Child Protection?

EPA workers blast agency's rulings

Friday, May 26, 2006
ALEX PULASKI
The Oregonian

By pandering to farmers and chemical manufacturers, the Environmental Protection Agency risks gutting a 10-year-old law designed to safeguard children from dangerous pesticides, workers within the agency charge.

In a letter sent this week to agency Administrator Stephen L. Johnson, nine representatives of unions representing about 9,000 EPA scientists, risk managers and other workers said the agency "has lost sight of its regulatory responsibilities in trying to reach consensus with those that it regulates, and the result is that the integrity of the science upon which Agency decisions are based has been compromised."

Since 1996, the Food Quality Protection Act has been under attack from both sides -- pesticide makers and farmers asserting that the law is being applied too stringently, and environmentalists and consumer advocates charging that it is being undermined. The law was intended to protect children from hazardous effects of pesticides in foods and in the environment.

The letter sent Wednesday represents the second time in recent months that workers within the agency have openly questioned whether their chief is putting children at risk by bowing to industry pressures.

"Our colleagues in the Pesticide Program feel besieged by political pressure exerted by Agency officials perceived to be too closely aligned with the pesticide industry and former EPA officials now representing the pesticide and agricultural community . . ." the letter states.

"Equally alarming is the belief among managers in the Pesticide and Toxics Programs that regulatory decisions should only be made after reaching full consensus with the regulated pesticide and chemicals industry."

In response, the agency issued a one-paragraph written statement from spokeswoman Jennifer Wood.

"EPA has been reviewing all pesticides in question and applying new, stricter standards as required under the Food Quality Protection Act, with a specific focus on their effects on children's health," she said. "EPA remains committed to its mission of protecting human health and the environment."

In a letter sent to Johnson in December, the American Federation of Government Employees, a union with members who work for the EPA, said the agency's proposed rules on accepting data from trials exposing humans to pesticides -- instead of typical animal studies -- had so many loopholes that they invite unethical behavior such as intentionally dosing children and pregnant women.

The Gilded Age never had it so good. The best part is that you don't have to prove the science wrong, just confuse the issue enough that all of those graduates that didn't develop thinking skills will just hold their heads and give up trying to follow along and say, "Whatever".

Any bets on when the pesticide industry will try to reform DDT?