Children in rural communities get a “double-dose” of the pesticide chlorpyrifos from food and drift from neighboring fields

Washington, DC — As children settle into the new school year, health professionals are demanding that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ban the neurotoxic chemical chlorpyrifos, a pesticide used on farms throughout the country and the same chemical that the agency banned some ten years ago for use in homes.

In a letter to be submitted to EPA tomorrow, over two dozen health professionals cite new science showing the health impacts of chlorpyrifos, including lowering IQs and increasing the risk of ADHD and learning disabilities among children.

“EPA should follow the science and take this brain toxin completely off the market” said Dr. David Carpenter, MD, Director Institute for Health & The Environment, University at Albany. “Chlorpyrifos poses serious threats to children’s health and doesn’t belong in our homes, on our farms, or on our cafeteria trays.”

The recent studies show that exposure to chlorpyrifos in the womb and in early childhood, during critical development “windows,” can lead to lasting effects on the brain. Researchers now say that as many as 25% of all U.S. children may have IQs several points lower due to eating foods treated with chlorpyrifos and similar pesticides.

“Fruits and vegetables are essential for healthy children but shouldn’t be grown with chlorpyrifos,”said Ted Schettler, MD, MPH, Science Director of the Science and Environmental Health Network, and one of the letter’s signatories. “Children in rural communities face a double dose of this brain poison. They are exposed to chlorpyrifos drifting from neighboring fields, and again when the pesticide is on their food.”

Chlorpyrifos was banned for use in homes over ten years ago because of it’s potential harm to children. But ten million pounds of chlorpyrifos are still used on agricultural fields each year. Air monitoring, biomonitoringand poisoning data confirm that extensive human exposure to chlorpyrifos is linked to its continued use in agriculture. According to data from the Centers for Disease Control,the vast majority of us — including children — carry breakdown products of the chemical in our bodies.

Children living in farm communities are at especially high risk. In addition to exposure from food they may also be breathing in particles that drift into their classrooms and homes from nearby farms. Farmworker children are exposed even more, as parents sometimes carry residues of the pesticide home at the end of the day on clothing and shoes.

“Chlorpyrifos drift poses serious threats to communities like mine,” said Luis Medellin, of the community organization El Quinto Sol de America. Luis grew up in homes next to farms using chlorpyrifos in California’s San Joaquin Valley. “The realities on the ground show that this brain toxin can’t be used safely and should not be used in the fields.”

At age 17, Luis began using Pesticide Action Network’s Drift Catcher to document chemical drift from neighboring citrus fields, finding that a majority of samples contained chlorpyrifos. Residents also sampled chlorpyrifos in their urine, and all but one had levels above what EPA considers “acceptable.”

In their letter to EPA (pdf), health professionals are demanding that EPA ban all uses of chlorpyrifos. In their letter they state:

We urge EPA to act now on the weight of scientific evidence of health harms of chlorpyrifos for children and fetuses. It is time that EPA take action to protect the public health and provide a healthy legacy for our children and for future generations. We call on EPA to cancel all uses of pesticide chlorpyrifos.

Other letters with a similar demand were delivered to EPA from environmental health groups nationwide, including a petition signed by more than 6,000 concerned citizens across the country.

Author:

PAN, Toxic Brain Chemical Must Be Banned: Health Professionals Demand EPA Take Action, October 5, 2011

Related articles:

• Chemical Threat: Groups call for Pesticide Ban
• Prenatal exposure to Pesticides linked to ADHD
• Anxiety in adult female mice following perinatal exposure to Chlorpyrifos
• Children susceptible to pesticides longer than expected, Berkeley study finds

Consumers, Parents, Health Advocates, Farm Workers and Others Target Widely Used Pesticides Linked to Attention and Learning Problems

(Yakima, WA) 13,000 individuals and organizations from across the U.S. sent a letter to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today calling for a ban on the pesticide chlorpyrifos and a phase out of other organophosphate (OP) pesticides.

Dr. Theo Colborn’s organization TEDX (The Endocrine Disruption Exchange) concurrently announced the addition of chlorpyrifos to their publicly-accessible on-line database, Critical Windows of Development, spotlighting animal research that links prenatal, low dose chlorpyrifos exposure to altered health outcomes in the brain and other organs.

“Human studies have now linked prenatal exposure to chlorpyrifos with mental and developmental delays emphasizing even more the urgency to remove the product from the market,” said Colborn, President of TEDX and a signatory on the letter. “Chlorpyrifos illustrates the urgent need to be cautious, prevent further exposure and protect our children from the time they are conceived onward,” she said.

Dr. David Carpenter, M.D. and Director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University of Albany said, “It is unacceptable that farm worker children, and children in the general population continue to be exposed to these neurotoxins.”

“As more families cope with the suffering and costs of learning and developmental disabilities and attention problems, EPA must prevent further exposures to neurotoxic pesticides,” said Maureen Swanson of the Learning Disabilities Association of America. “EPA needs to protect people, especially children and pregnant women, from any chemical that threatens brain development. In addition to banning neurotoxic pesticides, we must reform the Toxic Substance Control Act to require EPA to address the many neurotoxic chemicals in our everyday products,” she said.

“The last time EPA reviewed these pesticides, its own scientists complained that the Agency was not assuring adequate protection of the nation’s children, and that it was unduly influenced by those it regulates,” said Dr. William Hirzy, a professor at American University in Washington D.C. and a former EPA chemist. While at EPA, Hirzy was involved in a letter raising these concerns sent to management by six unions representing 9000 EPA scientists and other staff, as the Agency was finalizing its Cumulative Risk Assessment for organophosphates in 2006. “Five years later, with even more sobering studies in hand, will EPA finally act to protect children?” Hirzy asked.

“The warning signs have been obvious for decades, yet EPA has allowed generation after generation to suffer exposures and consequences,” said Carol Dansereau, Executive Director of the Farm Worker Pesticide Project, a Washington State farm worker organization that initiated the letter to EPA. “EPA is promising to better protect children and other vulnerable people, but that promise is meaningless as long as it keeps reregistering chlorpyrifos and other organophosphates, ” she said. FWPP and others are asking the public to contact EPA and join in demanding a ban, and precaution-based policies.

“Unfortunately chlorpyrifos and other organophosphates do not stay where sprayed. They evaporate and move with wind and fog. That’s how they contaminated our fields,” said Larry Jacobs of Jacobs Farm/Del Cabo, an organic grower in California. “There are better ways to manage insect pests than depending on organophosphates like chlorpyrifos. We signed onto the letter to EPA to protect our health and to protect our farm.”

EPA is in the process of considering re-registration for chlorpyrifos, one of the most widely used pesticides in agriculture in the US and worldwide.

More Information:

Fact Sheets: On Health Effects, Industry Influence on EPA, Regulatory Status, Use/Exposures/Alternatives, the Letter and Signers

Literature:

United Farm Workers, Chemical Threat: Groups Call for Pesticide Ban – Consumers, Parents, Health Advocates, Farm Workers and Others Target Widely Used Pesticides Linked to Attention and Learning Problems, 10/13/2010

Related articles:

• Prenatal Exposure to Pesticides linked to ADHD
• Groups Seeking Ban on Organophosphate Pesticide Go to Federal Court
• President’s Cancer Panel: Organic Foods reduce Environmental Risks
• Earthday – Ontarion Lawns and Gardens getting Greener and Pesticide free

First Perfume and Fragrance- free Asthma Conference

The American Environmental Protection Agency is holding a large asthma conference from June 17-19, 2010, in Washington D.C.. For the first time ever, the EPA has a special conference feature which is to renounce fragrances and perfume. Thus, the EPA is sending a signal to indicate the fragrance issue and to provide participants with asthma, the possibility to participate at the 2010 National Asthma Forum. Fragrances are among the principle factors for asthma attacks.

Nearly 300 experts and leaders, whose work is to improve the living conditions of people with asthma, are taking part in this event. Primary decision makers of federal and state authorities, as well as those responsible for guidelines, managers of health authorities, scientists, physicians and leaders of self-help organizations are included in this group. Their goal is to design environments to assist in safe living for all asthmatics.

In order to allow all participants to take part in the conference, meaning a conference free of perfume, aftershave, hairspray, body lotion, fabric softener or scented deodorants, the federal agency sent out the following reminder online:

“Asthma-friendly environments are our business – Please help us to make this a fragrance-free event by using fragrance-free personal care products and avoid perfumes and other irritants.”

This is a very positive step by the EPA. They have removed the largest known barrier for asthmatics and chemically injured people this year for the 2010 National Asthma Forum. World leaders on every continent should incorporate this humanitarian example by the EPA , for those disabled with illnesses affecting the breathing and lung function throughout the world.

Author: Silvia K. Müller, CSN – Chemical Sensitivity Network, 17 June 2010

Translation: Thank’s to Christi Howarth

Related Articles:

• Secret Chemicals revealed in Celebrity Perfumes, Teen Body Spray
• Open Letter: Perfumed Stamps constrain people with disability
• Professor urges us to take people with Chemical Sensibility into Account

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today released a user-friendly document to help risk assessors understand how children are exposed to pollution. The document, titled “Highlights of the Child-Specific Exposure Factors Handbook” serves as a quick-reference guide to the more comprehensive “Child-Specific Exposure Factors Handbook” published by EPA in 2008. It will serve as an additional resource for those who work on children’s health issues, which the agency has been highlighting during Children’s Health Month.

EPA developed the reference guide to provide important information necessary for answering questions about exposure through drinking water, breathing, and eating foods, such as:

• How much exposure to environmental pollutants might children get if they live or play near contaminated sites?
• How much dirt from a child’s hands might s/he inadvertently eat?
• How much of a child’s exposure to various pollutants might come from skin contact?
• Which age groups (childhood life stages) may inhale or ingest the most and thus may be at higher risks?

More information on the documents:

• http://www.epa.gov/childexpfactors/highlights
• http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=200445

Reference: EPA Releases Guide to Help Scientists Understand Children’s Exposure to Pollutants, Release date: 10/27/2009

SAN FRANCISCO – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has filed suit against San Leandro based VF Corporation for the alleged sale and distribution of unregistered pesticides through their retail company, The North Face.

The EPA maintains that The North Face made unsubstantiated public health claims regarding unregistered products, and their ability to control germs and pathogens — a violation of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. Products discovered online and evidence found at The North Face retail store in San Francisco led the Agency to issue a complaint against the VF Corporation.

“The EPA takes very seriously its responsibility to enforce against companies that sell products with unsubstantiated antimicrobial properties,” said Katherine Taylor, associate director of the Communities and Ecosystems Division in EPA’s Pacific Southwest region. “Unverified public health claims can lead people to believe they are protected from disease-causing organisms when, in fact, they may not be.”

At issue were more than 70 styles of footwear that incorporated an AgION silver treated footbed. The company sold the products making unsubstantiated claims that the footwear would prevent disease-causing bacteria. Specifically, The North Face made the following public health claims about the footwear on-line and on product packaging:

• “AgION antimicrobial silver agent inhibits the growth of disease-causing bacteria”
• “Prevents bacterial and fungal growth”
• Continuous release of antimicrobial agents

After being contacted by EPA, The North Face stopped making claims that their footwear protects against germs, removed claims from their website, and revised their product packaging.

Products that kill or repel bacteria or germs are considered pesticides, and must be registered with the EPA prior to distribution or sale. The Agency will not register a pesticide until it has been tested to show that it will not pose an unreasonable risk when used according to the directions. Consumers should be careful to look for the EPA registration number printed on product labels, and to follow the directions for proper use.

Reference: EPA, “The North Face” Clothing Parent Company Facing Nearly $1M in Federal Fines Following Unsubstantiated Product Claims, 09/22/2009