Volume 10, Number 3, September, 1999
In This Issue
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced on August 2, 1999 cancellation agreements and risk reduction strategies to increase protections for American families and their children from risks posed by two of the oldest, most widely used chemical compounds that remain in use as pesticides today. EPA is eliminating specific uses of methyl parathion, and significantly lowering allowable residues for azinphos methyl on a wide variety of produce, including several fruits and vegetables regularly eaten by children.
EPA also laid out a rigorous 18-month schedule for completing its review of all the "organophosphates," a group of 39 older, common pesticides, which include methyl parathion and azinphos methyl. In addition to the organophosphates, the Agency has targeted several other older, widely used pesticides for priority review within the next year and a half, including the pesticides atrazine, aldicarb and carbofuran, among others.
"Our nation enjoys the safest, most abundant food supply in the world, said EPA Administrator Carol Browner. "I want to emphasize that for children and adults alike, the benefits of a diet that includes fruits and vegetables far outweigh the risks of pesticides.
"Nonetheless, as our scientific understanding of the health risks and environmental effects of pesticides improves, it is becoming increasingly clear that foods can be made even safer, especially for children. Our actions will protect children from the adverse effects of exposure to pesticides commonly used on foods. The Agency also is on schedule to meet all deadlines for ensuring safer pesticide use under the new Food Quality Protection Act."
EPA's actions are being taken after an extensive scientific review of the risks posed by these chemicals. EPA has worked closely with the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the agricultural community to ensure that our decisions will not disrupt the growing and marketing plans of farmers. As adjustments are made to reduce pesticide risk, EPA and USDA also are working together to ensure that farmers will have alternative pest management tools and substitutes.
The Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA), which was passed unanimously by Congress under the leadership of the Clinton Administration and based on recommendations from the National Academy of Sciences, provides the public, especially children, with unprecedented protection from the risks of pesticide exposure. Under the Act, which the President signed in 1996, EPA is to apply, for the first time, a comprehensive set of new, more protective healthbased standards. These standards incorporate the most current scientific knowledge available on pesticide risks, and include an additional 10fold safety factor to address the special risks of children's exposures to pesticides.
The reductions EPA is making will address the unique risks children face when exposed to pesticides. For example, it is known that some pesticides pose a greater risk to infants and children because their bodies and internal organs are still developing, which makes them much more susceptible to the effects of pesticides. Children also ingest greater quantities of food and drink relative to their body weight, as compared to adults, which increases their exposure to pesticides.
Based on its concerns, EPA is today eliminating the continued use of methyl parathion -- one of the more potent organophosphates -- on apples, peaches, pears, grapes, nectarines, cherries, plums, carrots, certain peas, certain beans, and tomatoes, among other fruits and vegetables. For azinphos methyl, also considered to be a pesticide of concern, the Agency is reducing application rates and requiring practices that will result in significant reductions in allowable residues on apples, pears, and peaches.
The major manufacturers to enter into these agreements are, for methyl parathion, Cheminova Inc., Wayne, N.J., and Elf Atochem North America Inc., Philadelphia, Pa. For azinphos methyl, the two primary manufacturers are Bayer Corp., Kansas City, Mo., and MakhteshimAgan, BeerSheva, Israel.
In addition to significantly reducing the use of methyl parathion and azinphos methyl on foods popular among children, EPA has taken a number of additional measures to reduce pesticide risks, as called for by FQPA, including:
By the end of next year, EPA is scheduled to complete its reassessment of the organophosphates and several other older, more commonly used pesticides, and to meet the FQPA's food safety goals. A schedule outlining the review of the organophosphates and a progress report on FQPA are available at: www.epa.gov/pesticides.
Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, August 2, 1999
A total of 29 percent of U.S. farms now has Internet access, compared to 13 percent with Internet access in 1997. A total of 47 percent of farms had access to a computer in 1999, compared to the 1997 level of 38 percent. Forty percent of all U.S. farms own or lease a computer, up from 31 percent in 1997. Farms using computers for their farm business increased from 20 percent in 1997 to 24 percent in 1999.
In 1999, 77 percent of U.S. farms with sales of $250,000 and more have access to a computer; 72 percent own or lease a computer; 65 percent are using a computer for their farm business; and 52 percent have Internet access. For farms with sales of $249,999 or less; 45 percent have access to a computer; 37 percent own or lease a computer; 21 percent use a computer for their farm business; and 27 percent have Internet access.
Source: National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), U.S. Department of Agriculture, July 30, 1999
In a look at waterquality conditions of 20 of the country's largest and most important river basins, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) announced June 28, 1999 that streams in areas with significant agricultural or urban development almost always contain complex mixtures of nutrients and pesticides.
The complex nature of those chemical mixtures and the lack of current human and aquatic health criteria to determine risk of exposure, make addressing these issues a top national priority.
Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt said, "Over the last two decades, our nation has made great progress in improving water quality and, yet, as the USGS report points out, major challenges remain in protecting our aquatic resources.
"The widespread occurrence of pesticides and nutrients in water documented in the USGS report underscores the need to devote more attention to the quality of our waterways and the life that depends on them," Babbitt said.
The good news is that concentrations of individual pesticides in samples from wells and as annual averages in streams were almost always lower than current U.S. Environmental Protection Agency drinking-water standards and guidelines.
The USGS assessment results suggest aquatic life may be more at risk than humans from these contaminants. More than one-half of agricultural and urban streams sampled had concentrations of at least one pesticide that exceeded a guideline for the protection of aquatic life.
The potential risk to people and to aquatic life can only be partially addressed, based on available standards and guidelines. The health picture is made more complex by the lack of standards or guidelines for many pesticides and their "breakdown" products or metabolites. Adding to the complexity is the fact that existing standards and guidelines were developed for individual chemicals and do not take into account exposure to mixtures of chemicals and seasonal pulses of high concentrations.
USGS analysis of almost every stream sample and about one-half of the well samples detected the presence of two or more pesticides. The ability of the USGS to "detect" these chemicals in water samples does not automatically translate into impacts on human or aquatic health. (The level of accuracy demanded by the USGS to assess the effects on water quality is a minute amount -- sometimes parts per trillion -- that is well below the threshold used for setting standards and guidelines.)
In addition, potential effects on reproductive, nervous, and immune systems, as well as on chemically sensitive individuals, are not yet well understood. For example, some of the most frequently detected pesticides are suspected endocrine disrupters that have potential to affect reproduction or development of aquatic organisms or wildlife by interfering with natural hormones.
"Despite considerable progress in the four decades since Rachel Carson warned the nation of the risks posed by environmental contaminants, a large range of nutrients and other contaminants continue to enter our waterways," said Mark Schaefer, deputy assistant secretary for water and science at the Interior Department, in commenting on the report.
Schaefer pointed to the report's implication that understanding patterns of contamination in relation to land use, pesticide use, and the natural characteristics of hydrologic systems can help reduce the amounts of pesticides that reach streams and ground water. Of the urban streams studied by the USGS, nearly every one had concentrations of insecticides that exceed guidelines for protection of aquatic life, which shows this is not just an agricultural problem.
Turning to nutrients, the USGS report said that nitrate generally does not pose a health risk for people whose drinking water comes from streams or from aquifers (waterbearing rock formations) buried deep beneath the land.
Protection of human health is more difficult in rural agricultural areas where shallow ground water is used for domestic water supply. High levels of nitrate in shallow ground water also may serve as an "early warning" of possible future contamination of older underlying ground water, which is a common source for public water supply.
Looking at the aquatic environment, concentrations of nitrogen and phosphorus commonly exceed levels that can contribute to excessive growth of algae and other nuisance plants in streams. Such growth can clog water intake pipes and filters and interfere with recreational activities, such as fishing, swimming, and boating.
The subsequent decay of the algae can result in foul odors, bad taste in drinking water and low dissolved oxygen in aquatic habitats -- oxygen that is necessary for fish and other aquatic life to survive.
Source: U.S. Geological Survey, June 28, 1999
For years researchers have been investigating the hypothesis that trace levels of such industrial chemicals as pesticides, chlorinated compounds, and heavy metals are hazardous to human health. Although studies have failed to establish a causal relationship, some scientists and activist groups continue to emphasize the role of trace levels of synthetic chemicals in human illness. This continuing focus may be attributed, in part, to our increased ability to detect low levels of chemicals in the environment. It may also stem, however, from a collective and often irrational fear of such substances.
A report from the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) explores the endocrine disrupter hypothesis, which asserts that certain (primarily manmade) chemicals act as or interfere with, human hormones (specifically estrogens) in the body and thus cause a range of defects and diseases related to the endocrine system. This report also evaluates the possible implications of endocrine disrupters more appropriately called "endocrine modulators" for human health.
The following points are central to ACSH's analysis:
When examining the endocrine disrupter hypothesis, as with any other hypothesis, it is important to validate studies and novel findings before the media and others publicize them prematurely, exaggerate the evidence, and create undue alarm. Unfortunately, once irrational fears have been aroused, it becomes difficult to distinguish real risk from hypothetical risk.
The lack of quick results and definite answers can be frustrating, both to the public and to policymakers, who are often pressured by their constituents to impose the "precautionary principle": Act now and confirm the truth later. But we must proceed objectively, using sound scientific principles or we will find ourselves misdirecting valuable public resources, both intellectual and financial.
Bound copies of the report, "Endocrine Disrupters: A Scientific Perspective", are available from the American Council on Science and Health, 1995 Broadway, 2nd Floor, New York, NY 10023 at $5.00 per copy. The report may be downloaded without charge from ACSH's website at "http://www.acsh.org".
Source: American Council on Science and Health, July 1999
Use of genetically engineered crops with input traits for pest management has risen dramatically since commercial approval in the mid1990s. Crops containing a gene derived from the soil bacterium Bacillus thuringensis (Bt) produce their own toxin to protect the entire plant. Crops having herbicide-tolerant traits permit farmers to use herbicides that offer more effective weed control.
ERS analysts recently examined data from the ERS/NASS Agricultural Resource Management Study (ARMS) to provide new insight into the extent of adoption of genetically engineered cotton, corn, and soybeans in terms of the percentage of acres planted and production by type of technology, crop, and region for 1996, 1997, and 1998. The analysis also includes a comparison of yields and pesticide use for adopters and nonadopters of the technology.
The ERS analyses of ARMS data generally support the following:
The full report is available on the Internet at: "http://www.econ.ag.gov/whatsnew/issues/biotech/".
Source: Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, June 25, 1999
Effective July 1 . . . EPA's final rule revising the phaseout regulations that govern production and importation of methyl bromide is amended. The amendment reflects changes in U.S. obligations under the Montreal Protocol, an international agreement recently adjusted by the signatory countries. To conform with the Montreal Protocol's schedule for industrialized nations, the EPA issued the following schedule for production and consumption of methyl bromide:
Source: OPMP Monthly, Office of Pest Management Policy, U.S. Department of Agriculture, July 1999
The American bald eagle, the living symbol of the United States since 1782, is back from the brink of extinction and can now be removed from the endangered species list. Celebrating a three-decade struggle to protect the bald eagle against issues such as pesticides and encroachments on its habitat, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service formally proposed that the eagle be declared fully recovered, and announced a process that is expected to remove the bird from the list by July 2000. The return of the bald eagle is a fitting cap to a century of better environmental stewardship.
When the Continental Congress in 1782 placed the bald eagle in the center of the Great Seal of the United States, an olive branch in one claw and 13 arrows in the other, there were as many as a half million eagles in the skies of North America. By 1963, however, only 417 breeding pairs remained in the lower 48 states because of hunting, loss of prey and habitat, and the widespread use of DDT. With the banning of DDT in 1972 and the passage of the Endangered Species Act a year later, the bald eagle began making a dramatic recovery. Today, there are an estimated 5,800 breeding pairs. Four years ago, with recovery well underway, the eagle was upgraded from endangered to threatened.
Removing the bald eagle from the government's endangered list will not expose it to new angers and its status will be closely monitored. Officials will keep monitoring eagles for at least five more years. If the population declines significantly, bald eagles will go back on the list. The eagle will continue to be protected from hunting or capture by two laws: the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (which prohibits the taking, killing, possession, transportation, and importation of migratory birds), and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (which bans the taking, possession, transportation, export, and import of a bald or golden eagle, alive or dead). "Taking" is defined as shooting, poisoning, molesting, or harming the bird.
The bald eagle now joins more than 20 other species, including the alligator, in moving off the endangered list. Another eight species are in line for "promotion." These success stories now acquire a new symbolism: a sign of the environmental progress that is possible when "Homo sapiens" puts their mind to it.
Source: Chemically Speaking, University of Florida, August 1999
EPA has created a new web site to provide farm workers, certified applicators, and health care providers with information on the Agency's pesticide safety programs. This web site, which can be accessed in English and Spanish, provides specific information on applicator certification and training requirements and EPA's Worker Protection Standard, including pesticide safety training, notification of pesticide applications, use of personal protective equipment, and emergency medical assistance. The site also provides information on the Pesticides and National Strategies for Health Care Providers, an EPAled initiative aimed at helping health care providers become trained in diagnosing and preventing pesticide-related illnesses. The site is available at: "http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/safety".
Source: U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, August 12, 1999
An EPA draft guidance document, open to public comment through September 13, is an excellent primer about how EPA gathers and employs information on pesticide use. Entitled, "The Role of Use-Related Information in Pesticide Risk Assessment and Risk Management," it can be viewed at: "http://www.epa.gov/oppbead1/userelated.pdf". Prospective land-grant reviewers and others who expect to comment on risk assessments would benefit from studying this document.
Source: OPMP Monthly, Office of Pest Management Policy, U.S. Department of Agriculture, August 1999
Last fall, Bayer Corporation conducted a test of Guthion, an insecticide used on fruit crops, on 50 volunteers in Scotland who were paid approximately $750 to ingest the pesticide. Company officials reported that the study showed no serious side effects in the subjects. The test is one of many that pesticide manufacturers want the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to consider in enforcement of a new federal law that raises the standards protecting children from pesticides. Companies say that human testing would give the EPA an accurate indication of human reactions to pesticide exposure, guaranteeing that their products would be erroneously restricted.
However, opponents of human testing say that the tests are unethical. Marcia Mulkey, director of the EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs, said, "We have not required these tests nor believe they are necessary. But if the companies submit these tests anyway, you're faced with the issue about what to do with them. We need an approach to evaluate both their validity and their ethics."
A special science advisory panel convened by the agency to decide the issue has drafted a report that could allow the routine use of human laboratory tests in calculating risks to humans. In recent weeks, however, reseachers and ethicists on the panel have expressed grave concerns about the tests and sparked reaction over the unreleased report. Half of the 16-member panel may call for a decision that severely limits or prohibits the testing.
Source: Brian Walth, The Oregonian, June 27, 1999
Employment and program opportunities are offered to all people regardless of race, color, national origin, sex, age or handicap. North Carolina State University, North Carolina A&T State University, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and local governments cooperating.
Last modified on September 10, 1999 by Stephen J. Toth, Jr.