 1/5 inch, which live in the cracks and crevices in bed frames and adjacent walls or in mattress seams. They usually become active at night, while their host is sleeping, in order to feed. Human reactions to bedbug bites can be anywhere from swelling and pain to nothing at all. Bed bugs can easily be transported from one host to another by riding on clothing to buses and trains, movie theaters and other public places where another person could pick them up. They can also be introduced to a home on a used mattress, or can travel between apartments and hotel rooms.
While bedbugs were not much of a problem in the last several decades, they have recently been making a comeback. The Washington Post reports that in the past five years, bedbugs have been reported in 27 states. Last spring a Chicago woman sued a New York hotel for $20 million after suffering more than 500 bed bug bites (see Daily News 5-10-06). Both New York and San Francisco have recently passed city legislation to help control the spread of the bugs. In San Francisco, the legislation centers on landlord and tenant rights while in New York, it involves controlling the sale and transport of used mattresses.
EcoBugFree for Bed Bugs is currently being used by hotels and shelters to manage their bed bug issues and is being stocked at hardware stores and pharmacies for sale to the general public. According to the manufacturers, EcoBugFree for Bed Bugs is a safe product that can be used on and around the bed as well as in the presence of children and pets.
As with any pest problem, before resorting to pest control, consider alternative practices first. The first step is to inspect to see if you really have a bug problem. Some signs of a bedbug infestation include a pungent odor, and blood or fecal spots on your pillow casings and sheets. Search out eggs and adult bedbugs in the cracks and spaces in your bed frame and along the baseboard if you think you might have a bedbug problem.
The next step is to investigate the possible cause of the infestation. The bugs could be coming from a nearby bird¿s nest or bat nesting area. By getting rid of the source, you will help rid the infestation in your home. Be sure to caulk and paint the openings and cracks in your bed frame and surrounding area to close up any hiding places.
There are also more direct strategies to take care of a bedbug problem. If you need to take action right away, a good short-term emergency technique involves setting up a barrier so that the bugs cannot get on your bed. Place the legs of your bed in containers filled with soapy water, and make sure that no part of the bed is touching the wall.
You must thoroughly clean sheets and blankets. Try using an enzyme cleaner or borax for this. Steam clean all the furniture in your home. Infested mattresses and beds should be replaced.
Temperature manipulation provides another control method. Bedbugs can only survive in the range of 48° F and 97° F. By artificially raising the temperature in the infected area to 97° and 99° for several days, a large number of bedbugs will be killed. Lowering the temperature to 32° to 48° will take 30-60 days to kill off all the eggs. If you opt for temperature manipulation, use it in conjunction with the other techniques discussed above so that you can get rid of the entire infestation.
In addition to K4 Products¿ EcoBugFree for Bed Bugs, insecticidal soaps and silica aerogels provide least-toxic controls that you can employ if all else fails.
(Beyond Pesticides, November 2, 2006) In a new study in the journal Aquatic Toxicology, Canadian researchers find that at environmentally-relevant levels, the anti-bacterial agent triclosan interferes with the thyroid hormone in frogs, affecting the timing of metamorphosis in tadpoles. This study is the first demonstration of low-level impacts of triclosan on thyroid hormone function. The study raises further questions about human and environmental health risks from triclosan.
The study, entitled ¿The Bactericidal Agent Triclosan Modulates Thyroid Hormone-Associated Gene Expression and Disrupts Postembryonic Anuran Development,¿ shows that exposure to as little as 0.15 micrograms/L triclosan causes an earlier metamorphosis from tadpole to frog than normal, with effects on the tadpole brain and tail.
Results of the study indicate that low levels of triclosan can potentially affect the human thyroid gland. The thyroid plays a role in development, body temperature and metabolism.
"Frogs serve as a very sensitive sentinel species for chemicals that can actually disrupt thyroid hormone action," said University of Victoria molecular biologist Caren Helbing, Ph.D., one of the authors of study. ¿Triclosan at levels measured in our waterways can actually affect how thyroid hormones works in frogs."
The chemical triclosan, marketed widely to protect children from germs, is found in hundreds of products, including antibacterial soaps, deodorants, toothpastes, cosmetics, fabrics and plastics. Research shows that triclosan is no more effective than washing with regular soap and water, and the ubiquitous nature of the chemical is leading to antibacterial resistance problems.
"For most things, regular soap is just fine. In terms of children's products, they shouldn't have triclosan in them at all,¿ Dr. Helbing said in an interview with the Victoria Sun.
"When you ask a qualified microbiologist, they'll tell you that it's being overdone and there's probably a greater chance of creating bacterial resistance than preventing problems," said Joe Schwarcz, Ph.D., director of McGill University's Office for Science and Society. "Washing with soap and water is enough, except in a hospital environment ... You don't want to use a jackhammer to kill an ant when stepping on it will do.
"The reason why the triclosan story is interesting is it's so pervasive - it's in so many products. Even (though) the risk (of ill effects) is small, the exposure is too large," says Dr. Schwarcz.
In fact, triclosan is used so commonly that is has made its way into the human body ¿ it has been found in the umbilical cord blood of infants and in the breast milk of mothers.
In March, the Canadian Paediatric Society called for parents to stop buying antibacterial products, and instead use traditional soap and water to wash toys, hands or household items. This past August, an Illinois County asked EPA to cut the widespread use of antibacterial agents. The American Medical Association and Association for Professionals in Infection Control have said there's no evidence that antibacterial soaps prevent infections in homes. Additionally, on October 20, 2005, at a meeting of the Nonprescription Drugs Advisory Committee, which advises FDA, the committee voted 11-1 that antibacterial soaps and washes were no more effective than regular soap and water in fighting infections ¿ both work equally as well. Shortly after, Beyond Pesticides, along with 14 other public health and environmental advocacy groups, petitioned FDA to ban triclosan for all non-medical uses. As of yet, the agency has failed to respond to the petition.
The widespread use of triclosan has led to contamination of the nation¿s waterways. A 2006 study by researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health finds that after people flush antibacterial products down the drain, about 75 percent of triclocarban and triclosan compounds survive treatment at sewage plants. Most of that ends up in waterways and sludge spread on agricultural fields, and may end up on produce.
TAKE ACTION: When used in hospitals and other health care settings, or for persons with weakened immune systems, triclosan and its analog, triclocarban, represent important health care and sanitary tools. Outside of these settings, the use of these antibacterial ingredients is unnecessary, and the constant exposure to them becomes a health and environmental hazard. The best solution to preventing infections is good old, regular soap and water. Make sure you read all labels when buying soaps and other toiletry products, including cosmetics, to ensure that triclosan and triclocarban are not included. Also be on the lookout for Microban and Irgasan, which are other names for triclosan.
Three times more likely to fall ill
Study examines agricultural link
Oct. 12, 2006. 01:00 AM
JOSEPH HALL
HEALTH REPORTER
Women who have worked on farms are almost three times more likely to develop breast cancer than those who have never worked in agriculture, a new study of cancer patients in the Windsor area suggests.
The paper, to be published today in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, says women with farming experience are 2.8 times more likely to develop the disease than non-farmers and that the agricultural link may linger long after a woman has gone on to other occupations.
Study author James Brophy, an occupational and environmental health scientist, theorizes that exposure to pesticides, or other common farm contaminants, may explain the increased risk.
The study was conducted over 2 1/2 years and looked into the lives of 564 women diagnosed with breast cancer at the Windsor Regional Cancer Centre, said Brophy, who is also executive director of the Occupational Health Clinic for Ontario Workers in Sarnia. Of those 564 patients from Essex and Kent counties, 154 had worked on farms. Those patients were compared to an equal number of women in the same area who did not have any form of cancer.
After weeding out traditional breast cancer risk factors ¿ such as genetics, smoking, age, number of children and hormone replacement therapies ¿ the farming link was apparent, said Brophy.
"We also found that if she went on to work in health care or in auto (manufacturing) her breast cancer risk continued, and in the case of the auto industry, it actually slightly increased."
Brophy said there have been a couple of previous studies that have also shown a link between agriculture and breast cancer. But "there is a significant gap in our understanding of work-related exposures and breast-cancer risk." he wrote in the paper's introduction.
"I'm not saying we have the smoking gun on breast cancer. We don't," said Brophy, who conducted the study with Dr. Margaret Keith. "What I think we do have is a study that shows the importance of looking at occupation as a potential risk factor and that something is going on ... within the rural population."
Heather Logan, head of cancer control policy with the Canadian Cancer Society, said much more must be done to study occupational links to the disease, and Brophy's paper could point the way.
"The whole way they've approached this study is really quite remarkable," Logan said. "And it raised really important questions, not just about women's work history, but our ability to understand the previous work history in both men and women and the potential risk of developing cancer as a result."
Ann Chambers, a professor of oncology at the University of Western Ontario's Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, said it was a "good study" that should prompt further research. But Chambers, who specializes in breast cancer, said it was important to understand the association found in the study between cancer and farming does not necessarily mean there's a causal relationship between the two.
"The real danger that the public has in this sort of thing is that you see an association and then they think, `Aha, working on a farm causes cancer,'" she said. "And the study statistically can't say that. It says there is an association which warrants further study to understand what the cause is."
Brophy agreed further research must be conducted to see if the association holds true outside of the Windsor area and he is currently expanding his sample size to 1,000 women.
He said the study groups all forms of agriculture together and cannot determine if one type of farming is more dangerous than another.
Brophy said a host of environmental contaminants, like diesel fumes, antibiotics and growth hormones are common in agricultural settings and could also be contributing to the higher cancer rates.
(Beyond Pesticides, September 22, 2006) Low-level exposure to dieldrin, a banned but persistent pesticide lingering in the environment, appears to accelerate changes in the brain that can potentially lead to the onset of Parkinson's disease symptoms years or even decades before they might naturally develop. This finding, by researchers at Emory University and the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, was presented at the 232nd national meeting of the American Chemical Society. The concept of an accelerated disease process is a new twist in the investigation of the long-suspected link between the use of pesticides and Parkinson's disease, according to the researchers.
"Our current study clearly shows that pesticides such as dieldrin appear to accelerate or exacerbate the already underlying disease," said Gary Miller, Ph.D., an associate professor of environmental and occupational health at Emory University. "Pesticides aren't necessarily the causative agents, but they do promote Parkinson's. So it appears the more you are exposed to pesticides, the greater your risk of developing the disease earlier in life."
In their pilot study, Dr. Miller and his co-researchers -- Emory graduate student Jaime Hatcher and Georgia Tech Professor Kurt Pennell, Ph.D. -- found that levels of dieldrin, an organochlorine pesticide developed in the 1940s as an alternative to DDT, were three times higher in the brains of 14 people who had Parkinson's disease than in the brains of 12 people who didn't.
Based on this finding, the researchers estimated the lifetime exposure levels of these people and extrapolated these levels to mice. They then exposed laboratory mice to low, but "environmentally relevant" dosages of dieldrin - about 1 to 3 milligrams per kilogram. After one month, although none of the mice showed symptoms of Parkinson's disease, the researchers did detect increased levels of oxidative stress in the brain and significantly reduced uptake of dopamine, the neurotransmitter that plays a key role in the development of Parkinson's.
This latest work adds more evidence establishing a link between pesticides and Parkinson's. Earlier this year, a Harvard School of Public Health study of more than 140,000 adults found that those exposed to long-term, low levels of pesticides had a 70 percent higher incidence of Parkinson's disease. Another recent study, by the same Emory/Georgia Tech team, found that fetal rodents exposed to dieldrin had brain alterations that made them more susceptible to Parkinson's-inducing toxic chemicals.
"All of the evidence that has been accumulating suggests that exposure to pesticides increases the risk of Parkinson's disease," Dr. Miller said. "We believe that a person who is destined to get Parkinson's because of genetics or other factors at age 80 might develop symptoms when they're 65 or 70 if they have been exposed to pesticides."
Dieldrin, which was most commonly used to control agricultural pests and termites, was banned for most uses by the Environmental Protection Agency in 1974 after it was found to be harmful to fish and other wildlife. It was totally banned in 1987. Although no longer used, dieldrin can persist in the environment for decades and move up through the food chain, particularly in dairy products and meats, to humans, noted Dr. Pennell.
Over the next few decades, however, dieldrin and other banned pesticides should dissipate in the environment and become less of a factor in the development of Parkinson's disease, according to Dr. Miller. "Today, people are being exposed to much lower levels of pesticides than people were 30 or 40 years ago," Miller said. "I would predict that over the course of the next several decades that we will see a decrease in the incidence of Parkinson's disease." Environmentalists are concerned, however, that because newer pesticides are not adequately studied for long-term effects, that the problem may continue.
At least 500,000 Americans have Parkinson's disease and about 50,000 new cases are diagnosed each year, according to the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. The disease occurs when certain nerve cells die or become impaired and can no longer produce dopamine.
(Beyond Pesticides, September 8, 2006) According to the Associated Press
(AP), some species of male fish are acquiring female sexual characteristics at unusually high frequencies in the Potomac River and its tributaries, prompting concerns about pollutants that might be causing the problem. Environmentalists have long pointed to pesticides and other endocrine disrupting chemicals as having the potential for wreaking such hormonal chaos. The article reports that in some Potomac tributaries, including the Shenandoah River in Virginia, nearly all of the male smallmouth bass caught in a survey last year by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) were so-called intersex fish, producing immature eggs in their testes. In the Potomac itself, 7 of 13 largemouth bass exhibited female characteristics, including 3 that were producing eggs.
Intersex fish were discovered in the Potomac rivershed in 2003 and have also been found in other parts of the country. But the frequency found by the surveys is much higher than what had been found elsewhere, said Vicki Blazer, a USGS fish pathologist. Female fish caught in the survey did not develop any unusual sex traits, though fish of both sexes exhibited lesions and other problems related to pollution, said Ms. Blazer, who coordinated the survey. Gerald LeBlanc, an environmental toxicologist at North Carolina State University, told the AP that the high percentages of intersex fish found in the Potomac survey were surprising. It is not uncommon for such fish to be found in other parts of the country, Mr. LeBlanc said, but at lesser frequencies. Most scientists believe that changes are caused by a combination of endocrine disrupting pollutants and synthetic estrogens, such as pesticides and birth control pills. Endocrine disruptors are a diverse group of several thousands of chemicals that are used in everything from pesticides and flame retardants to cosmetics and pharmaceuticals. Endocrine disruptors may be mistaken for hormones by the body and thus their presence may alter the function of hormones, either blocking their normal action or interfering with how they are made in the body. Since hormones regulate things like growth and body development, there is great potential for damage. In particular, some endocrine disruptors are mistaken for the female hormone estrogen. These estrogen mimics interfere with the reproductive system, causing infertility, malformed sexual organs, and cancer of sensitive organs.
Disturbingly, there are many commonly used pesticides that are known or suspected endocrine disruptors, such as _atrazine_ (http://www.beyondpesticides.org/pesticides/factsheets/Atrazine.pdf) , _2,4-D_ (http://www.beyondpesticides.org/pesticides/factsheets/D.pdf) , _lindane_ (http://www.beyondpesticides.org/pesticides/factsheets/Lindane.pdf) , and _permethrin_ (http://www.beyondpesticides.org/pesticides/factsheets/permethrin.pdf) . A _recent study_ (http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/docs/2005/7728/abstract.html) found that the commonly used lawn pesticide formulation Round-up, with the active ingredient _glyphosate_ (http://www.beyondpesticides.org/pesticides/factsheets/Glyphosate.pdf) , causes damaging endocrine effects in fetuses. EPA does not currently evaluate or consider the endocrine disrupting properties of pesticides during registration or reregistration.
The environmental effects of these chemicals has been well-established: pseudo-hermaphrodite polar bears with penis-like stumps, panthers with atrophied testicles, _hermaphroditic deformities in frogs_ (http://www.beyondpesticides.org/infoservices/pesticidesandyou/Summer%2004/Wreaking%20Havoc%20with%20Life.pdf) , and male trout with eggs growing in their testes have all been documented as the probable result of endocrine-disrupting chemicals in the environment. Many scientists believe that wildlife provides early warnings of effects produced by endocrine disruptors, which may as yet be unobserved in humans.
Environmental Science & Technology
Science News –
September 6, 2006
The first national study to examine pesticide exposure in daycare centers finds some mixed results.
Millions of children get exposed to pesticides while attending daycare, concludes the first nationwide study of insecticide residues in U.S. daycare centers. The study, published today on ES&T’s Research ASAP website (DOI: 10.1021/es061021h), found low levels of organophosphate and pyrethroid pesticides. Although the health impacts are unclear, the results raise questions about the risks children face from these chemicals.
“We found at least one pesticide in every daycare center,” says lead author Nicolle Tulve, a research scientist with the U.S. EPA’s National Exposure Research Laboratory. Tulve says that the concentrations were quite low. She did not comment on whether these concentrations might be harmful but notes that no health advisories or national standards currently exist for such exposures.
For the study, researchers selected 168 daycare centers across the U.S. At each site, a technician wiped samples from indoor surfaces, such as floors and tables, and collected soil from outdoor play areas. The manager of each facility was also questioned about cleaning and pest-management practices. Researchers tested for 39 pesticides, and 63% of the centers reported applying up to 10 different insectides. Organophosphate and pyrethroid pesticides cropped up most often, and three of the four centers with the most pesticides detected were in the South, where warm weather brings out the bugs.
This study provides a teaching opportunity in terms of training childcare workers to manage pests in the safest way possible, says Lynn Goldman, who is a professor of applied health at Johns Hopkins University and a former EPA official in charge of the agency’s pesticide program. “These chemicals should be avoided around children, and if needed, bait traps, which do not leave residues on the floors and surfaces, are preferable, as long as they are kept out of the reach of children,” she says.
Goldman says that she was disappointed that the agency did not use the results to characterize how much exposure to pesticides children face. “These data are interesting but [could] be far more meaningful,” she says.
Paul Lioy, the deputy director of the Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute at Rutgers University, agrees. He says that aggregating the total exposures could help to identify individuals with sensitivity to these chemicals.
In the past decade, more and more states have started regulating pesticides in daycare facilities. In 2000, Massachusetts passed a law requiring all schools to submit integrated pest-management plans to limit children’s contact with pesticides. And New York legislators recently introduced a bill to prohibit pesticide applications in daycare centers during business hours. Meanwhile, California is considering a bill to require daycare owners to notify parents when they are treating for pests.
However, Lioy also notes that pesticides are not all bad. These chemicals kill roaches, which can cause allergies in some children. Prudence, he says, dictates wise use of insecticides and complete pest-management plans. —PAUL D. THACKER
(Beyond Pesticides, September 6, 2006) According to researchers at Emory University and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), residential pesticide use represents the most important risk factor for children's exposure to pyrethroid insecticides. The study, A Longitudinal Approach to Assessing Urban and Suburban Children's Exposure to Pyrethroid Pesticides, is published in the September 2006 issue of Environmental Health Perspectives (Vol. 114, No. 9).
The results are part of a larger study examining the impacts of dietary and residential exposure of children to organophosphate (OP) and synthetic pyrethroid pesticides. With the phaseout of most residential uses of the common OP insecticides, chlorpyrifos and diazinon, home use of pyrethroids has increased. Pesticide products containing synthetic pyrethroids are often described by pest control operators and community mosquito management bureaus as ¿safe as chrysanthemum flowers.¿ While pyrethroids are a synthetic version of an extract from the chyrsanthemum plant, they were chemically engineered to be more toxic, take longer to breakdown, and are often formulated with synergists, increasing potency and compromising the human body¿s ability to detoxify the pesticide. Pyrethroids may affect neurological development, disrupt hormones, induce cancer, and suppress the immune system.
The authors conducted a longitudinal study to assess the exposure of 23 elementary school¿age children to pyrethroid pesticides, using urinary pyrethroid metabolites as exposure biomarkers. The 15-consecutive-day sampling period was divided into three phases. During phase 1 (days 1¿3) and phase 3 (days 9¿15), children consumed their normal conventional diets. During phase 2 (days 4¿8), organic food items, including fresh fruits and vegetables, juices, processed fruit or vegetables (e.g., salsa), and wheat- or corn-based items (e.g., pasta, cereal, popcorn, or chips), were substituted for the children's conventional diet. These food items are routinely reported to contain pesticide residues by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). During the 15 days, urine samples were analyzed for five common pyrethroid metabolites. The researchers also surveyed the children's parents for residential pesticide use. Comparing metabolites between dietary phases, the researchers saw no apparent trend. However, seven children in families that reported using pyrethroid pesticides had significantly higher metabolite levels than the other children.
Furthermore, children's ages appear to be significantly associated with pyrethroid exposure, which is likely attributed to the use of pyrethroids around the premises or in the facilities where older children engaged in outdoor activities. The researchers conclude that an organic diet alone is unlikely to dramatically decrease a child's exposure to pyrethroids the way it does exposure to OP pesticides. Limiting residential use of pyrethroids and preventing children's contact with treated areas are essential in reducing children's exposure to these harmful pesticides.
The September issue of
Environmental Health Perspectives is available online.
You
can see it here: http://www.ehponline.org/docs/2006/114-9/toc.html
Because pyrethroid pesticides are often used in conventional agriculture, people are routinely exposed to trace amounts in foods. Similar exposure to organophosphorus (OP) pesticides has been described previously in results from the Children's Pesticide Exposure Study, an investigation of pesticide exposures among 23 Seattle children aged 3¿11. Unlike OP pesticides, however, pyrethroids are also approved for residential use. The latest findings from this study show that residential use of pyrethroids appears to be a more significant source of exposure to this class of pesticides than diet [http://www.ehponline.org/docs/2006/9043/abstract.html.
With the phaseout of residential use of the commonly used OP pesticides chlorpyrifos and diazinon, home use of pyrethroids has increased. Depending on the compound and the dose, pyrethroids may affect neurological development, disrupt hormones, induce cancer, and suppress the immune system. However, little is known about the extent and effects of human exposure.
Using samples collected during the summer of 2003, researchers at Emory University and the CDC determined urinary pyrethroid metabolite levels during 15 consecutive days for each child. During days 1¿3 and 9¿15, the children consumed foods prepared from conventionally grown crops. On days 4¿8, organic items were substituted for plant-based foods such as fruits, vegetables, pasta, and cereal.
During the entire 15-day sampling period, the dominant metabolite seen was PBA, a nonspecific metabolite of permethrin, cypermethrin, and deltamethrin. PBA was detected in 82% of samples and had the highest median concentration, 0.45 µg/L. trans-DCCA and cis-DCCA, metabolites of permethrin, cypermethrin, and cyfluthrin, were also common, detected in 71% and 35% of all samples, respectively. Concentrations of cis-DCCA were too low to quantify; the median trans-DCCA concentration was 0.38 µg/L. The metabolites FPBA, derived from cyfluthrin, and DBCA, derived from deltamethrin, were each detected in only 2% of samples.
Comparing metabolites between dietary phases, the researchers saw no apparent trend. However, seven children in families that reported using pyrethroid pesticides had significantly higher levels of PBA and trans-DCCA than the other children and accounted for most of the FPBA-containing samples and all of the DBCA-containing samples. Interestingly, the older children experienced higher exposure than the younger ones. Typically younger children have higher exposure due to behaviors such as mouthing items and playing on floors, but the older children in this study spent time at sports facilities where pyrethroids may have been used.
The researchers conclude that an organic diet alone is unlikely to dramatically decrease a child's exposure to pyrethroids the way it does exposure to OP pesticides. Limiting residential use of pyrethroids and preventing children's contact with treated areas are very likely the best measures for decreasing their exposure to these pesticides.
(Beyond Pesticides, August 31,
2006) A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld a
pesticide rule issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 2004,
saying that the regulation does not violate the Clean Air Act even though it may
conflict with an international environmental treaty signed by the U.S. that
phases out the use of the methyl bromide, an ozone-depleting and cancer-causing
agricultural fumigant. The ruling came after the Natural Resources Defense
Council (NRDC) sued EPA in 2005, arguing that the agency permitted chemical
companies to boost supplies of methyl bromide instead of phasing out the
contentious pesticide as outlined in the Montreal Protocol (See Daily
News Story 1/4/05).
"EPA is pleased with the court's decision. EPA
and the Bush Administration remain committed to finishing the job of restoring
and protecting the ozone layer, protecting public health and meeting critical
needs of American farmers as they make the transition to methyl bromide
alternatives," an agency spokesperson said.
In the ruling, the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said that the NRDC had the legal right to have
its case considered, but maintained that EPA didn't break the December 2004 law,
which allowed for a 2 million pound increase in the use of methyl bromide in
2005 alone (See Daily
News Story 12/17/04).
The NRDC in its lawsuit had argued that EPA's
move violated both the Clean Air Act and the Montreal Protocol, an international
environmental treaty on ozone. But the court, in a unanimous decision, said that
an international treaty could not be considered a federal "law" and as such, was
not enforceable in federal court.
The Montreal Protocol, signed by
President Ronald Reagan in 1987 and supported by subsequent U.S. presidents from
both political parties, is intended to protect the ozone layer, which shields us
from harmful cancer-causing ultraviolet radiation that increases risks of skin
cancer, cataracts and immune disease. In addition to being a potent
ozone-depleter, methyl bromide also causes prostate cancer in agricultural
workers and others who are directly exposed, according to the National Cancer
Institute.
TAKE ACTION: Write President Bush in the White House and insist that the U.S. comply with the Montreal Protocol and begin implementing alternatives to methyl bromide.
(Beyond Pesticides, August 30, 2006) Kerry Ryan, a symbol in the fight against Agent Orange, died Monday at 35 of kidney failure. Her father, Michael Ryan, a Vietnam War veteran, attributes her battle with 22 major birth defects to his exposure to the chemical while serving in the war. Mr. Ryan said, ¿She belongs on the wall in Washington, D.C. She is a casualty of Vietnam the same as any man on there.¿
Kerry¿s story first became public when the Ryans were named in a 1979 class-action lawsuit against Dow Chemical, one of the manufacturers of Agent Orange. The suit was ultimately settled for $180 million, but did not directly benefit the Ryans. Her family also wrote a book in 1982, called Kelly: Agent Orange and an American Family.
Kelly¿s death comes less than a week after the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that Vietnam veterans who patrolled offshore can now claim disability benefits due to exposure to Agent Orange. The ruling stated that the current regulations over such benefits were unclear, particularly in the distinction between land-based and sea-based veterans. As Judge William A. Moorman wrote, ¿Veterans serving on vessels in close proximity to land would have the same risk of exposure to the herbicide Agent Orange as veterans serving on adjacent land, or an even greater risk than that borne by those veterans who may have visited and set foot on the land of the Republic of Vietnam only.¿ While the Veterans Affairs Department said that it was unsure how many veterans would be affected by the ruling or what the cost might be, it is expected to expand coverage to thousands more who served in Vietnam.
Agent Orange is infamous for its effects on millions of soldiers and civilians during the Vietnam War. Hundreds of thousands of children have been affected by their parents¿ exposure to the chemical, and like Kerry, showed a wide range of symptoms. It has been linked to Lukemia, diabetes, and peripheral neuropathy. While application of Agent Orange may be less prevalent, its sister-chemicals, such as 2, 4-D, are still commonly used.
(Beyond Pesticides, August 21, 2006) During the peaking of West Nile Virus season and an increase in community decisions to spray for mosquito control, a new study shows that spraying does not reduce the transmission of West Nile Virus.
Recognizing the widespread use of truck-mounted spraying to control adult mosquitos, yet the lack of research on the true effectiveness of this method in reducing the transmission of West Nile Virus (WNv) disease, a group of scientists and practicioners conducted an efficacy investigation of truck-mounted spraying in reducing mosquito populations. The study, ¿Efficacy of Resmethrin Aerosols Applied from the Road for Suppressing Culex Vectors of West Nile Virus,¿ is funded in part by the Centers for Disease Control and the National Institutes of Health, and led by the Harvard School of Public Health (Michael R. Reddy, et. al.) appears in the June 2006 issue of Vector-Borne and Zoonotic Diseases, Volume 6, Number 2.
Three suburban landscapes in eastern Massachusetts with an array of lot sizes, street, and vegetation patterns provided the study site. Following U.S. EPA guidelines for flow rates and droplet size, and heeding important mosquito control considerations for wind speed and temperature, a typical spray application of the pyrethroid pesticide, resmethrin, commenced just after dusk and continued for two hours.
Mosquito populations were measured looking at egg-laying rates in treated and non-treated areas in six different trials during the months of July and August. Minimum and maximum rates of resmethrin were applied. Generally, about as many eggs were deposited before the pesticide application as after in both the treated and untreated areas, meaning the treatments did not decrease the reproductive activity of the adult mosquitos. In only one of the trials did the egg rafts decrease somewhat after spraying, and in another trial the populations of eggs actually rose after treatment in both the treated and untreated sites.
The authors conclude ¿we find that ULV applications of resmethrin had little or no impact on the Culex vectors of WNV, even at maximum permitted rates of application, [and] such insecticidal aerosols, delivered from the road, may not effectively reduce the force of transmission of WNV.¿
In further discussion the authors state, ¿Although numerous field trials have demonstrated that insecticidal aerosols are lethal to caged mosquitoes (Mount 1998), few have monitored their impact on mosquitoes in nature. A previous study (in Memphis, Tennessee by one of the authors, Paul Reiter,) demonstrated an 80% reduction of Culex species on the night after a treatment, but concluded that a single application was probably inadequate for meaningful reduction of human risk of arboviral infection (Reiter et al. 1990).¿ The authors consider the nature of the Memphis neighborhood with its larger plots (five times larger than New England), extensive lawns and lack of shrubbery, the major factor in the efficacy numbers found in this study.
In 1998, ¿A critical review of ultralow volume aerolsols of insecticides applied with vehicle-mounted generators for adult mosquito control.¿ appeared in the Journal of the American Mosquito Control Association (Mount, G.A.), and concluded that the average upwind and downwind mosquito kill from truck-mounted spraying to be between 21% -45%.
(Beyond Pesticides, August 18, 2006) Research conducted at the University of Kansas (KU) showed findings that the popular herbicide Roundup (glyphosate) could lose its effectiveness on weeds over time. The research team, which included Ernst Schönbrunn, associate professor of medicinal chemistry, and Todd Funke, doctoral student at KU, analyzed the protein that makes certain crops resistant to the herbicide Roundup, chemically named glyphosate. The study was recently published in the peer-review journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The team¿s findings suggest that the farming industry might need to develop a new weed killer or develop better management practices that are environmentally friendly.
Successful alternative least-toxic weed strategies are available,.with preventiong being the key to managing weeds. Cultural practices have been proven to be the single most effective method of weed management. In states such as Wyoming, noxious weeds are being successfully controlled with Cashmere goats. (See PAY Vol. 21, No 4 2001.)
During the 1990s Monsanto found a bacteria that could resist Roundup in a production factory where the herbicide was highly concentrated. Crops were given a DNA sequence from the resistant bacteria and were then able to make a protein that allowed them to resist Roundup. The crops were dubbed Roundup-Ready. Weeds do not possess the same protein and thus are killed by the herbicide.
According to Mr. Funke, ¿Roundup-Ready crops have been on the market for years, but no one knew exactly what allowed this protein to work.¿ Dr. Schönbrunn said results of their research indicates that weeds could soon become resistant to Roundup, as did the bacteria in the production factory, because the chemical change needed for plants to resist the herbicide is so minor. Dr. Schönbrunn continued, ¿The scary thing is that glyphosate, or Roundup, is commercially very successful because it is toxic to plants but doesn¿t harm animals or the environment and that all other known herbicides are more poisonous to animals and cause more environmental damage.¿ Exposure to glyphosate can cause asthma-like symptoms and breathing difficulty. Undisclosed, or proprietary, ingredients (called ¿inert ingredients¿) in Roundup, a common formulation of glyphosate, have been linked to pneumonia and damage to the mucous membrane tissue and the upper respiratory tract.
Symptoms following exposure to glyphosate formulations include: swollen eyes, face and joints; facial numbness; burning and/or itching skin; blisters; rapid heart rate; elevated blood pressure; chest pains, congestion; coughing; headache; and nausea. In developmental toxicity studies using pregnant rats and rabbits, glyphosate caused treatment-related effects in high dose groups, including diarrhea, decreased body weight gain, nasal discharge and death. A 2002 peer-reviewed study finds children born to parents exposed to glyphosate (Roundup®) show a higher incidence of attention deficit disorder and hyperactivity. EPA material safety data sheets for the common herbicides glyphosate (Roundup), 2,4-D, mecoprop, and dicamba, (often combined as Trimec®) list them as respiratory irritants that can cause irritation to skin and mucous membranes, chest burning, coughing, nausea and vomiting.
According to Mr. Funke, there is a bright side to the team¿s findings that could lead to the development of drugs that fight microbial infections, such as pneumonia or malaria. Mr. Funke continued, ¿All bacteria, plants, fungi and many parasites use this protein, but humans don¿t. So there¿s a lot of interest in designing chemicals to stop this protein from functioning." The researchers plan to search for chemicals that target this protein in order to develop new antibiotics and herbicides.
(Beyond Pesticides, August 11, 2006)
The preliminary results of an ongoing study, led by the University of North Dakota's Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC), add to the growing body of evidence linking pesticides to neurological changes associated with Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis (MS), epilepsy, and Alzheimer's. Funded by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the results of the study's first year showed that the areas of the brain in laboratory-tested rats affected by pesticide exposure are the same areas linked to these disorders.
These findings are consistent with a Harvard School of Public Health study in June 2006 that found a 70% increase in risk for Parkinson's among individuals exposed to pesticides over those not exposed. This study comes a year after a UK study of 3,000 individuals, which concluded that the higher one's exposure to pesticides, the greater one's risk for contracting Parkinson's. And while the pesticide industry trade group CropLife America calls such studies "unsubstantial," it acknowledges 31 separate studies finding a connection between pesticide exposure and Parkinson's.
The longer-term goal of the EERC's study will be to determine how airborne pesticides affect humans, in order to design strategies to reduce the risk for affected populations. North Dakota provides an ideal stage to test this. As EERC Director Gerald Groenewold said, "North Dakota is the perfect laboratory to perform this testing as the state's main industry is agriculture. Airborne pesticides are more prevalent in our state relative to other classes of pollutants, which makes their effects easier to detect." This aids a branch of the study designed to show that the most efficient means of human exposure to pesticides is not through food or water, but tiny airborne particles of pollen. As he told Minnesota Public Radio, "Frankly, if there is a link between pesticides and these diseases, I think the very fine pollen is the transport mechanism, and is in some cases you might say the smoking gun."
Although this is the first year in a proposed four-year study
(the EERC is currently seeking additional funding to continue the study),
researcher Dr. Patrick Carr emphasized the finding of "physical changes" in the
rats' brains which, with further research, could eventually be correlated to the
affects on a person working with pesticides. "What this research says is that we
have started to open some doors and shine some light in a very objective
fashion, a very comprehensive fashion, on this group of questions," Groenewold
said. "And it says, more than ever, that this research is extremely important
not only here in the Red River Valley, but basically
globally."
(Beyond Pesticides, August 9, 2006) A new study, An Effective Counter Measure Against Poisoning by Organophosphorus Insecticides and Nerve Agents from the University of Maryland School of Medicine showed findings when treatment with galantamine, a drug used to treat mild to moderate cases of Alzheimer's is combined with atrophine it can protect people from the toxic effects of nerve agents and some insecticides. In the study researchers gave guinea pigs a treatment of galantamine, combined with atrophine, which protected them from lethal doses of the nerve agents sarin and somain and one of the most extremely acute toxic insecticides parathion, which is notorious for the number and severity of human poisonings that it causes each year.
Study results find that galantamine, a drug originally extracted from snowdrop flowers currently approved to treat Alzheimer's disease, could be used as an antidotal therapy to counteract the lethal effects of even the most deadly organophosphorus compounds. According to the findings that will be published later this week in the online edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the study provides the basis for the further development of a safe and effective treatment to protect people exposed to organophosphorus compounds, that include nerve agents that have been used in chemical warfare and terrorist attacks, as well as pesticides used in and around households and on farms worldwide has been provided in the findings that has been published this week in the online edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
According to the lead author of the study, Dr. Edison X. Albuquerque, "the only medication currently approved by the Food and Drug Administration to prevent the catastrophic effects of nerve agent poisoning does not protect the brain," Dr. Albuquerque continued, "This medication, pyridostigmine, doesn't effectively cross the blood-brain barrier."
Most animals that are treated with pyridostigmine and exposed to toxic doses of nerve agents survive when they receive a combination of other medications, including atropine, oximes and benzodiazepines. However, even with this drug cocktail, animals surviving the initial nerve agent exposure can develop neurological effects.
The reason Dr. Albuquerque and his colleagues studied the effects of galantamine in an animal model was to counteract the neurological devastation caused by nerve agents and organophosphorus pesticides. According to Dr. Albuquerque, "We wanted to test a drug with neuroprotective properties that is widely available and safe and could be as effective taken before as it would be taken after an exposure." Dr. Albuquerque continued, "galantamine fit that description."
According to the study, those animals treated with galantamine and later exposed to lethal doses of soman or sarin survived and showed no signs of the most common symptoms of exposure to nerve agents, such as convulsions, respiratory distress and loss of coordinated movement. Comparatively, those animals treated with the standard therapy of atropine and benzodiazepines all died after being exposed. The researchers repeated the experiments with paraoxon, the active metabolite of the insecticide parathion and again, all of the animals survived with no signs of toxicity.
Due to the difficulty in predicting when a person might be exposed to toxic levels of nerve agents or insecticides, the researchers also studied whether treatment with galantamine following exposure could counteract their toxicity effectively. According to Dr. Albuquerque, "All the animals treated with the antidotal therapy consisting of galantamine and atropine within five minutes after an exposure to lethal doses of soman and paraoxon survived with no side effects."
Dr Albuqurque said, "The basic finding of their study is that galantamine effectively penetrates the blood-brain barrier and protects the brain from the toxic effects of organophosphorus compounds, as long as it is administered before or soon after an exposure. " The researchers feel that this simple and safe antidotal therapy could be added to the arsenal of medications carried by all military members and first responders, who could easily administer it to themselves should they suspect that they've been exposed to a nerve agent. The researchers also feel that their findings show that this therapy could be used worldwide to save the lives of people who come in contact with toxic levels of organophosphorus insecticides.
Other researchers such as David H. Moore, D.V.M., Ph.D., director of Strategic Research Program Development at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Chemical Defense say that, "These important findings of Dr. Albuquerque and his colleagues will pave the way for further improvements in the current medical countermeasures against intoxication by organophosphorus nerve agents and insecticides
(Beyond Pesticides, August 7, 2006) August 3, 2006 marked the congressionally mandated deadline for the Environmental Protecion Agency's (EPA's) safety review of thousands of widely used pesticide products, from home lawn weed killers to insecticides used in food production. The Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996 required EPA to review and reregister food use pesticides, and reassess the amount of residues that are allowed on food, the tolerances, specifically with children's unique vulnerability in mind. The review includes 231 organophosphate and carbamate pesticides, known to damage the developing nervous system of fetuses, infants, and children.
On the tenth anniversary of FQPA enactment, EPA completed over 99% or 9,637 of the 9,721 tolerance reassessment decisions resulting in recommendations for the revocation of 3,200 tolerances, the modification of 1,200 tolerances, and the confirmed safety of 5,237 tolerances. The reregistration process has resuled in cancellation of nearly 4,400 individual pesticide end-use product registrations out of a current universe of 17,592.
Simultaneously, EPA announced immediate cancellation of most uses of the highly toxic chemical carbofuran, after a review that has lasted more than two decades. Thanks to public pressure and overwhelming scientific data showing harm, the agency announced yesterday its conclusion that there are considerable risks associated with carbofuran in food and drinking water, risks to pesticide applicators and risks to birds that are exposed in treated fields. The pesticide, which is sold under the name "Furadan" by FMC Corporation, is one of the most toxic pesticides to birds left on the market. It is responsible for the deaths of millions of birds and wildlife since its introduction in 1967. See more on carbofuran decision.
So, is our food supply safer and our children fully protected? A look at the neurobehavioral associations of organophosphates exposures with Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder, ADHD, a growing neurobehavioral disorder among children, suggests not. Trends available during the last 10 years show a major increase in ADHD among children. A 1999 Report of the U.S. Surgeon General on Mental Health Report states between 1.398 million (3%) and 2.330 million (5%) of school-age children had AD/HD. In 2003, Centers for Disease Control (CDC) estimates 4.4 million youth ages 4-17 have been diagnosed with ADHD and 7.8% of school-aged children were reported to have an ADHD diagnosis by their parent.
Scientific studies link exposure to certain common organophosphate pesticides, such as carbaryl – a pesticide found on the shelves of retail stores as well as in agriculture - to adverse cognitive and behavioral effects in mice and other subjects. Research by Dr. Warren Porter, a researcher at University of Wisconsin, has shown that even low levels of pesticide exposure can cause endocrine disruption, which can lead to learning disabilities. Another study published in the March 2003 issue of Nature Genetics demonstrates a clear genetic link between exposure to organophosphate pesticides and neurological disorders such as ADHD and gulf war syndrome. A 2002 peer-reviewed study found children born to parents exposed to glyphosate (Roundup) show a higher incidence of attention deficit disorder and hyperactivity (ADD and ADHD). In 1995/96, glyphosate ranked as the second most used active ingredient in non-agricultural settings, with five to seven million pounds used in the home and garden and nine to twelve million pounds used in commercial settings.
On August 4, the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Office of Inspector General (IG) issued an evaluation report of the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), entitled Measuring the Impact of the Food Quality Protection Act: Challenges and Opportunities, in time for EPA's deadline. The report found that EPA has "made progress" in implementing the requirements of the FQPA, but that OPP has primarily measured its success and the impact of FQPA by adherence to its registration schedule rather than by reductions in risk to children's health. It went on to say that the "measures used by OPP generally indicate actions taken, instead of environmental or human health outcomes achieved." Whether this is because OPP is less focused and interested in keeping track of human health outcomes is unclear, as is the degree to which it has been engaged in achieving such outcomes.
On August 2, the New York Times reported on recent actions of Unions representing 9000 of EPA's own staff scientists, "We are concerned that the agency has not, consistent with its principles of scientific integrity and sound science, adequately summarized or drawn conclusions" about the chemcials. The EPA scientists, also charge that EPA's Administrator is willfully ignoring evidence that "pesticides damage the developing nervous systems of fetuses, infants and children," and are calling on EPA to cancel the registrations of 20 pesticides in the organophosphate and carbamate chemical family. See May 24, 2006 letter by EPA scientists.
"EPA's pesticide program allows corporate chemical company interests to trump science, putting the public and environment in harm's way," said Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides, a national public interest group.
Beyond Pesticides and other environmental and public health organizations identify a series of deficiencies in EPA's review of pesticides, calling into question the safety of commonly used products.
EPA plans to complete reregistration eligibility decisions for the remaining 47 non-food use pesticide reregistration cases by October 3, 2008, as required by the 2004 amendments to FIFRA contained in the Pesticide Registration Improvement Act (PRIA).
(Beyond Pesticides, August 4, 2006)
The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Office of Inspector General (IG) has issued an evaluation report of the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), entitled Measuring the Impact of the Food Quality Protection Act: Challenges and Opportunities, in time for EPA's August 3, 2006 final tolerance approval deadline for 231 food use pesticides. The study, which comes on the heels of a May 24, 2006 letter by EPA scientists alleging the agency is too heavily influenced by politics and uses bad science in its policy making decisions, can be viewed as a response to those claims, though it does not directly address them, and an attempt to validate OPP's regulatory evaluation methods.
The study was initiated to determine OPP's ability to measure its performance in meeting the mandates of the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA); to determine the strengths and weaknesses of OPP's current measuring system; to determine how OPP can "use existing data to measure"; and what impact FQPA had on mitigating dietary pesticide exposure risk on children's health.
Beyond Pesticides criticizes the report conclusions for assuming that the risk assessments used by EPA are flawless, at the same time that the agency does not fully consider the availability of least toxic approaches to pest management. The report identifies the dilemma faced by OPP, a program with a self-described mission to serve as a "gateway" for harmful pesticides to enter the market, while being ill-equipped to track pesticide poisoning and contamination incidents that may occur as a result of pesticide use.
Buried in the IG's report is a finding that OPP, in order to measure its performance on regulatory outcomes, can rely on "existing data" that do not include poisoning incident reports. In fact, none of the data cited in the report track acute pesticide incident reports. Pesticide incident report data cannot be used because EPA discontinued its pesticide incident monitoring system (PIMS) in 1981, leaving no federal system in place to track pesticide poisoning incidents. Adding to the question of the reliability of data used for regulatory and policy making decisions that do not assess incident reports, is the fact that risk assessment, which does not account for biological variations in the human population with respect to determining harmful levels of exposure, is heavily relied upon and is seen as a fool proof and bullet proof evaluation method. The report fails to recognize the deficiencies in risk assessment that have been found and documented in numerous studies and reports. The report apparently accepts risk assessment as a hundred percent credible without addressing underlying problems of uncertainty, data gaps, and political influence that are associated with it. EPA's commitment to its overall goals of protecting human health and the environment from pesticide risk is called into question by the failure to recognize these deficiencies.
Risk assessment calculations under the federal pesticide registration and tolerance laws evaluate harm based on false realities about daily toxic exposure and individual sensitivities. Risk management decisions under these laws assume the benefits of toxic pesticide products to society or to various sectors of users, then make a determination that the risks are "reasonable." Even under FQPA, which has been touted for its health-based standard, there is an inherent assumption that if a pesticide meets a highly questionable "acceptable" risk threshold, it has value or benefit. This is the practice even though there are typically less or non-toxic methods or products available. Absent altogether is any analysis of whether the so-called "pest" (insect or plant) has been accurately defined. EPA does not regularly consider non-chemical alternatives (such as organic agricultural methods), nor does it evaluate the need for or the benefit provided to society (do we need to use toxic chemicals to kill clover in our yards?).
The report also indicated that OPP successfully accomplished the reduction of detections on a core set of 19 foods eaten by children relative to detection levels for those foods reported in 1994-1996, as well as an apparent increase in the percentage of acre treatments with "reduced risk" pesticides.
However, such conclusions do not necessarily reflect increased vigilance on OPP's part. For example, the IG found that "risks associated with 16 foods commonly eaten by children declined by almost 50 percent," but does not discuss which pesticides were responsible for the reduction. The reduction could have come as the result of reduced usage of just one pesticide, rather than several, or as a result of changes in practices that are less reliant or not dependent on toxic chemicals. But there is no way to determine this, nor precisely what was responsible for the reduction. As a further example, the report discusses methyl parathion, which has had some of its uses cancelled. These cancelled uses represented a 90% reduction in the dietary risk to children, dramatically reducing the estimated dietary risk and thus making the risk "acceptable for children and all others in the U.S. population." And in a discussion of how EPA regulatory actions decrease dietary pesticide exposure risks, the report indicated that just two pesticides, parathions and chorpyrifos, were responsible for a 98% reduction in dietary pesticide exposure risks.
The report found that EPA has "made progress" in implementing the requirements of the FQPA, but that OPP has primarily measured its success and the impact of FQPA by adherence to its registration schedule rather than by reductions in risk to children's health. It went on to say that the "measures used by OPP generally indicate actions taken, instead of environmental or human health outcomes achieved." Whether this is because OPP is less focused and interested in keeping track of human health outcomes is unclear, as is the degree to which it has been engaged in achieving such outcomes.
What is clear is OPP's commitment to facilitate, and certainly not discourage, pesticide usage and its seeming lack of a desire to consider least toxic alternatives. According to the report, "OPP's mission is not one of zero risk or zero exposure&ellipsis;OPP must balance its dual mission of providing a gateway to the marketplace for pesticide products with the protection of the public from harmful pesticide exposures." The degree to which OPP focuses on the former to the detriment of the latter is the substantive question the report really ought to have considered.
August 2, 2006
New York Times
By MICHAEL JANOFSKY
WASHINGTON, Aug. 1 - Unions representing thousands of staff scientists at
the Environmental Protection Agency say the agency is bending to
political pressure and ignoring sound science in allowing a group of
toxic chemicals to be used in agricultural pesticides.
Leaders of several federal employee unions say the chemicals pose serious
risks for fetuses, pregnant women, young children and the elderly through
food and exposure and should not be approved by Thursday, the
Congressional deadline for completing an agency review of thousands of
substances in pesticides.
"We are concerned that the agency has not, consistent with its
principles of scientific integrity and sound science, adequately
summarized or drawn conclusions" about the chemicals, union leaders
told the agency administrator, Stephen L. Johnson, in a newly disclosed
letter sent May 25.
The leaders also wrote that they believed that under priorities of EPA
management, "the concerns of agriculture and the pesticide industry
come before our responsibility to protect the health of our nation's
citizens."
Nine union leaders representing 9,000 agency scientists and other
personnel around the country signed the letter. It was given to The New
York Times on Tuesday by environmental advocacy organizations working on
their behalf in the hope that it would arouse public outcry and increase
pressure on the agency to withdraw the chemicals from use.
The chemicals at issue are organophosphates and carbamates, long a matter
of controversy over their environmental and health risks. They are in
such pesticides as chlorpyrifos, methyl parathion and diazinon.
The advocacy organizations that released the letter, Public Employees for
Environmental Responsibility and the Pesticide Action Network, also
provided the agency's response, on June 27, from Susan B. Hazen, acting
assistant administrator. Ms. Hazen assured the scientists that her agency
was applying proper scientific review for the use of all chemicals in
pesticides.
Ms. Hazen did not deny the accusation that industry positions were taken
into account. She welcomed information "from all interested
parties," she said.
In an interview on Tuesday, Jim Jones, director of the EPA's pesticide
office, described the scientists' accusations as inaccurate, saying the
agency examines the effects of various chemicals and adjusts
recommendations for public use according to what the science
dictates.
Risk assessments of the pesticides cited in the unions' letter, Mr. Jones
said, have been "aggressively regulated" through steady reviews
of their use over the last six years.
The complaints from agency employees are the latest to come from within
federal agencies that accuse the Bush administration of allowing politics
or industry pressure to trump science on issues like climate change and
stem cell research.
In this case, they also echo concerns raised by the EPA inspector general
in January in a report that suggested the agency had not done enough to
protect children from exposure to pesticides, which can affect the
development of the brain and the nervous system. That investigation was
prompted, in part, by published reports of a Florida program in which
parents would be paid for letting their children participate in an effort
measuring the effects of pesticides in the home. The program was quickly
shut down.
The inspector general's report fueled a growing desire among union
leaders to take a more active role in shedding light on what they say is
a flawed system.
"More and more, the unions are coming together to confront the
agency's unwillingness to make the appropriate use of science to show
risks to public health and the environment," said William Hirzy, a
senior scientist at the environmental agency and a union
official.
Despite the agency's insistence that pesticide regulations follow
scientific guidelines, several agency scientists said industry determined
how chemicals were regulated.
"It's how the game is played," said an EPA specialist involved
in the pesticide program who spoke on the condition of anonymity because,
he said, critics within the agency often lose choice
assignments.
"You go to a meeting, and word comes down that this is an important
chemical, this is one we've got to save," he said. "It's all
informal, of course. But it suggests that industry interests are
governing the decisions of EPA management. The pesticide program
functions as a governmental cover for what is effectively a private
industry licensing program."
Another senior EPA scientist who also spoke on condition of anonymity
said the agency often ignored independent scientific studies that
contradicted the industry-subsidized study that supported many
regulations on pesticides.
She cited a North Carolina researcher who found that chlorpyrifos might
have a more damaging effect on developing brains than other studies.
"What we heard back from headquarters was, 'No, he's wrong,' "
the scientist said.
"Chemicals like these can be harmful to children in ways we don't
understand yet,'' the scientist said. "If there is disagreement,
doesn't that cry out for further research?"
Mr. Jones said the agency had addressed chlorpyrifos in complying with a
10-year Congressional mandate to review 9,741 pesticide ingredients by
Thursday.
Work has been completed on 9,637 of them, or 99 percent, he said, and
"all are protective of children."
Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company
(Beyond Pesticides, July 25, 2006) A new study finds that trace quantities of agricultural chemicals find their way into rural homes—not only on the fruits and vegetables that consumers buy, but also through dust that enters houses. The study, "Proximity to Crops and Residential Exposure to Agricultural Herbicides in Iowa," which was published in the June 2006 issue of the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, shows that home exposure to agricultural herbicides increases as the amount of nearby cropland increases.
The findings are disturbing considering the documented links between pesticides and health effects, including non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. This study was done as an offshoot of a larger non-Hodgkin's lymphoma study financed by the National Cancer Institute, reports Science News Online.
In the new study, Mary H. Ward, PhD, of the National Cancer Institute, and her colleagues collected dust vacuumed from the homes of 112 Iowa lymphoma patients and healthy, randomly selected volunteers of the same age. Using satellite-generated maps of agricultural fields in the state, the team calculated the acreage of croplands near the home of each participant. Both farm and in-town homes were included in the study. Because most of Iowa's cropland had been historically planted with corn and soybeans, Dr. Ward's team probed homes for specific chemicals known to be used on the local fields.
Analyses show that at least one of six primarily agricultural herbicides is present in house dust from 28 percent of sampled homes. These chemicals include acetochlor, alachlor, atrazine, bentazon, fluazifop-p-butyl, and metolachlor. Atrazine and metolachlor are the agents most commonly used to treat corn and soybeans. The next most-popular herbicides used on the crops are trifluralin and dicamba. At least one of these four herbicides show up in 43 percent of homes.
Although atrazine had been applied to nearly 70 percent of corn acreage, it showed up in the house dust of only 8 percent of homes. Where detected, however, its concentration in dust ranged from 60 to 4,700 parts per billion (ppb). Metolachlor was found in about 20 percent of homes; its concentration ranged from 27 to almost 3,200 ppb.
Most shocking is the amount of dust containing 2,4-D, which was found to be present in 95 percent of homes, typically in concentrations exceeding 1,000 ppb. In one house, 2,4-D's values reached an astounding 125,000 ppb. Used on crops, along roadsides, in forests, and on lawns, 2,4-D is the third most widely used herbicide in the United States and Canada. According to Illinois EPA, 2,4-D is a probable endocrine disruptor and a number of studies link 2,4-D to non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.
The study also finds that farm workers' homes are generally the most contaminated with weed killers. Some herbicide concentrations in their dwellings more than tripled those present in the homes of people who have never worked in agriculture.
Nearly 60 percent of the study's participants live within 550 yards of cropland. The chance of finding agricultural weed killers in house dust increases by six percent for every 10 acres of cropland found within a roughly 800-yard perimeter of the house. The result was that herbicide-laced dust showed up in three-quarters of homes having at least 300 acres of cropland within that 800-yard perimeter.
Of nearly 120 studies that have investigated the risk of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma associated with pesticide contact, most show an increased risk for the disease—especially for herbicides—according to the Lymphoma Foundation of America. Printed information from the foundation states that the pesticides "more frequently associated with increased lymphoma incidence and/or deaths" are the herbicides 2,4-D and the triazines, which includes atrazine.
Cancer, however, is far from the only health or environmental risk associated with agricultural pesticides. For instance, some herbicides used on corn have been shown to disrupt normal reproductive development in frogs, in studies so far (see Daily News). Some biologists now suspect that such changes may explain declining amphibian populations.
Agricultural pesticides may also affect human fertility. Four years ago, epidemiologist Shanna H. Swan, PhD, of the University of Missouri and her colleagues studied sperm in men from big cities and small towns. In the study, sperm concentrations and quality in men from semi-rural Missouri communities are below those of men from Minneapolis, Los Angeles, and New York City (See Daily News). This suggests, Dr. Swan told Science News Online that "environmental exposure to current-use pesticides is associated with poorer semen quality."
In an extension of that study, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta will soon measure agricultural pesticides in the urine of men who had participated in the original study, notes Dr. Swan, now at the University of Rochester
July 13, 2006 — By Associated Press
BRUSSELS, Belgium — The European Commission proposed stricter rules Wednesday to regulate the use of pesticides including mandatory record-keeping of their use by farmers and a ban on aerial spraying.
EU Health and Consumer Protection Commissioner Markos Kyprianou said tougher rules were needed to improve protection of the environment and human health.
"It will ensure an even higher level of protection ... while also offering more choice to farmers and boosting competitiveness for the industry in this field," Kyprianou said.
The plan, which needs approval by European Union governments, also seeks to tighten and simplify the rules for authorizing new pesticides that come on to the EU market. It also aims to force pesticide makers to reduce animal testing of their products.
The EU head office said new rules were needed to prevent the overuse of pesticides and spur research into alternative methods. It said continued pesticide use damages water, air and soil and could cause long-term health problems for humans, animals and plants.
"Long-term exposure to pesticides can lead to serious disturbances to the immune system, sexual disorders, cancers, sterility, birth defects, damage to the nervous system and genetic damage," the Commission said in a statement.
The Commission said some 300,000 tons of pesticide substances were sold in Europe in 2003 with no sign of a decrease in use over the past decade.
"Five percent of food and feed samples still contain unwanted residues of pesticides in quantities which exceed the maximum regulatory limits," the Commission said, adding that the contamination of rivers and streams was an acute problem in Europe.
The use of crop-dusters to spray pesticides will be banned "except for strictly defined cases," to ensure residues do not end up in nearby streams or wildlife areas where they could do harm.
The plan also calls for the banning of pesticides in specific sensitive areas near nature reserves or parks.
Source: Associated Press
June 26, 2006
People who have been exposed to pesticides are 70 percent more likely to develop Parkinson's disease than those who haven't, according to a new study. The results suggest that any pesticide exposure, whether occupationally related or not, will increase a person's risk of the disease. This means that using pesticides in the home or garden may have similarly harmful effects as working with the chemicals on a farm or as a pest controller.
The research, published in the July issue of Annals of Neurology, provides the strongest evidence to date of the link between pesticide exposure and Parkinson's. The study included over 143,000 men and women who completed extensive lifestyle questionnaires beginning in 1982, and follow-up surveys through 2001. All subjects were symptom-free at the beginning of the project, when they were asked about their occupation and exposure to potentially hazardous materials. Since then, 413 of them have developed confirmed cases of Parkinson's, with a greater incidence of the disease in those who spent time around pesticides. "Low- dose pesticide exposure was associated with a significant increase in risk for Parkinson's disease," says lead author Alberto Ascherio of the Harvard School for Public Health. "I think this is one reason to be careful about using pesticides in general."
Although the causes of Parkinson's are not well understood, it has long been suspected that environmental factors play a large role. Animal studies have shown that chemical compounds commonly used as pesticides can cause a degeneration of dopamine-producing neurons. In Parkinson's, a shortage of dopamine causes the disease's characteristic motor abnormalities, including muscle tremors and muscle rigidity. Previous small-scale human studies had suggested a link between pesticides and Parkinson's, but this new study is the first to establish a clear correlation in a large patient population.
The researchers also looked for links between Parkinson's and other environmental contaminants, including asbestos, coal dust, exhaust, formaldehyde and radioactive material. They found no correlation between the disease and any of the materials besides pesticides, however. Because of the design of the questionnaires, the study was not able to determine how the frequency, duration, or intensity of pesticide exposure affected the incidence of Parkinson's. The next step, according to Ascherio, is to figure out which class of chemicals is actually causing the disease, so that people can reduce their exposure.