Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

appalachiablue

(41,148 posts)
Sun Jan 12, 2020, 12:55 AM Jan 2020

EPA Is Promoting 'Worst of the Worst Pesticides': 69 New Products Approved, New Report

'New Report Details How EPA Is Promoting 'Worst of the Worst Pesticides.' From 2017-2018, the agency approved 69 new pesticide products containing an ingredient the EPA recognizes as a "known" or "likely" carcinogen. Common Dreams, Jan. 10, 2020.

A new review into the pesticide products the U.S. approved in 2017 and 2018 reveals the Environmental Protection Agency is carrying out an industry-friendly, "broken" regulatory process that included green-lighting over 100 products with ingredients widely deemed extremely dangerous. Entitled Toxic Hangover: How the EPA Is Approving New Products With Dangerous Pesticides It Committed to Phasing Out, the 11-page analysis was released Tuesday by the Center for Biological Diversity.



-- A detail of the cover image for Toxic Hangover, a new report by Center for Biological Diversity.

Nathan Donley, senior scientist at the Center, authored the study. He said the agency was acting "recklessly." "It's disgusting that rather than do the right thing and phase out the worst of the worst pesticides, the EPA is quietly encouraging their ongoing use," Donley said in a statement.

Among the findings is that the EPA appears all-too willing to give its stamp of approval to pesticides, the study found. To wit: the agency authorized 1,190 end-use pesticide products, which includes herbicides and fungicides. Just 71 such products were not approved in that time frame, meaning about 94 percent were. Where records were available regarding the lack of approval, the reasons were due to deficiencies with the minimum study required or packaging requirements—in other words, the rejections were not based on a product's toxic threat.

"When the EPA is approving 94% of applications that come across its desk, including for some of the planet's most dangerous pesticides," said Donley, "it's obvious the safety review process is completely broken." The products that were approved give cause for concern.

The bottom line, said the analysis, "the agency is actively working against its own efforts to incentivize the replacement of older, more dangerous pesticides by approving new pesticide products that contain these same dangerous ingredients." As the Center outlined, the EPA approved
15 new products containing neurotoxic carbamates or organophosphates (OPs), including chlorpyrifos.
17 new products containing the endocrine disruptor atrazine.
Six new products containing paraquat, which is so lethal that one spoonful can kill a full-grown adult.
Four new products containing the extremely dangerous airborne fumigants methyl bromide or chloropicrin.
91 new restricted-use pesticides, so dangerous they can only be applied by a professional.
69 new products containing an ingredient the EPA recognizes as a "known" or "likely" carcinogen.

Roughly a third of the products approved over the two-year period have more than one active ingredient, with some containing as many as six. That's cause for concern. From the report:

When the EPA analyzes the harms associated with pesticides, it only takes into account exposure to a single active ingredient at a time. This practice fails to fully capture the risk and potential harms that can be caused by 1 out of every 3 products it's approving. This is in addition to the EPA's refusal to consider the impacts of interactions between active ingredients and other ingredients in formulated products that can result in increased toxicity. This refusal to analyze harm from ingredient mixtures, the same mixtures that are sold on store shelves, calls into question the effectiveness of a risk-assessment process that ignores these highly relevant exposures.

The EPA's approach of weening out dangerous products by waiting on companies to voluntarily cancel them just doesn't cut it in terms of protecting human health and the environment, the study says...

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/01/10/new-report-details-how-epa-promoting-worst-worst-pesticides

6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
EPA Is Promoting 'Worst of the Worst Pesticides': 69 New Products Approved, New Report (Original Post) appalachiablue Jan 2020 OP
This agency was one purged early during the trump regime lunasun Jan 2020 #1
I have a good friend who is a toxicologist.... AJT Jan 2020 #2
Drinking paraquat is a frequent method of suicide in the developing world. crazytown Jan 2020 #3
It's almost as though they want to hasten the death of Planet Earth. calimary Jan 2020 #4
I despise them Duppers Jan 2020 #6
Trump is poison Martin Eden Jan 2020 #5

AJT

(5,240 posts)
2. I have a good friend who is a toxicologist....
Sun Jan 12, 2020, 01:21 AM
Jan 2020

the EPA is no longer working for the people, it works for corporate America.

calimary

(81,332 posts)
4. It's almost as though they want to hasten the death of Planet Earth.
Sun Jan 12, 2020, 05:27 AM
Jan 2020

Why? So Jesus will be forced to come back? Like some Heavenly Janitor or something, Who will happily clean up all the messes we made?

Is that what they think? Is that what they believe???

Among the many things I was taught about in Catholic school was that “no one will know the hour,” and that no one can force the Hand of God. It is the ultimate in arrogance to believe otherwise.

Reagan’s abomination of an excuse for an Interior Secretary, James Watt, once testified that “when the last tree is felled, Jesus will come back.” I saw it with my own eyes and heard it with my own ears. Watched it on TV when he was a witness at some Congressional hearing. I was aghast, utterly horrified, to hear him say that. His demeanor was such that it seemed clear that he really did believe this. I knew he was trouble. I knew he felt that the more trees were cut down, the sooner that could make Christ reappear.

That just seems incomprehensible to me. COMPLETELY insane. Out-to-frickin’-lunch, dinner, and midnight snack. The absolute worst possible attitude to be running the Department of the Interior.

Even Nancy Reagan didn’t like him.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»EPA Is Promoting 'Worst o...