LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
2010 Webby Award Winner for Best Political Blog
 
May 26, 2012
Log in / Register

 Choose a size
Text Size

Trending:     gay marriage     barack obama     robert scheer     chris hedges     ndaa
Most Read

TED: 'A Money-Soaked Orgy of Self-Congratulatory Futurism'

Truthdiggers of the Week: 400,000 Canadians Launching the ‘Maple Spring’

Russia and Exxon Mobil Sign Arctic Oil Deal

I Can't Hear Myself Think

A Rare Admission That Money Trumps Everything Else

Most Comments
Most Emailed

Reports
Why Bain Questions Matter
OSHA Struggles When Tower Climbers Die

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Arts & Culture
Better Than We Found It
The Good-Natured Dictator

Digs
Financial Meltdown 101

Truthdig Bazaar
The Sense of Music

The Sense of Music

By Stephen Brown

more items

 
Ear to the Ground

Unaddressed Concerns Over a Pesticide

Email this item Email    Print this item Print   

Posted on Sep 5, 2011
Flickr / ex_magician

Old cans of methyl bromide, the predecessor of the pesticide methyl iodide, are seen in a wildlife refuge in Northern California.

In 2006, more than 50 scientists and doctors—five nobel laureates among them—wrote an urgent letter to the EPA warning of the dangers of the pesticide methyl iodide. In 2007, the agency approved its use.

According to Pesticide Action Network, a group opposed to the use of methyl iodide, exposure to the substance “causes late term miscarriages, contaminates groundwater and is so reliably carcinogenic that it’s used to create cancer cells in laboratories,” posing a serious threat to farmworkers and those who live near treated fields. A panel of independent scientists convened by the state of California concluded that exposure would be “difficult, if not impossible” to prevent.

So why is methyl iodide now approved for use? The chemical was initially welcomed as a savior to the agricultural industry. Years ago the EPA saw it as an alternative to another pesticide, methyl bromide, which was barred because it depleted the ozone layer. As for the controversy that has followed, look to the revolving door between industry and regulatory agencies. —ARK

Mother Jones:

The US government’s official opinion on methyl bromide has been: We can’t fully ban it until we find a suitable alternative. And the agrichemical industry has been scrambling to find a Montreal Pact-friendly alternative for years.

Here’s where we get back to methyl iodide. In 2006, the Japanese chemical giant Arysta presented it to the EPA as the perfect candidate to replace methyl bromide. The pitch: It works just as well on nematodes, but it doesn’t harm the ozone layer. As for farmworkers, well…

Arysta had friends in high places while the EPA pondered methyl iodide: In 2006, then-EPA director Stephen Johnson appointed Elin Miller, then-CEO of the North American arm of Arysta, to a high post within the agency. Before her stint at Arysta, Miller had worked at Dow Chemical, “overseeing the company’s public affairs, global pest management, and Asia Pacific operations,” according to an an EPA press release.

Read more

More Below the Ad

Advertisement


New and Improved Comments

We are launching a major overhaul of our comments section.

In addition to more robust spam filtering and moderation, new features include the ability to rate other comments, sort how they are displayed and respond directly via e-mail or in a thread.

Unfortunately, commenters will lose their existing Truthdig identities. It's a pain, we know, but on the plus side you will now be able to log in with a plethora of options, including Google, Twitter, Facebook and Disqus accounts.

Before launching this system we spent months in discussion with our top commenters. We listened to the feedback and we hope you like what we've come up with.

Please direct any problems or concerns to us via our contact page.

By Textynn, September 5, 2011 at 11:26 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I was poisoned working unknowingly in a school built
in a Superfund site. If they will build schools and
HeadStarts in Superfund sites, the question is , What
won’t they do? 

I was very very ill and my best friend at work died.
No one really knew about it until the Health Dept
wanted to test the kids. I knew I was ill, of course,
but I didn’t know why until that day.  I had to
investigate to find out the real truth and it was
unbelievable.

I actually almost died and finding out what was
happening to me is probably the only thing that saved
me. I had to quit work because I couldn’t walk at one
point and a bunch of other unsavory problems.

Anyway, I write about it and no one seems to notice
much but if one person realized what I am saying, it
might save them.

What am I saying.  Well, for starters, they build
schools in Superfund sites. There’s nothing they
won’t do.

Report this
prisnersdilema's avatar

By prisnersdilema, September 5, 2011 at 1:41 pm Link to this comment

You need to understand how things are now. it doesn’t matter what the hell that
pesticide does or how many miscarriages it causes. The same exact thing has happened
with the herbicides, GMO’s, pharmaceuticals, all of it.

What the scientists say doesn’t really matter. In fact I would advise them to stay out of
light planes.

The corporations, are baby killers, and they own the government and it’s regulatory
agencies.

They will send a swat team to raid you if you sell raw milk. But don’t really care how
many they kill with their poison, because whose going to hold them accountable, no one.

Report this
Newsletter

Get Truthdig in your inbox


 
 
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2012 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.