World’s Largest Producer of Toxic Pesticide Chlorpyrifos Ends Its Production
07 February
Health + Wellness
Children's health is most at risk from exposure to chlorpyrifos. Cavan Images / Cavan / Getty Images
Corteva, formerly part of the chemical manufacturing giant Dow Chemical, announced today that it would stop making chlorpyrifos — a toxic, brain-harming pesticide commonly sprayed on various U.S. food crops, including apples, oranges, and berries — by the end of the year.
<p>The <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-corteva-agriculture-pesticide/corteva-to-stop-making-pesticide-linked-to-kids-health-problems-idUSKBN20023I" target="_blank">decision by the chemical's biggest producer</a>, which cited declining sales, marks a watershed moment in the drawn-out fight by environmental, labor, and <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/public-health" rel="noopener noreferrer">public health</a> groups to ban <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/chlorpyrifos" rel="noopener noreferrer">chlorpyrifos</a> and protect children, whose health is most at risk from exposure. The move by Corteva will likely reduce the more than <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/media/2019/190508-1" target="_blank">five million pounds</a> of chlorpyrifos that are sprayed on U.S. food crops each year. "After years of pressure and increasing public concern, the end of chlorpyrifos is finally in sight," <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/experts/jennifer-sass" target="_blank">Jennifer Sass</a>, senior scientist at NRDC, says.</p>
<p>Adapted from World War II nerve gases, the chemical sticks around on our food and makes its way into our drinking water and air, exposing farmworkers and those living in agricultural areas.</p><p>While Corteva continues to claim the pesticide is safe, the science has long disagreed: In 2016, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/experts/miriam-rotkin-ellman/epa-toxic-pesticide-fruitsveggies-puts-kids-risk" target="_blank">itself concluded</a> that the chemical contaminates the national food supply at unsafe levels. Exposure brings along with it serious risks to the developing brains and nervous systems of children and fetuses, such as learning disabilities, ADHD-like symptoms, and reductions in IQ.</p>
<p>"The science, policy, and public pushback all aligned around this chemical being too dangerous for use on our food and in our fields, making today's announcement an eventual forgone conclusion," Sass says.</p><p>The fight against chlorpyrifos isn't over. A federal ban — proposed by President Obama but reversed by the Trump administration soon after taking office — has <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/experts/nrdc/epa-still-doesnt-want-ban-pesticide-harms-kids" target="_blank">yet to be put in place</a>, a decision that a coalition of labor and health groups, including NRDC, <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/experts/nrdc/nrdc-takes-epa-court-again-protect-childrens-health" target="_blank">continue to fight in court</a>. Chlorpyrifos also remains available and in use in other parts of the world.</p>
<p>"We will be watching the manufacturer's statements to ensure that the sunset of chlorpyrifos is as quick and as complete as possible," Sass says. "Ridding the American marketplace of this pesticide is a huge step, but it cannot be allowed to continue to threaten the health of kids in other global markets."</p>
From Your Site Articles
- California, Nation's Top User of Chlorpyrifos, Announces Ban on ... ›
- 'Finally!': Court Orders EPA to Stop Stalling Potential Ban on ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Sometimes gratitude feels like a stretch. Foxys_forest_manufacture / iStock / Getty Images Plus
By Karen Perry Stillerman
Sometimes gratitude feels like a stretch, and this fall has been one of those times. We're in the home stretch of a difficult year. Bad news abounds, and even the holiday that many of us will celebrate this week is complicated — a day of thanks that also evokes loss and grief for many Native people, along with expressions of resilience. With Thanksgiving approaching, I went looking for hopeful stories, scanning the news of food and agriculture for signs of progress and promise.
<p>And though I'm sure I've only scratched the surface, I actually found quite a lot. Here's a roundup of good news food and <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/farming">farming</a> stories.</p><p>And happy Thanksgiving.</p>
<h2>1. The story of the first Thanksgiving feast is being retold — more truthfully. </h2><p>The Thanksgiving story most of us were taught as children was … well, <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/11/25/the-invention-of-thanksgiving" target="_blank">it was a lie</a>. It papered over a genocide that included the systematic <a href="https://blog.ucsusa.org/ricardo-salvador/on-indigenous-peoples-day-a-look-at-the-movement-to-revive-native-foodways-and-how-western-science-might-support-for-a-change" target="_blank">destruction of indigenous food systems</a> that had kept Native American peoples nourished for centuries (and which are <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2014/feb/03/indigenous-diets-fight-modern-illnesses" target="_blank">healthier and more sustainable</a> than modern diets). But <a href="https://time.com/5725168/thanksgiving-history-lesson/" target="_blank">a story in Time this week</a> explores how and why teachers across the country are (at last) updating the Thanksgiving curriculum from false feel-good stories and cultural appropriation to helping students grapple with a difficult history. In an <a href="https://www.npr.org/2019/11/24/782403538/teaching-thanksgiving" target="_blank">NPR feature</a> this past weekend, teachers shared their stories, including this one from a kindergarten teacher in Colorado: "I spend the whole month of November talking about the different Native American groups. I make it a point to tell them and show them books and videos that are current and have Native American representation so they don't think they were just in history. And then the week before Thanksgiving, we talk about how the colonists came over. And I call them colonists instead of pilgrims." We have a lot more work to do, but that's a start.</p>
<h2>2. Farmers are agitating — and organizing — for the climate. </h2><p>As 2019's <a href="https://blog.ucsusa.org/marcia-delonge/facing-climate-change-on-us-farms-an-urgent-need-for-science-based-policy" target="_blank">crazy Midwest weather</a> made clear, <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-change">climate change</a> is here and it's <a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/climate-change-and-agriculture" target="_blank">bad news for farmers and our food system</a>. A spate of <a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/Soil4Climate/permalink/2539253286346410/" target="_blank">recent news articles</a> has focused on ways farmers can <a href="https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2019/08/23/soil-health-can-combat-climate-change-from-the-ground-up" target="_blank">build resilience</a> and become <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/can-farmers-sow-their-way-out-of-climate-change/" target="_blank">part of the climate solution</a>. Now, as more and more farmers <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/04/impeachment-is-not-the-issue-voters-in-iowa-care-about" target="_blank">recognize the dangers</a> of more frequent <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/flooding">floods</a> and <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/drought">droughts</a>, they're speaking up, with thousands <a href="https://grist.org/article/why-10000-farmers-have-gotten-behind-the-green-new-deal/" target="_blank">organizing behind the Green New Deal</a> and one fifth-generation Iowa farmer <a href="https://www.today.com/video/inside-the-growing-shift-toward-eco-friendly-and-sustainable-farming-73992773539" target="_blank">educating presidential candidates</a> on the issue as they traipse through the state on the campaign trail.</p>
<h2>3. Some big food companies are also calling for climate action. </h2><p>If you heard that a coalition of huge multinational companies was weighing in on President Trump's decision to initiate the process of pulling the U.S. out of the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/paris-agreement">Paris agreement</a> on climate change, you might not expect them to be taking him to task for it. But that's what Unilever, Mars, Danone and Nestle — major players in the food industry that came together in 2018 as the <a href="https://foodpolicyalliance.org/" target="_blank">Sustainable Food Policy Alliance</a> — did last month. See their <a href="https://foodpolicyalliance.org/news/response-paris-climate-agreement/" target="_blank">press release</a> on the need to stay in the Paris agreement, and also their <a href="https://foodpolicyalliance.org/news/sfpa-climate-policy-principles/" target="_blank">climate policy principles</a>, which include "partnering with farms to reduce emissions and promote regenerative soil health management."</p>
<h2><br>4. States are banning a dangerous pesticide in the face of EPA inaction … and it's about time. </h2><p>I've followed the saga of the brain-damaging insecticide <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/chlorpyrifos">chlorpyrifos</a> since the Trump <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/epa">EPA</a>'s disturbing <a href="https://blog.ucsusa.org/karen-perry-stillerman/disregarding-science-trump-administration-trades-kids-brains-for-dow-profit" target="_blank">about-face on a national ban in 2017</a>. This year, states started taking matters into their own hands to protect children from <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51464370_Chlorpyrifos_residues_levels_in_fruits_and_vegetables_after_field_treatment" target="_blank">chlorpyrifos residues on fruits</a> and other common foods and <a href="http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2018/widely-used-pesticide-one-year-later/" target="_blank">farmworkers from exposure in the field</a>. Following a <a href="https://apnews.com/4af87a8210474f1a97d2dc6e73ba9344/New-Hawaii-law-bans-use-of-widely-used-pesticide" target="_blank">2018 ban in Hawaii</a> and <a href="https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/new-york-approves-ban-on-chlorpyrifos-pesticide" target="_blank">another in New York</a> in early 2019, this fall <a href="https://www.npr.org/2019/10/09/768795666/california-bans-popular-pesticide-linked-to-brain-damage-in-children" target="_blank">California became the third state</a> to act to protect public health.</p>
<h2>5. Soil-protecting, pollution-preventing solutions are gaining ground. </h2><p>Cover crops are a <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-15/u-s-farmers-plant-crops-you-won-t-eat-in-climate-change-fight" target="_blank">powerful tool</a> for building healthy, living <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/soil">soil</a> that is resilient to <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/extreme-weather">extreme weather</a>, thwarts pests and weeds with fewer chemicals, prevents fertilizer runoff into water and stores carbon. As we reported on this blog earlier this year, adoption of cover crops on U.S. farms <a href="https://blog.ucsusa.org/marcia-delonge/key-questions-answered-in-the-usdas-new-census-of-agriculture" target="_blank">grew by 50 percent</a> over five years, from 10 million acres in 2012 to 15 million acres in 2017. Led by Iowa <a href="https://www.agriculture.com/news/crops/ag-census-cover-crop-acres-surge-from-2012-to-2017" target="_blank">(which saw a whopping 156% jump)</a>, every state in the Midwest increased its cover crop plantings, and <a href="https://www.agdaily.com/crops/census-cover-crops-acreage-surged/" target="_blank">seven states saw at least a doubling</a> of acreage in cover crops. Moreover, more farmers may soon get insurance discounts for planting them, if a three-year, $3 million <a href="https://www.thegazette.com/subject/news/government/should-there-be-a-good-farmer-discount-for-cover-crops-iowa-demo-program-could-gather-data-20191121" target="_blank">Iowa demonstration project</a> shows they reduce farmers' risk.</p>
<h2>6. New research shows how farmers can grow crops under solar panels for a win-win. </h2><p>The emerging field of "agrivoltaics" can help farmers boost revenue, generate clean energy and use less water. In a <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0364-5" target="_blank">study published in September</a>, researchers in Arizona showed all those benefits for cherry tomatoes grown in agrivoltaic systems in that hot, dry and sunny state. Dual-use <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/solar">solar</a> systems also seem to <a href="https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/07/190729123751.htm" target="_blank">work with leafy greens</a>, which benefit from the cooling shade of the panels. Now, cranberry growers in Massachusetts are now <a href="https://www.kenoshanews.com/agriculture/consider-solar-cranberry-partnership/article_88b61f3d-c8a7-53f7-bd17-5827c57c9ff9.html" target="_blank">experimenting with the system</a>, which — if it's successful — could make everyone's "<a href="https://www.chicagotribune.com/lifestyles/sns-tns-bc-hdy-canned-cranberry-sauce-20191125-story.html" target="_blank">favorite</a>" holiday condiment more sustainable (no matter <a href="https://www.foodandwine.com/lifestyle/cranberry-sauce-debate-canned-homemade" target="_blank">how you like it prepared</a>).</p>
<h2>7. Obesity rates are falling for young children enrolled in a federal nutrition program. </h2><p>In recent years, public health practitioners have fought an uphill battle to counter <a href="https://stateofchildhoodobesity.org/" target="_blank">rising childhood obesity</a>, which impacts nearly 1 in 5 children and costs an estimated $14 billion in direct medical expenses each year. A <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2019/p1121-decline-childhood-obesity-wic-families.html" target="_blank">new report</a> from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows promising declines in obesity among young children ages two to four whose families are enrolled in the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (commonly known as WIC). These declines, which occurred across 41 states and territories, may be a reflection of program changes back in 2009 that brought WIC food packages into closer alignment with the <a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/2020-dietary-guidelines-americans" target="_blank">Dietary Guidelines for Americans</a>, but it's likely that other concurrent efforts happening at federal, state and local levels helped.</p>
<h2>8. Food can help revitalize communities — both in cities and in rural areas. </h2><p>With a new book, author Mark Winne argues for the power of "good food" to spark community development. In <a href="https://islandpress.org/books/food-town-usa" target="_blank">Food Town USA</a> (see also a <a href="https://www.usnews.com/news/cities/slideshows/author-of-food-town-usa-says-food-may-bring-back-struggling-us-cities?slide=7" target="_blank">book review</a> in slideshow form), Winne points to seven cities and towns across the country — from Sitka, Alaska to Jacksonville, Florida — where local entrepreneurs and activists are reshaping food landscapes for the better, addressing racial inequities, climate challenges and urban decay. And it's not just cities that can benefit from local food system development. A <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/05/us/rural-farm-market.html" target="_blank">recent New York Times story</a> puts a spotlight on rural areas that have lost grocery stores, documenting how residents have launched cooperative markets and other creative solutions to bring back fresh food and a sense of community for their neighbors.</p><p>Now, pass the cranberry sauce …</p>
<p><em>Karen Perry Stillerman is a senior communication strategist and senior analyst in the Food & Environment Program at <a href="https://www.ucsusa.org" target="_blank">UCS</a>.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
New FDA Report on Pesticides in Fruits and Vegetables Adds to Growing Public Health Concerns
28 October 2019
Health + Wellness
Farm workers spray pesticides on newly planted strawberries on a farm along the Pacific Coast. GomezDavid / E+ / Getty Images
By Carey Gillam
Last month the Food & Drug Administration published its latest annual analysis of the levels of pesticide residues that contaminate the fruits and veggies and other foods we Americans routinely put on our dinner plates. The fresh data adds to growing consumer concern and scientific debate over how pesticide residues in food may contribute – or not – to illness, disease and reproductive problems.
<p>Over 55 pages of data, charts and graphs, the FDA's "Pesticide Residue Monitoring Program" report also provides a rather unappetizing example of the degree to which U.S. farmers have come to rely on synthetic insecticides, fungicides and herbicides in growing our <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/food/" target="_self">food</a>.</p><p>We learn, for instance, in reading the latest report, that traces of pesticides were found in 84 percent of domestic samples of fruits, and 53 percent of vegetables, as well as 42 percent of grains and 73 percent of food samples simply listed as "other." The samples were drawn from around the country, including from California, Texas, Kansas, New York and Wisconsin.</p><p>Roughly 94 percent of grapes, grape juice and raisins tested positive for pesticide residues as did 99 percent of strawberries, 88 percent of apples and apple juice, and 33 percent of rice products, according to the FDA data.</p>
<p>Imported fruits and vegetables actually showed a lower prevalence of pesticides, with 52 percent of fruits and 46 percent of vegetables from abroad testing positive for pesticides. Those samples came from more than 40 countries, including Mexico, China, India and Canada.</p><p>We also learn that for the most recently reported sampling, among the hundreds of different pesticides, the FDA found traces of the long-banned insecticide DDT in food samples, as well as <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/chlorpyrifos">chlorpyrifos</a>, 2,4-D and <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/glyphosate">glyphosate</a>. DDT is linked to breast cancer, infertility and miscarriage, while chlorpyrifos – another insecticide – has been scientifically shown to cause neurodevelopmental problems in young children.</p><p>Chlorpyrifos is so dangerous that the European Food Safety Authority has recommended a ban of the chemical in Europe, finding that there is <a href="https://www.foodnavigator.com/Article/2019/08/06/EFSA-backs-ban-on-chlorpyrifos" target="_blank">no safe exposure level.</a> The herbicides <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-un-herbicides-2-4-d/who-unit-finds-24-d-herbicide-possibly-causes-cancer-in-humans-idUSKBN0P22FK20150623" target="_blank">2,4-D</a> and g<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/feb/14/weed-killing-products-increase-cancer-risk-of-cancer" target="_blank">lyphosate</a> are both linked to <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/cancer">cancers</a> and other health problems as well.</p><p>Thailand recently <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/thailand-bans-use-of-paraquat-and-other-toxic-farm-chemicals/2019/10/22/1f41e66c-f4c1-11e9-b2d2-1f37c9d82dbb_story.html" target="_blank">said it was banning</a> glyphosate and chlorpyrifos due to the scientifically established risks of these pesticides.</p>
<p>Despite the prevalence of pesticides found in U.S. foods, the FDA, along with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (<a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/epa" target="_self">EPA</a>) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), assert that pesticide residues in food are really nothing to worry about. Amid heavy lobbying by the agrichemical industry the EPA has actually supported continued use of glyphosate and chlorpyrifos in food production.</p><p>The regulators echo the words of <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/monsanto" target="_self">Monsanto</a> executives and others in the chemical industry by insisting that pesticide residues pose no threat to human health as long as the levels of each type of residue falls under a "tolerance" level set by the EPA.</p><p>In the most recent FDA analysis, only 3.8 percent of domestic foods had residue levels that were considered illegally high, or "violative." For imported foods, 10.4 percent of the foods sampled were violative, according to the FDA.</p><p>What the FDA did not say, and what regulatory agencies routinely avoid saying publicly, is that the tolerance levels for certain pesticides have risen over the years as the companies that sell the pesticides request higher and higher legal limits. The EPA has approved several increases allowed for glyphosate residues in food, for instance. As well, the agency often makes the determination that it need not comply with a legal requirement that states the EPA "shall apply an additional tenfold margin of safety for infants and children" in setting the legal levels for pesticide residues. The EPA has overridden that requirement in the setting of many pesticide tolerances, saying no such extra margin of safety is needed to protect children.</p><p>The bottom line: The higher the EPA sets the "tolerance" allowed as the legal limit, the lower the possibility that regulators will have to report "violative" residues in our food. As a result, the U.S. routinely allows higher levels of pesticide residues in food than other developed nations. For example, the legal limit for the weed killer glyphosate on an apple is 0.2 parts per million (ppm) in the U.S. but only half that level – 0.1 ppm – is allowed on an apple in the European Union. As well, the U.S. allows residues of glyphosate on corn at 5 ppm, while the EU allows only 1 ppm.</p><p>As legal limits rise for pesticide residues in food, many scientists have been increasingly raising alarms about the risks of regular consumption of the residues, and the lack of regulatory consideration of the potential cumulative impacts of consuming an array of bug and weed killers with every meal.</p><p>A team of Harvard scientists <a href="http://www.ask-force.org/web/Organic/Hemler-Organic-Foods-for-Cancer-Preventio-Worth-the-Investment-2018.pdf" target="_blank">are calling for</a> in-depth research about potential links between disease and consumption of pesticide as they estimate that more than 90 percent of people in the U.S. have pesticide residues in their urine and blood due to consumption of pesticide-laced foods. A <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29084307" target="_blank">study</a> connected to Harvard found that dietary pesticide exposure within a "typical" range was associated both with problems women had getting pregnant and delivering live babies.</p><p>Additional studies have found other health problems tied to dietary exposures to pesticides, <a href="https://health.ucsd.edu/news/releases/Pages/2019-05-14-herbicide-linked-to-human-liver-disease.aspx" target="_blank">including to glyphosate</a>. Glyphosate is the most widely used herbicide in the world and is the active ingredient in Monsanto's branded Roundup and other weed killing products.</p>
<h2>Pesticide Industry Push Back</h2><p>But as the concerns mount, agrichemical industry allies are pushing back. This month a group of three researchers with long-standing close ties to the companies that sell agricultural pesticides released a report seeking to soothe consumer worries and discount the scientific research.</p><p>The report, <a href="https://www.cast-science.org/publication/interpreting-pesticide-residues-in-food/" target="_blank">which was issued Oct. 21</a>, stated that "there is no direct scientific or medical evidence indicating that typical exposure of consumers to pesticide residues poses any health risk. Pesticide residue data and exposure estimates typically demonstrate that food consumers are exposed to levels of pesticide residues that are several orders of magnitude below those of potential health concern."</p><p>Not surprisingly, the three authors of the report are closely tied to the agrichemical industry. One of the report's authors is Steve Savage, an agrichemical industry <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/steven-savage-820a263/" target="_blank">consultant</a> and <a href="https://gmoanswers.com/experts/steve-savage" target="_blank">former DuPont employee.</a> Another is Carol Burns, a former scientist for Dow Chemical and current consultant for Cortevia Agriscience, a spin-off of DowDuPont. The third author is Carl Winter, chair of the Department of Food Science and Technology at the University of California at Davis. The university has received approximately <a href="https://biobeef.faculty.ucdavis.edu/2017/01/08/who-does-fund-university-research/" target="_blank">$2 million a year</a> from the agrichemical industry, according to a university researcher, though the accuracy of that figure has not been established.</p><p>The authors took their report directly to Congress, holding <a href="http://events.r20.constantcontact.com/register/event?oeidk=a07egnhquf855778481&llr=zy8mbvcab" target="_blank">three different presentations</a> in Washington, DC, designed to promote their message of pesticide safety for use in "media food safety stories, and consumer advice regarding which foods consumers should (or should not) consume."</p><p>The pro-pesticide sessions were held at the office buildings for members of Congress and, appropriately it seems, at the headquarters for <a href="http://www.croplifeamerica.org/our-story" target="_blank">CropLife America</a>, the lobbyist for the agrichemical industry. </p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from our media associate <a href="https://usrtk.org/news-and-notes-by-carey-gillam/an-unappetizing-analysis-from-fda/" target="_blank">U.S. Right to Know</a>.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
- Strawberries, Spinach Top 'Dirty Dozen' List of Pesticide ... ›
- US Food Sampling Shows Troubling Pesticide Residues ›
- Massive Study Finds Eating Organic Slashes Cancer Risks ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Chlorpyrifos is commonly used by farmers on many popular crops such as grapes. lovro77 / E+ / Getty Images
A popular agricultural pesticide that has been linked to brain damage in children will no longer be sold in California starting in February, state officials announced on Wednesday, as the AP reported.
<p>Under the agreement, farmers will still be allowed to use the pesticide <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/chlorpyrifos" target="_self">chlorpyrifos</a>, but will have to stop at the end of 2020.</p><p>If the manufacturer of chlorpyrifos had decided to embark on a protracted legal battle rather than voluntarily withdraw their product, the timeline for removing the pesticide would have been much longer, according to the <a href="https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2019-10-09/chemical-companies-agree-to-end-fight-over-pesticide-ban" target="_blank">Los Angeles Times</a>.</p><p>"For years, environmental justice advocates have fought to get the harmful pesticide chlorpyrifos out of our communities," said Governor Gavin Newsom in a <a href="https://calepa.ca.gov/2019/10/09/press-release-agreement-reached-to-end-sale-of-chlorpyrifos-in-ca-by-feb-2020/" target="_blank">statement</a> released by the California EPA. "Thanks to their tenacity and the work of countless others, this will now occur faster than originally envisioned. This is a big win for children, workers and public health in California."</p><p>The pesticide is widely used as farmers rely on it for some of the nation's most popular crops, including alfalfa, almonds, citrus, cotton, grapes and walnuts, according to the <a href="https://www.apnews.com/2b433b664d834f3faa4e39ff257cabb6" target="_blank">AP</a>.</p><p>California environmental regulators have had a ban on chlorpyrifos in their sights for years. They had designated the pesticide "<a href="https://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/whs/pdf/chlorpyrifos_srp_findings.pdf" target="_blank">a toxic air contaminant</a>" that is harmful when it enters the respiratory track or makes skin contact. That designation allowed yesterday's agreement to include a ban on aerial spraying of chlorpyrfios, as <a href="https://www.npr.org/2019/10/09/768795666/california-bans-popular-pesticide-linked-to-brain-damage-in-children" target="_blank">NPR</a> reported.</p><p>The federal government also sought to stop the use of chlorpyrifos under the Obama administration. The Obama administration proposed banning the pesticide in 2015 when the federal Environmental Protection Agency (<a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/epa">EPA</a>) found that chlorpyrifos could pose harm to consumers. However, in early 2017, the EPA, under the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/trump-watch/" target="_self">Trump</a> administration, reversed course and said there was too much uncertainty about it, as <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2017/03/29/521898976/will-the-epa-reject-a-pesticide-or-its-own-scientific-evidence" target="_blank">NPR</a> reported.</p><p>Since the federal government walked back its plan to ban the pesticide, California moved to implement its own regulation. Hawaii and New York are already phasing in their own bans, according to the <a href="https://www.apnews.com/2b433b664d834f3faa4e39ff257cabb6" target="_blank">AP</a>.</p>
<p>"The swift end to the sale of chlorpyrifos protects vulnerable communities by taking a harmful pesticide off the market," said California Secretary for Environmental Protection Jared Blumenfeld in a <a href="https://calepa.ca.gov/2019/10/09/press-release-agreement-reached-to-end-sale-of-chlorpyrifos-in-ca-by-feb-2020/" target="_blank">statement</a>. "This agreement avoids a protracted legal process while providing a clear timeline for California farmers as we look toward developing alternative pest management practices."</p><p>The state did agree to kick in $5.6 million to help pesticide manufacturers develop a safer alternative.</p><p>"But just so you're aware, that's what agriculture does every day, we're always looking for new products, safer products that are effective," said Casey Creamer, president of the California Citrus Association, which represents about 5,000 growers, as the <a href="https://www.apnews.com/2b433b664d834f3faa4e39ff257cabb6" target="_blank">AP</a> reported.</p><p>Creamer added that the he and his organization believe the risks are far less than what the state presented.</p><p>"We really thought the exposure assessments and risks were just inflated and it wasn't a true characterization of the protections that were already in place," he said according to the <a href="https://www.apnews.com/2b433b664d834f3faa4e39ff257cabb6" target="_blank">AP</a>.</p><p>Corteva AgriScience, formerly known as Dow AgroSciences, is the largest manufacturer of the chemical. After mounting restrictions on applications of chlorpyrifos products over the last few years, the state chose to revoke product registrations this year, which is effectively a ban. Companies that make the pesticide, led by Dow, had asked for a hearing, which delayed implementation of the ban, according to the <a href="https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2019-10-09/chemical-companies-agree-to-end-fight-over-pesticide-ban" target="_blank">Los Angeles Times</a>.</p><p>Corteva said in a statement that it reached the agreement "in the best interests of the affected growers," as the <a href="https://www.apnews.com/2b433b664d834f3faa4e39ff257cabb6" target="_blank">AP</a> reported.</p><p>"Through recent actions, the state of California has improvised and implemented several uniquely challenging regulatory requirements for chlorpyrifos. These new, novel requirements have made it virtually impossible for growers to use this important tool in their state," Corteva said in its statement.</p><p>As for the federal government, EPA chief Andrew Wheeler had extended the safety review of chlorpyrifos until 2022, but complaints about its process have forced the agency to expedite the review process and to have a decision by next October, the <a href="https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2019-10-09/chemical-companies-agree-to-end-fight-over-pesticide-ban" target="_blank">Los Angeles Times</a> reported.</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">"...as long as the Trump administration is in charge, this EPA will favor the interests of the chemical lobby over children's safety." In my 2nd <a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@EcoWatch</a> post today, <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Trump?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Trump</a>'s <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/EPA?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#EPA</a> decided not to ban toxic <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/pesticide?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#pesticide</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/chlorpyrifos?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#chlorpyrifos</a>: <a href="https://t.co/91WkwqaT0I">https://t.co/91WkwqaT0I</a></p>— Olivia Rosane (@orosane) <a href="https://twitter.com/orosane/status/1152205647703883776?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 19, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
From Your Site Articles
- Entire Pesticide Class Must Be Banned to Save Children's Health ... ›
- Hawaii Becomes First State in the U.S. to Ban the Toxic Pesticide ... ›
- How to Avoid Brain-Damaging Chlorpyrifos in Milk and Produce ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Former astronaut Buzz Aldrin shakes President Trump's hand as Vice President Mike Pence watches on July 19 in DC.
SHEALAH CRAIGHEAD
By Elliott Negin
On July 19, President Trump hosted Apollo 11 astronauts Buzz Aldrin and Michael Collins and their families, along with the family of their deceased colleague Neil Armstrong, at a White House event to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the first manned landing on the moon.
<p>"Tomorrow will represent 50 years from the time we planted a beautiful American flag on the moon," Trump <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/watch-trump-meets-with-apollo-11-astronauts-buzz-aldrin-and-michael-collins" target="_blank">said</a>. "And that was an achievement, possibly one of the great, considered one of the great achievements ever."</p><p>Trump's fractured syntax notwithstanding, the Apollo program was indeed a stunning triumph of federal science, <a href="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_NASA" target="_blank">involving</a> more than 34,000 National Aeronautics and Space Administration employees and 375,000 industry and university contractors. It was one of many spectacular <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dont-take-federal-science_b_4146736" target="_blank">achievements</a> by federal and federally funded scientists over the last half-century, such as the creation of the internet, fiber optics and magnetic resonance imaging technology, not to mention the role those scientists played in providing the technical underpinning for health and environmental <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/environmental-protections-save-lives-create-jobs-and_b_58dc4a1ee4b04ba4a5e25098" target="_blank">standards</a> that save lives and protect critical ecosystems and <a href="http://ecowatch.com/tag/wildlife" rel="noopener noreferrer">wildlife</a> habitats.</p><p>Trump's lauding of the Apollo 11 mission rang a particularly discordant note given the lengths to which his administration has gone to destroy federal science by censoring scientific findings, gagging agency scientists and fostering a hostile working environment. Since taking office, the administration has launched more than <a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/center-science-and-democracy/attacks-on-science" target="_blank">100 attacks on science</a>, according to my organization, the <a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/" target="_blank">Union of Concerned Scientists</a> — more than the George W. Bush administration <a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/our-work/center-science-and-democracy/promoting-scientific-integrity/abuses-science-case-studies" target="_blank">amassed</a> over its two four-year terms.</p><p>Just a day before Trump's Apollo photo op, for example, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/18/climate/epa-chlorpyrifos-pesticide-ban.html" target="_blank">announced it would reject</a> <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17116700" target="_blank">scientific evidence</a> and the recommendation of its own staff scientists by not banning <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/chlorpyrifos" target="_self">chlorpyrifos</a>, the widely used agricultural pesticide shown to hamper childhood brain development. It was the agency's second scientifically indefensible chemical-related decision of the year. In April, it overruled <a href="https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/815-e-p-a-memos-on-asbestos/12c87a96be998db10048/optimized/full.pdf#page=1" target="_blank">the advice</a> of its own scientists who urged the agency to follow the example of <a href="https://tinyurl.com/y5x2k32p" target="_blank">55 other countries</a> in completely banning <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/asbestos" target="_self">asbestos</a>, a known carcinogen.</p>
Sidelining Science
<div id="a0046" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="KTL07A1576661585"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1164145122381950977" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">“By allowing chlorpyrifos to stay in our fruits and vegetables, Trump’s @EPA is breaking the law and neglecting the… https://t.co/DCZpzQKdi9</div> — On Capitol Hill (@On Capitol Hill)<a href="https://twitter.com/EarthjusticeDC/statuses/1164145122381950977">1566388800.0</a></blockquote></div><p>Today's EPA offers a stark example of the Trump administration's crusade to dismantle science-based agencies. Nearly 1,600 employees <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/with-a-shrinking-epa-trump-delivers-on-his-promise-to-cut-government/2018/09/08/6b058f9e-b143-11e8-a20b-5f4f84429666_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.580c7cd37b13" target="_blank">left the EPA</a> during the first year and a half of the EPA administration, while only 400 were hired, according to data obtained by The Washington Post through a Freedom of Information Act request. Of 1,600 employees <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/epa-workers-trump-administration-2603730765.html">who left</a>, at least 260 were scientists, 185 were "environmental protection specialists" and 106 were engineers. The <a href="https://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/budget" target="_blank">total number of employees</a> at the agency today — 14,172 — is the lowest in 30 years.<br></p><p>Besides chopping staff, the EPA has dramatically reduced the role of outside science advisers. Last fall, EPA Administrator <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/andrew-wheeler">Andrew Wheeler</a>, a former coal industry lobbyist, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/11/climate/epa-disbands-pollution-science-panel.html" target="_blank">disbanded</a> a 20-member scientific advisory committee on particulate matter, <a href="https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060102455" target="_blank">failed</a> to convene a similar panel on ozone, and <a href="https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060102455" target="_blank">packed</a> a seven-member advisory committee on air quality standards with industry-friendly participants.</p><p>The EPA is not the only agency pushing scientists out the door. The same day the EPA made its chlorpyrifos announcement, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2019/07/18/many-usda-workers-quit-research-agencies-move-kansas-city-brain-drain-we-all-feared/?utm_term=.c549e94ec861" target="_blank">announced</a> that nearly two-thirds of 395 Washington, D.C.-based employees in its Economic Research Service, which provides analyses on a range of issues, and National Institute of Food and Agriculture, which oversees $1.7 billion in scientific funding, will quit rather than relocate to Kansas City.</p><p>The department's dubious rationale for moving the Research Service and National Institute is placing researchers closer to farmers and <a href="https://www.aaea.org/UserFiles/file/Report-MovingUSDAResearchersWillCostTaxpayers-AAEAReport2019june19final.docx.pdf" target="_blank">cutting costs</a>, but its ulterior motive is to hollow out their staffs, hindering their ability to carry out their missions. Mick Mulvaney, acting White House chief of staff, acknowledged as much during a <a href="https://www.c-span.org/video/?463060-1/mick-mulvaney-addresses-south-carolina-republican-party-gala&start=2412" target="_blank">speech</a> he gave at an Aug. 2 Republican fundraiser in South Carolina.</p><p>"You've heard about 'drain the swamp.' What you probably haven't heard is what we are actually doing," he said. "I don't know if you saw the news the other day, but the USDA just tried to move, or did move, two offices out of Washington, D.C…. Guess what happened? More than half the people quit…. What a wonderful way to sort of streamline government, and do what we haven't been able to do for a long time."</p>Capitol Hill Science Defenders
<p>Some members of Congress are fighting back. Late last month, for example, the House Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress — a temporary committee with an equal number of Democrats and Republicans — <a href="https://federalnewsnetwork.com/modernizing-congress/2019/07/house-modernization-committee-recommends-bringing-back-office-of-technology-assessment/" target="_blank">unanimously approved</a> a recommendation to resurrect the Office of Technology Assessment, a congressional watchdog agency that then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich <a href="https://ota.fas.org/2012/01/31/gingrich-said-to-decimate-congressional-expertise/" target="_blank">killed</a> in the mid-1990s.</p><p>The select committee's recommendation comes on the heels of a draft House <a href="https://appropriations.house.gov/news/press-releases/appropriations-committee-releases-fiscal-year-2020-legislative-branch-funding" target="_blank">spending bill</a> for the 2020 fiscal year that includes $6 million to jumpstart the agency, which provided Congress with <a href="https://ota.fas.org/otareports/" target="_blank">analyses</a> on a range of topics, from acid rain to <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/">climate change</a> to <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/renewable-energy/" rel="noopener noreferrer">renewable energy</a>, from 1972 to 1995.</p><p>Meanwhile, House Democrats and Republicans alike voiced their support for protecting federal science during a recent Science, Space and Technology Committee <a href="https://eos.org/articles/hearing-garners-bipartisan-support-for-scientific-integrity" target="_blank">hearing</a> on scientific integrity. <a href="https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/administration/eop/ostp/library/scientificintegrity" target="_blank">Two dozen</a> federal agencies have adopted scientific integrity policies since 2010, but they are inconsistent and difficult to enforce, so some members of Congress want to codify protections in a law.</p><p>"Allowing political power or special interests to manipulate or suppress federal science hurts, and hurts all of us," <a href="https://eos.org/articles/hearing-garners-bipartisan-support-for-scientific-integrity" target="_blank">said</a> New York Rep. Paul Tonko at the July 17 hearing. "It leads to dirtier air, unsafe water, toxic products on our shelves, and chemicals in our homes and environment. And it has driven federal inaction in response to the growing climate crisis."</p><p>Earlier this year, Tonko introduced the <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/1709/text?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22scientific+integrity+act%22%5D%7D&r=1&s=1" target="_blank">Scientific Integrity Act</a>, which would guarantee federal scientists the right to share their findings with the public, ensure the accuracy of government science-related communications, and protect scientific research from political interference.</p><p>Federal science has taken an unprecedented beating during the Trump administration and remains a long way from its glory days half a century ago when it landed men on the moon. Tonko recognizes that protecting scientific integrity is a critical first step to rebuilding American scientific enterprise and that it deserves bipartisan support.</p><p>"Scientific integrity is a longstanding concern that transcends any one party or political administration," Tonko <a href="https://eos.org/articles/hearing-garners-bipartisan-support-for-scientific-integrity" target="_blank">said</a>. "The abuses directed by this president and his top officials have brought a new urgency to the issue, but the fact remains whether a Democrat or Republican sits in the [House] speaker's chair or the Oval Office, we need strong scientific integrity policies."</p>From Your Site Articles
- Trump's EPA Won't Ban Brain-Damaging Pesticide - EcoWatch ›
- How to Avoid Brain-Damaging Chlorpyrifos in Milk and Produce ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
A worker in California sprays pesticides on strawberries, one of the crops on which chlorpyrifos is used. Paul Grebliunas / The Image Bank / Getty Images Plus
President Donald Trump's U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will not ban the agricultural use of chlorpyrifos, a toxic pesticide that the EPA's own scientists have linked to brain damage in children, The New York Times reported Thursday.
<p>The <a href="https://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/files/PrePubCopy_9997-06_FR%20Document_Signed_2019-07-18.pdf" target="_blank">decision</a>, announced Thursday, was a response to a petition from public health and environmental groups who had pushed for a ban. The agency ruled that "critical questions remained regarding the significance of the data" on the pesticide's health effects, according to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jul/18/epa-chlorpyrifos-ban-children-brain-damage-trump" target="_blank">The Guardian</a>.</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">BREAKING: Trump's <a href="https://twitter.com/EPA?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@EPA</a> announced the brain-damaging pesticide chlorpyrifos is safe and can still be used on food, although mainstream science says this pesticide is unsafe for children and farmworkers. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/BanChlorpyrifos?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#BanChlorpyrifos</a> <a href="https://t.co/rzfwPovUL9">https://t.co/rzfwPovUL9</a></p>— Earthjustice (@Earthjustice) <a href="https://twitter.com/Earthjustice/status/1151934775634071552?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 18, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<p>The ruling is the latest in a series of Trump EPA decisions that weaken <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/chemicals" target="_self">chemical</a> safety rules, The New York Times pointed out. In April, it <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/epa-asbestos-rule-2634944150.html" target="_self">opted against a full ban</a> on <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/asbestos" target="_self">asbestos</a> in favor of restrictions that critics say could usher in new uses. Also this year, it issued restrictions on a paint-stripping chemical that were weaker than a ban proposed during the Obama years. Finally, just last week, it widely expanded the use of the pesticide sulfoxaflor, which its own scientists have shown can harm <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/bees" target="_self">bees</a>, as <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/sulfoxaflor-epa-honeybee-colonies-usda-data-200-million-acres_n_5d2bf580e4b0060b11eeb5f1" target="_blank">HuffPost reported</a>.</p><p>"Siding with pesticide corporations over the health and well-being of kids is the new normal at the EPA," <a href="https://www.ewg.org/" target="_blank">Environmental Working Group</a> President Ken Cook said in a <a href="https://www.ewg.org/release/epa-s-wheeler-keeps-brain-damaging-pesticide-legal-use-foods-kids-eat" target="_blank">statement</a>. "Today's decision underscores the sad truth that as long as the Trump administration is in charge, this EPA will favor the interests of the chemical lobby over children's safety."</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">.<a href="https://twitter.com/EPA?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@EPA</a>’s Wheeler Keeps Brain-Damaging Pesticide Legal for Use on Foods Kids Eat | <a href="https://twitter.com/ewg?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ewg</a> | <a href="https://t.co/01HR1n5bOg">https://t.co/01HR1n5bOg</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/chlorpyrifos?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#chlorpyrifos</a></p>— Alex Formuzis (@AlexFormuzis) <a href="https://twitter.com/AlexFormuzis/status/1151948995847233538?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 18, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<p>The EPA's decision came after a federal court ordered the agency to make a <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/epa-chlorpyrifos-court-2635261283.html?rebelltitem=1#rebelltitem1" target="_self">final call</a> on the ban by mid-July. Chlorpyrifos has been banned for home use since 2000, but farmers have continued to spray it on crops like apples, strawberries, broccoli and corn. The Obama administration had initiated a ban on agricultural uses of the pesticide, but Trump's EPA reversed it, setting off a legal battle with environmental advocates. In the absence of federal action, states have moved against the pesticide on their own. Hawaii <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/hawaii-ban-pesticides-chlorpyrifos-2565244742.html" target="_self">became the first state</a> to ban chlorpyrifos in 2018, and <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/california-chlorpyrifos-ban-2636704080.html" target="_self">California announced</a> it would ban the chemical in May. New York is also moving towards a ban, The New York Times reported.</p><p>Research has linked chlorpyrifos exposure to lower IQ, memory loss, breathing problems and increased risk of autism in babies born to mothers who lived near farms where it was sprayed, according to The Guardian.</p><p>"What we have with chlorpyrifos is multiple academic research projects that have shown that actual children who actually live in California are being harmed by this chemical," <a href="https://www.ceh.org/" target="_blank">Center for Environmental Health</a> senior scientist Caroline Cox told The Guardian. "It's pretty rare that you have that kind of evidence for any toxic chemical."</p><p>So how was the EPA able to decide that the science wasn't conclusive? The New York Times explained that the ruling was a direct consequence of former EPA administrator <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/scott-pruitt" target="_self">Scott Pruitt</a>'s decision to limit the kinds of studies that regulators could use to make decisions:</p><blockquote>Under Mr. Pruitt, the agency proposed a rule saying it <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/26/climate/epa-scientific-transparency-honest-act.html?module=inline" target="_blank">could not consider scientific research</a> unless the raw data behind it was made public, saying the issue was a matter of transparency. Scientists argued that studies measuring human exposure to pesticides and other chemicals often rely on confidential health information and argued the E.P.A.'s real motivation was to restrict the ability to develop regulations.<br><br>In opting not to ban chlorpyrifos, the E.P.A. rejected a major study conducted by Columbia University on its effects on children in New York City. The E.P.A. said because it was unable to obtain the raw data and replicate that study, which <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OI-A1C1ZeP0IgKSSc1lHZU00F71DefIk/view" target="_blank">linked the insecticide to developmental delays</a>, it could not independently verify the conclusions.</blockquote><p>The 12 groups who brought the petition against the EPA vowed to keep fighting.</p><p>"We will continue to fight until chlorpyrifos is banned and children and farmworkers are safe from this dangerous chemical," they said in a joint <a href="https://earthjustice.org/news/press/2019/trump-s-epa-keeps-brain-damaging-pesticide-in-fruits-and-vegetables?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social" target="_blank">statement</a> reported by <a href="https://earthjustice.org/" target="_blank">Earthjustice</a>, the legal organization that represented the groups.</p><p>Former senior EPA attorney Kevin Minoli thought that federal courts would ultimately rule in favor of a ban.</p><p>"To me, this starts the clock on the use of chlorpyrifos on food crops in the US," he told the <a href="https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2019/07/18/epa-chlorpyrifos-pesticide-brain-damage/1773300001/" target="_blank">Associated Press</a>.</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr"><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Trump?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Trump</a>'s Pick to Head <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Interior?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Interior</a> Blocked Report Warning of <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Pesticide?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Pesticide</a> Risk to 1,000+ Endangered Species <a href="https://t.co/qL6qLKJvoC">https://t.co/qL6qLKJvoC</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/bpncamp?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@bpncamp</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/EricLiptonNYT?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@EricLiptonNYT</a></p>— EcoWatch (@EcoWatch) <a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/status/1111055370338922496?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 28, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
From Your Site Articles
- Entire Pesticide Class Must Be Banned to Save Children's Health ... ›
- California, Nation's Top User of Chlorpyrifos, Announces Ban on ... ›
- Trump White House Pushes to Let Minors Spray Brain-Damaging ... ›
- Trump EPA Won’t Regulate Toxic Drinking Water Chemical That Harms Children’s Development - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
krisanapong detraphiphat / Moment / Getty Images
By Grace Francese
You may know that many conventional oat cereals contain troubling amounts of the carcinogenic pesticide glyphosate. But another toxic pesticide may be contaminating your kids' breakfast. A new study by the Organic Center shows that almost 60 percent of the non-organic milk sampled contains residues of chlorpyrifos, a pesticide scientists say is unsafe at any concentration.
<p>But by making a few changes to your grocery list, you can avoid the foods most likely to be contaminated with <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/chlorpyrifos">chlorpyrifos</a>. Here's what you need to know about this chemical.</p>
Dangerous but Legal
<p>Chlorpyrifos is a neurotoxin — it affects the nervous system and brain, and even small amounts of exposure can cause permanent health damage to babies and children. These health effects can include impairment of children's IQ and harm to the parts of the brain that control language, memory, behavior and emotion. A new <a href="http://cphpost.dk/news/link-between-insecticides-and-adhd-among-kids-danish-study.html" target="_blank">study</a> from the University of Southern Denmark also links chlorpyrifos exposure in pregnant women to ADHD in their children.</p><p>Because millions of pounds of chlorpyrifos are sprayed on crops every year, most Americans are exposed to it through milk, fruit and other produce. Research by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) found that babies and developing fetuses are exposed to about five times more chlorpyrifos than what the EPA's standard deems safe, and children consume chlorpyrifos at 11 to 15 times the EPA standard.</p><p>Despite this, in 2017 the Trump EPA <a href="https://www.ewg.org/release/two-years-and-10-million-pounds-trump-epa-blocked-ban-brain-damaging-pesticide" target="_blank">decided</a> to ignore science in favor of the pesticide industry and cancelled a proposed ban on chlorpyrifos. Now the EPA won't act to keep it out of milk and produce for at least another five years. While the EPA waits to evaluate chlorpyrifos again, roughly <a href="https://www.ewg.org/news-and-analysis/2018/03/thanks-scott-pruitt-30-million-pounds-brain-damaging-pesticide-will-be" target="_blank">30 million pounds</a> of this chemical will be sprayed on crops, risking the health of children across the U.S. </p><p>The EPA's failure to ban chlorpyrifos has even more harmful consequences for farm workers and their families. According to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/17/california-pesticides-central-valley-trump" target="_blank">The Guardian</a> newspaper, parents in California's Central Valley, which has some of the heaviest use of chlorpyrifos in the country, fear that drifting clouds of pesticides are causing their children's chronic health problems, including learning problems and attention deficit disorders. They're just not sure about possible solutions.</p><p>"We know this is dangerous for the kids," said one mother of five, "but what are we supposed to do?" </p>Keeping Your Family Safe
<p>The Environmental Working Group (EWG) supports a complete ban on chlorpyrifos, such as <a href="https://www.tomudall.senate.gov/news/press-releases/udall-senators-introduce-bill-to-ban-toxic-pesticide-chlorpyrifos" target="_blank">a bill</a> currently under consideration in the Senate. EWG is also urging grocery stores to stop supplying foods that could have residues of chlorpyrifos.</p><p>In the meantime, switching to organic milk and organic versions of the most potentially contaminated produce is a great way to <a href="https://www.ewg.org/planet-trump/2017/04/don-t-want-eat-pruitt-s-pesticide-here-s-what-avoid#.WrPxnJPwY3i" target="_blank">cut this pesticide out of your diet</a>. Chlorpyrifos residues are most often detected on some imported produce, so skip buying peaches and nectarines imported from Chile, bell peppers and hot peppers imported from Mexico, and domestic and imported cilantro.</p>
Read More
Show Less
Students at the University of California, Berkeley, which has been offering a certified-organic cafeteria for many years. Justin Sullivan / Getty Images
By Corey Binns
When Ángel García was little, he often awoke to the smell of breakfast burritos on the stove. His mom would wake up at 4 a.m. to cook for him and pack his lunch before dropping him off with the babysitter by 6 a.m. so she could get to work. She spent her days picking fruits and vegetables on the farmland surrounding their California home. When she returned at the end of a long day, García remembers rushing to her for a hug, but she would shoo him away. She would remind him that chemicals misted down into the fields where she worked — what kind she didn't know, but she recognized the dangers they posed to her son's health.
<p>García knew his mom was doing her best to keep him safe. But her powers were limited: Agricultural fields blanketed in <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/pesticides">pesticides</a> also surrounded Garcia's school, and the meals her family ate included produce grown with the same toxic chemicals.</p><p>"We live in a reality that normalizes heavy chemical use on our food," said García. He is now an organizer for <a href="http://www.pesticidereform.org/" target="_blank">Californians for Pesticide </a><a href="http://www.pesticidereform.org/" target="_blank">Reform</a> in Tulare County, where many farmworkers and their families — who are predominantly Latinx — live in unincorporated communities and grapple with various health risks stemming from routine exposure to pesticides. These chemicals show up in the air they breathe, the water they drink and the dust in their homes. They include the widely used pesticide <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/chlorpyrifos">chlorpyrifos</a>, which lurks on many of our fruits and vegetables, and which scientists have linked to developmental delays and increased risk of learning disabilities in children.</p><p>García's organization is one of more than 100 that have joined forces with NRDC and the Community Alliance with Family Farmers (CAFF) to support the California Organic-to-School Pilot Program, introduced in <a href="http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB958" target="_blank">AB 958</a>. If the bill passes, the program will help schools buy more California-produced <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/organic">organic</a> food and grant up to 15 cents more per meal to qualifying schools. The Office of Farm to Fork at the California Department of Food and Agriculture would distribute the pilot program funds through a competitive grant application process to at least five school districts, enabling them to purchase organic food as soon as the 2020–21 school year.</p><p>Advocates like García are encouraged thus far by the response to the bill, which received universal support by members of the Committee on Agriculture at a State Assembly hearing in April. "A policy like this sends a message to children that there is another way of growing food, that it doesn't have to depend on chemicals," García said. "Organics shouldn't be something seen as expensive, or something you can only find at certain locations, or something seen as inaccessible to them."</p>
<p><a href="https://www.nrdc.org/experts/allison-johnson" target="_blank">Allison Johnson</a>, a sustainable food policy advocate at NRDC, agrees. "We really think everyone should have access to food that will make them healthy, food that is culturally appropriate, and food that won't hurt them in the long term — especially kids," she said. The program would particularly benefit those communities that are in close contact with agricultural pollution, and often the least able to afford healthy food options." <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935119300246" target="_blank">A</a><a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935119300246" target="_blank">ll-organic diets</a> have been shown to decrease levels of pesticides in people's bodies in as little as six days. "The effects of the food that we produce now will be with them for their lifetime," Johnson said.</p><p>The bill's authors noted that the first handful of grants should give priority to schools in districts that serve a high number of low-income students who receive free or reduced-price meals. It's an especially important approach given that for some children and teens, school lunch may the single reliable meal of their day, said Jennifer LeBarre, executive director of Student Nutrition Services for the San Francisco Unified School District. Despite this reality, school districts receive very limited state and federal funding to feed students, and the little they do get must also go toward food service operations and staffing. In the end, many schools spend as little as $1.25 on the food for each child's lunch — and few can afford to serve organic produce, let alone a fully organic meal.</p><p>LeBarre adds that school districts pay their food service workers higher wages and offer better benefits than the typical burger joint — part of the reason why the money spent on the ingredients themselves is so minimal. "The costs are higher when it comes to operating in the school food environment than, say, a McDonald's, and we certainly want to be bringing better food to our students than what you would receive at a fast-food restaurant," she said.</p><p>Organic strawberries and avocados are already on the menu in school lunchrooms in Encinitas, just north of San Diego. In 2012, the nonprofit <a href="http://www.healthydaypartners.org/" target="_blank">Healthy Day Partners</a> established the first certified-organic elementary school campus in the country there, and the group has influenced local farmers to grow more organic produce. The city even designated a neighboring park to go organic, too. The organization's CEO and president, Mim Michelove, said, "One of the things that I love about AB 958 is that it supports what we all know: <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/health_and_academics/pdf/health-academic-achievement.pdf" target="_blank">Healthy kids are better students</a>."</p><p>In recent years, schools have moved resources from food and kitchen budgets to technology like classroom smart boards and computer labs. When stocking the Encinitas salad bar with organic produce, Michelove learned the school was just not set up to receive fresh food. Instead, it specialized in packaged and processed goods. Healthy Day Partners teamed up with the district to set up best practices for preparing farm-fresh produce in the central kitchen and purchased some simple and affordable equipment to help clean and cut the food.</p>
<p>In addition to the health benefits of serving more organic meals, the new initiative will help boost the state economy. After all, as Michelove points out, "California leads the nation in the number of organic farms." Because the new items on the school lunch menu can be sourced locally, they will "reduce the carbon footprint of school lunches" and offset the need to truck in food from farther away. "The overall food system around school food can be transformed into one that promotes quality-of-life issues that go beyond healthy food and healthy kids to include things like cleaner air and water for us all," she said.</p><p>Growers will also reap benefits. Organic food is often more expensive than conventional food, in part because many organic farmers lack stable markets for their produce and must take on economic risks and technical challenges associated with growing crops without pesticides, not to mention additional labor costs. But the bill would help public schools, which purchase huge amounts of food, provide stable markets for organic growers. "We can use policy tools like this bill to ensure that farmers and workers are paid fairly for producing organic food and that the food remains affordable for everyone," Johnson said. "Organic farming can also offer a way for farms to stay in business — more than half of farms in the United States lose money, and fairer prices for organic food can help farms stay afloat."</p><p>While the economic upsides of the bill may excite many people, LeBarre is most thrilled by the prospect of getting more pesticide-free food onto the plates of California's kids. "I want organic food for our students because it's the best for them, and it's the best for the environment, and they're the ones who are going to be living on this planet long after I'm gone," she said. "It's my responsibility to do everything I can for them now, but also be forward thinking as well."</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">There’s a Toxic Weedkiller on the Menu in K-12 Schools Across the U.S. <a href="https://t.co/zmQ3MHpQx1">https://t.co/zmQ3MHpQx1</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Food?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Food</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Roundup?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Roundup</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Glyphosate?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Glyphosate</a> <a href="https://t.co/vb6eHGBSaK">pic.twitter.com/vb6eHGBSaK</a></p>— Renewable Search (@RenewableSearch) <a href="https://twitter.com/RenewableSearch/status/1082729936991875072?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 8, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
From Your Site Articles
- Farm to School Program Saves Big Bucks, Slashes Carbon Footprint ... ›
- Organic Food and Farm-to-Table Pioneer Alice Waters Is Creating a ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
California, Nation’s Top User of Chlorpyrifos, Announces Ban on Brain-Damaging Pesticide
09 May 2019
Food
California will ban a brain-damaging pesticide that the Trump administration's U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has delayed banning at the national level, the state announced Wednesday.
<p><a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/chlorpyrifos" target="_self">Chlorpyrifos</a>, which is used on almonds, citrus, grapes, cotton, walnuts and other crops, has been shown to harm children's health and neurological development. </p>
<p>"Countless people have suffered as a result of this <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/chemicals" target="_self">chemical</a>," California EPA (Cal-EPA) Secretary Jared Blumenfeld told <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/may/08/california-pesticide-ban-chlorpyrifos-agriculture" target="_blank">The Guardian</a>. "A lot of people live and work and go to school right next to fields that are being sprayed with chlorpyrifos … It's an issue of environmental health and justice."</p>
<div id="49681" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="BEWK4B1576662888"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1126195097245110272" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">“This action represents a historic opportunity for California to develop a new framework for alternative pest manag… https://t.co/vpvqfH5Wlt</div> — California EPA (@California EPA)<a href="https://twitter.com/CaliforniaEPA/statuses/1126195097245110272">1557340809.0</a></blockquote></div><p>The ban will take effect between six months and two years, and is accompanied by $5.7 million in funds from Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom to help transition to safer alternatives, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2019/05/08/california-ban-controversial-pesticide-citing-effect-child-brain-development/?utm_term=.cc66878e1fc1" target="_blank">The Washington Post reported</a>. California follows <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/hawaii-ban-pesticides-chlorpyrifos-2565244742.html" target="_self">Hawaii</a> and New York in approving a ban on the pesticide, and bills to ban chlorpyrifos are being considered by New Jersey, Connecticut and Oregon.</p><p>The EPA had recommended banning the pesticide during the Obama administration, but Trump's first pick for EPA Administrator, Scott Pruitt, walked back those efforts in 2017. Environmental groups then sued the agency. In the most recent development in the ensuing legal battle, a federal judge in April <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/epa-chlorpyrifos-court-2635261283.html?rebelltitem=1#rebelltitem1" target="_self">ordered the EPA</a> to make a final decision on a ban by mid-July.</p><p>"Governor Newsom has done what the Trump administration has refused to do: protect children, farmworkers and millions of others from being exposed to this neurotoxic pesticide," <a href="https://www.ewg.org/" target="_blank">Environmental Working Group</a> President Ken Cook said in a statement reported by The Washington Post. "With the governor's action, California is once again showing leadership in protecting public health."</p>
<div id="82ef3" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="9UWM1U1576662888"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1126201387702992897" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">“Gov. @GavinNewsom has done what the @realDonaldTrump administration has refused to do: protect children, farm work… https://t.co/nKGZf0pUsF</div> — EWG (@EWG)<a href="https://twitter.com/ewg/statuses/1126201387702992897">1557342309.0</a></blockquote></div><p>University of California, San Francisco medical professor and former Cal-EPA Deputy Secretary Dr. Gina Solomon told <a href="http://time.com/5585881/california-outlaw-pesticide-harmful-kids/" target="_blank">Time</a> that chlorpyrifos was unique among pesticides in that scientists know a significant amount about how it harms humans.</p><p>"We know a lot about what it does to developing children and that science is the bedrock of the action that Cal-EPA is announcing," she said. "Many pesticides have been studied well in lab rats but in this case we actually know what it does to people."</p><p>Chlorpyrifos has been shown to harm brain development in fetuses and lead to reduced IQ and reading ability and increased hyperactivity, in children. Children exposed in utero even have smaller heads, Solomon said.</p><p>"The science is definitive," Blumenfeld told The Guardian. "This job really should have been done by the US EPA."</p><p>However, Solomon noted that since California grows the majority of fruits and vegetables in the U.S., its ban will have a positive impact on other states, too.</p>
<div id="fe9fe" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="NDEISJ1576662888"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1126246655009984512" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">"California’s action to cancel the registration of chlorpyrifos is needed to prevent the significant harm this pest… https://t.co/xSb3jnOGFN</div> — CA_Pesticides (@CA_Pesticides)<a href="https://twitter.com/CA_Pesticides/statuses/1126246655009984512">1557353101.0</a></blockquote></div><p>One reason activists say the Trump administration has stalled on banning chlorpyrifos is that the predecessor of the pesticide's current manufacturer, DowDuPont, donated to Trump, The Guardian reported. The company has promised to challenge California's ban.</p><p>"This proposal disregards a robust database of more than 4,000 studies and reports examining the product in terms of health, safety and the environment," DowDuPont spokesman Gregg Schmidt said in an email reported by The Washington Post. "We are evaluating all options to challenge this proposal."</p><p>Chlorpyrifos use has fallen in California from two million pounds in 2005 to 900,000 pounds in 2016, but the state is still the largest user of the pesticide in the U.S.</p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
'Finally!': Court Orders EPA to Stop Stalling Potential Ban on Pesticide Tied to Brain Damage in Kids
22 April 2019
Food
American farmers use chlorpyrifos, a pesticide tied to brain and nervous system issues, on crops such as apples, broccoli, corn and strawberries. Stephanie Chapman / Flickr / CC BY 2.0
By Jessica Corbett
In a ruling welcomed by public health advocates, a federal court on Friday ordered the Trump administration to stop stalling a potential ban on a pesticide linked to brain damage in children, giving regulators until mid-July to make a final decision.
<p>Citing unacceptable health risks for children, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/09/us/epa-citing-risks-to-children-signs-accord-to-limit-insecticide.html" target="_blank">ended</a> household use of <a href="https://earthjustice.org/features/what-you-need-to-know-about-chlorpyrifos" target="_blank">chlorpyrifos</a> in 2000. However, farmers can still use the pesticide — which is also tied to <a href="http://npic.orst.edu/factsheets/chlorpgen.html" target="_blank">nervous system problems</a> in people and animals — on crops such as apples, broccoli, corn and strawberries.</p>
<p>The unanimous <a href="https://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/files/En%20Banc%20Mandamus%20Order.pdf" target="_blank">ruling</a> Friday from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit is the latest development in a drawn out court battle between the EPA — which <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2017/03/30/epa-rejects-own-science-greenlight-brain-damaging-pesticide" target="_blank">blocked</a> a planned agricultural ban on chlorpyrifos in 2017 — and the anti-pesticide, environmental and farmworkers organizations who disagreed with that decision.</p><p>Earthjustice attorney Patti Goldman, who represents the groups fighting to ban the pesticide from foods, commended the court for its ruling in a <a href="https://earthjustice.org/news/press/2019/court-orders-epa-to-decide-whether-to-ban-brain-damaging-pesticide-from-food" target="_blank">statement </a>Friday.</p><p>"While we are moving forward, the tragedy is that children are being exposed to chlorpyrifos, a pesticide science has long shown is unsafe," she said. "We hope Trump's EPA finally decides to protect the future of countless children and the health of millions of farmworkers."</p><p>Noting that public health advocates have been working to outlaw the pesticide for more than a decade, Natural Resources Defense Council senior attorney Mae Wu said, "All the science says EPA must ban."</p>
<div id="d46f5" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="U1E5R11576663163"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1119286984625786881" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">2 years after EPA backtracked from its proposal to ban the neurotoxic pesticide chlorpyrifos (and almost 12 years a… https://t.co/ucenWGtaqE</div> — Mae Wu (@Mae Wu)<a href="https://twitter.com/MaeNRDC/statuses/1119286984625786881">1555693787.0</a></blockquote></div><p>Kristin Schafer, executive director of the Pesticide Action Network, tweeted, "No more delay, [EPA]."</p>
<div id="09e4f" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="71DK2I1576663163"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1119299196245307394" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Yes!! The court granted our petition this morn, & set a deadline for EPA to (finally!) take action on the brain-har… https://t.co/gv59i5aKr9</div> — Kristin Schafer (@Kristin Schafer)<a href="https://twitter.com/KristinAtPAN/statuses/1119299196245307394">1555696698.0</a></blockquote></div><p><a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/07/05/finally-victory-people-and-planet-epa-chief-scott-pruitt-resigns" target="_blank">Scandal-ridden</a> former EPA chief Scott Pruitt <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2017/06/28/epa-chief-scott-pruitt-met-dow-ceo-just-killing-effort-ban-toxic-pesticide" target="_blank">blocked</a> the ban on chlorpyrifos in March of 2017, shortly after he met with the chief executive of Dow Chemical, which has been selling the pesticide for decades and lobbied against restrictions on it.</p><p>The appeals court <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/08/09/major-victory-public-health-court-orders-trump-epa-ban-pesticide-harms-kids-brains" target="_blank">ruled</a> last August that the EPA had illegally impeded the ban and ordered the agency to finalize its proposal. But then, the EPA requested a rehearing, which the court granted in February.</p><p>Shortly before the rehearing last month, Goldman explained the legal issues behind the case in a short video:</p>
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="8ae8aa65b3d572be8e94e92786f075f1"><iframe lazy-loadable="true" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rcUYTWMgnhU?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span><p>Environmental Working Group president Ken Cook, in a <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2019/04/19/us-court-orders-trump-epa-decide-fate-brain-damaging-pesticide" target="_blank">statement</a> Friday, criticized EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler — who replaced Pruitt — for failing to ban the pesticide and urged him to fulfill the agency's mission to protect human health and the environment.</p><p>"We'll find out in three months if the Trump EPA remains under the tight control of the chemical agriculture industry, or if Administrator Wheeler will finally take his job seriously and ban this brain-damaging pesticide," said Cook. "It's deplorable that Wheeler has defied the court's order for almost nine months, and it's time for him to do his job and protect public health."</p>
<p> <em>Reposted with permission from our media associate <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/04/19/finally-court-orders-epa-stop-stalling-potential-ban-pesticide-tied-brain-damage" target="_blank">Common Dreams</a>.</em><em></em></p>From Your Site Articles
- Even 'Moderate' Consumption of Red and Processed Meat ... ›
- Wheeler's EPA Keeps Brain-Damaging Chlorpyrifos in Food ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Chlorpyrifos, an organophosphate that comes from the same chemical family as sarin nerve gas, is used on foods such as strawberries. bluecinema / Getty Images
Health and labor organizations will have to argue again in court that chlorpyrifos, a brain-damaging pesticide, must be banned from all food uses, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday. The decision comes four months after Andrew Wheeler's U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) asked the court to rehear the case either by the three-judge panel that originally banned chlorpyrifos in 2018, or by a panel of 11 judges.
<p>The court will schedule proceedings that will likely include further briefings and argument.</p><p>"EPA's own scientists have said for more than two years that chlorpyrifos is harmful, particularly to children," said Patti Goldman, the <a href="https://earthjustice.org/" target="_blank">Earthjustice</a> managing attorney handling the case. "Any delay to ban this toxic chemical is a tragedy. Chlorpyrifos should be banned based on the agency's own scientific conclusion, and the law."</p><p>Last year, <a href="https://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/files/chlorpyrifos%20opinion%208.9.2018.pdf" target="_blank">the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ordered EPA</a> to finalize its proposed ban on chlorpyrifos based on undisputed findings that the pesticide is unsafe for public health, and particularly <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/childrens-health">harmful to children</a> and farmworkers. That court ruling happened nearly two years after the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/donald-trump">Trump</a> administration reversed EPA's own proposal to ban this pesticide. </p><p>Chlorpyrifos is a widely-used agricultural pesticide linked to reduced IQ, attention deficit disorder and other developmental damage in children. Chlorpyrifos, an organophosphate that comes from the <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=dT4wYTpGDNAC&pg=PA227&lpg=PA227&dq=chlorpyrifos+sarin+nazi&source=bl&ots=Tg7FxdSV_l&sig=vh5mxcVii7O8L4e73NHWKEkNy8o&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwij8-HZ_vTTAhVHx1QKHVoBAkAQ6AEIVjAI#v=onepage&q=chlorpyrifos%20sarin%20nazi&f=false" target="_blank">same chemical family</a> as sarin nerve gas, is used on staple foods, such as strawberries, apples, citrus, broccoli and more. Weeks after former EPA boss Scott Pruitt <a href="https://apnews.com/2350d7be5e24469ab445089bf663cdcb" target="_blank">met</a> with the head of the largest manufacturer of chlorpyrifos, Dow Chemical (now DowDuPont), <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/scott-pruitt">Pruitt</a> falsely claimed in 2017 the science is "<a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-03/documents/chlorpyrifos3b_order_denying_panna_and_nrdc27s_petitition_to_revoke_tolerances.pdf" target="_blank">unresolved</a>" and decided EPA would study the issue until 2022.</p><p>First developed by the Nazis for chemical warfare, organophosphates like chlorpyrifos were later repurposed for <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/agriculture">agriculture</a>. <a href="https://earthjustice.org/features/what-you-need-to-know-about-chlorpyrifos" target="_blank">Chlorpyrifos</a> has been banned from home use for about two decades, as it is too toxic to children.</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="4b36d" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="94XQ2M1576662185"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1055595409798782977" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Entire #Pesticide Class Must Be Banned to Save Children’s Health, Landmark Study Says @children @mamavation… https://t.co/RGU0iCPNFA</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/1055595409798782977">1540508532.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less