EPA OKs Controversial Farm Pesticide

Toxic Fumigant Is An Alternative To Banned Pest Killer That Depleted The Ozone Layer

(AP)  The Environmental Protection Agency gave the go-ahead for one-year use of a new agricultural pesticide Friday, saying its own scientific review overrides concerns expressed by more than 50 chemists and other scientists.

Methyl iodide, also known as iodomethane, will be allowed to control soil pests "under highly restrictive provisions governing its use," the EPA said in a statement.

"When used according to EPA's strict procedures, iodomethane is not only an effective pesticide, but also meets the health and safety standards for registering pesticides," the agency said.

Methyl iodide was developed by Tokyo-based Arysta LifeScience Corp. as an alternative to the widely used fumigant methyl bromide, which has been banned under an international treaty because it depletes the ozone layer. The fumigant kills off weeds and soil pests in the soil before planting a wide variety of fruits and vegetables.

The EPA said its decision was based on four years of risk assessment studies, constituting "one of the most thorough analyses ever completed by the agency for a pesticide registration action."

"The agency concluded that there are adequate safety margins and the registration of iodomethane does not pose unreasonable risks," the agency said. Last week, however, a group of 54 scientists, including six Nobel Prize winners, sent a letter to EPA urging that the pesticide not be registered for use because of the potential danger to pregnant women and children, the elderly and farmworkers.

In a letter to Robert Bergman, a University of California chemistry professor who was the lead author on the scientists' letter, EPA Assistant Administrator Jim Gulliford said the EPA's scientific analysis had taken into account their concerns and the agency concluded that its risk assessments "are realistic and demonstrate adequate protection for the most sensitive individuals."

Agency scientists spoke this week by telephone with Bergman and two other signers of the letter, and Bergman said he had reiterated his own concerns about the potential danger to fetuses and infants.

Conditions imposed by EPA on use of the product include use of government-approved respirators for workers applying the fumigant on fields, buffer zones around the fields to protect bystanders and five-day restriction on anyone entering the fields after the chemical is applied.

The fumigant is used to control pests on crops and plants such as strawberries, tomatoes and peppers. Farmers have been struggling to find alternative products that work as well as the banned methyl bromide.

[itgranny]

oh and in my research I must say I did so enjoy the flame Hilary advertisements along the side of the articles discrediting the DDT/thin eggshell links. it enlightened me in exactly who was behind your point of view.

[itgranny]

http://www.indiana.edu/~bradwood/eagles/ddt2.htm
http://www.worldofmolecules.com/pesticides/ddt.htm
http://www.chem.duke.edu/~jds/cruise_chem/pest/effects.html
http://www.learner.org/jnorth/tm/DDT.html
Obviously the scientists at Duke, Oxford, University of Wisconsin, and Indiana University are a bunch of quacks.

And who can believe those crazy eagle and trumpeter swan counters at the dnr and the us fish and wildlife?
http://search.live.com/images/results.aspx?q=eagles%2C%20population%20increase&FORM=BIRE#focal=26327b998dbab8729949bebe4c30e8cc&furl=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.npr.org%2Fprograms%2Fmorning%2Ffeatures%2F2007%2Fmar%2Feagles%2Feagles_graphic200.jpg

http://library.fws.gov/Bird_Publications/trumpeterswan_pop00.pdf


Good thing I checked back because otherwise uneducated comment might be believed by people who don''t want to check it out.

[cdfoxtrot]

If there is a little good news in all this it might be that the very people who put Bush and his cronies into office - rural people - are those most likely to be at risk from this poison. I feel very sorry for the migrant workers many of whom, no doubt, will die prematurely due to this stuff. It takes some arrogance for some government employee EPA a$$wipe to disregard the concerns of six Nobel prize winners.

[itgranny]

"Well does anyone have a viable alternative?" The real question is "Is the chance we''re taking by using this stuff worth the risk?" This isn''t something that''s been used for years and found to be bad. This is something that scientists are questioning safety BEFORE it hits the market. Since we''ve never used it before, I do question why risk it now. Take a look at Thalidomide, a drug that was approved in 50 countries in treatment of morning sickness in women. Take a look at DDT''s history. 30 years after its ban, we''re finally starting to get back eagles, hawks, trumpeter swans and other big birds.

The FDA is supposed to do the research and protect us from stuff that hurts us. That%u2019s what we pay them to do.

Yes, why are we importing food from China? Because Americans like cheap food and corporations like big profits. According to the 2005 report (http://www.bls.gov/cex/csxann05.pdf) we%u2019re spending nearly $2500 more on transportation than food. Rather than give up our SUVs%u2019 we take land that would be used for growing food and grow corn for ethanol. Rather than paying an American worker a fair wage for picking fresh fruit and veggies, we either hire illegal Mexicans or import from China. Or better yet, we%u2019ll spend 2 hours a day commuting from the suburbs, into what we think is a better paying job rather than getting less money and using the extra time as family time gardening and canning.

We really do need to get our priorities straight.

[sheila2u-2009]

Well does anyone have a viable alternative ? We do need the crops for the food supply and they do get destroyed by insects.
I would hope the farmers to be responsible and use this pesticide as per the instructions and cautions.
More importantly is why do we continue to import everything from China where they have few or no safeguards ???

[Krazcarl]

Does anyone rememer "LOVE CANAL" I was raised on a farm these things are needed for harvest and to make a living but always side with cation.

[jw218389]

There is NO supervision of HOW pesticides are applied by farmers. NO ONE is watching...

The EPA watches the APPROVAL but not the APPLICATION on the food we eat.

[hermit22]

100 years from now when 1/2 the kids will be born with 2 heads, the people are going to be saying this generation that spread POISON all over the globe realy were nuts.

[alphaa10-2009]

Bush has been bashed routinely, and with complete justification, for hiding his dirty laundry in news releases issued late Friday, just after the cutoff for Friday evening newscasts. But what do we expect of a regime run with deceit as its watchword?

A responsible handling of any genuine differences among scientists on the methyl iodide issue would have been more open, with a much wider window for public comment and debate.

The EPA assures us, however, its decision was based on "one of the most thorough analyses ever completed by the agency". For an in-house, closed DPA review, that clearly does not promise very much.

[itgranny]

I love how this stuff just happens to come up on Saturday news. It''s almost as if somebody don''t want us to see it. More and more we''re getting messed around with by corporate america who has our government in our pockets. When the FDA approves this sort of thing, its little more than a get out of jail free card for these big farms. They say that there''s strict rules governing the use of this stuff. Right! Like they have trained professionals watching every drop of this stuff. No, the chemical corps will sell it to the corporate farm who will in turn give it to the illegal mexican''s to apply. When will we say enough america?