CALIFORNIA FOCUS
FOR RELEASE: TUESDAY, MAY 15, 2018 OR THEREAFTER
BY THOMAS D. ELIAS
FOR RELEASE: TUESDAY, MAY 15, 2018 OR THEREAFTER
BY THOMAS D. ELIAS
“THIS
‘RESISTANCE’ LEGAL ACTION ON PESTICIDE IS VITAL”
It is,
quite simply, not within California’s power to rid its own food and fields –
let alone all of America’s fields – of a pesticide derived from chemicals
developed as a nerve gas by Nazi Germans who used them to fatally gas Jews,
gypsies and others they crammed into airtight mobile vans before and during World
War II.
That’s
why it was important for California Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra to intervene in a
federal lawsuit aiming to force the federal Environmental Protection Agency to
make a required safety finding (more likely, a finding that the chemical is unsafe)
in a case that has dragged on more than half a decade.
As
Barack Obama left office, the EPA appeared about to issue such a ruling on
chlorpyrifos, an organophosphate used on crops as diverse as nuts, apples,
broccoli, melons, citrus, corn and soybeans.
After
almost 10 years of delay, the EPA in late 2015 proposed a rule banning even
slight residues of chlorpyrifos on food because of safety concerns. Less than
18 months later, after President Trump had been in office only about two
months, his EPA administrator, Scott Pruitt, abruptly reversed course, ended
the rulemaking process and issued an order in effect leaving alone the existing
standard for acceptable levels of the pesticide in food. Neither he nor anyone
else has gone so far as to find the substance safe.
It may
be politically smart and opportune for Becerra to involve California in the
ongoing case to force action by Pruitt, whose decisions so far have universally
favored big business over consumers, and never mind safety. Even for essentials
like drinking water.
Sure,
Becerra prides himself on filing lawsuits seemingly every week to challenge
Trump administration actions, billing himself as a leader of the “resistance.”
Staying in the news that way gives him an advantage over primary election
competitors like current state Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones, a fellow
Democrat, and retired Judge Steven Bailey, a Republican.
But
there is little doubt about chlorpyrifos. It’s unsafe. A detailed 2016 study by
an independent group of academic scientists found that “Children…are at an
unacceptably high risk of neurodevelopmental disorders that affect the brain
and nervous system, including autism, intellectual disabilities and…behavioral
disabilities.” The nerve gas derivative can lead to lower IQ, attention deficit
disorders and childhood tremors, just to name a few deleterious effects.
The
Obama EPA’s proposed rule recognized this, finding chlorpyrifos adversely
affects brain development. Might the chemical be one reason for the current
seeming epidemic of ADHD? In any case, if this pesticide is used on orchards,
it’s a safe bet that an apple a day will no longer keep the doctor away.
It’s
not that farmers have to use chlorpyrifos, either. Some have voluntarily
shifted to another family of insecticides known as neonicitinoids. One problem
with those products, though, is that they are harder on bees than chlorpyrifos,
even while they are easier on humans.
Becerra’s
action, taken in a 30-page brief, saw California join New York, Washington,
Vermont, Maryland, Massachusetts and Hawaii in backing a lawsuit against Pruitt
by the League of Latin American Citizens.
“Pruitt
is not above the law,” said Becerra. “He has a legal responsibility to make a
safety (or unsafety) finding… He must be held accountable. The stakes are high
for our state and states across the country.”
That
seemed clear from a 2016 finding by the Obama-era EPA, which held there is no
safe use of chlorpyrifos. A scientific panel of California’s Office of
Environmental Health Hazard Assessment last winter voted unanimously to place
the chemical on the list of dangerous substances under the 1986 Proposition 65.
Prop.
65 warnings are common on gasoline pumps and tanker trucks, but might someday
have to be placed on the produce bins of supermarkets if use of this substance
is not outlawed. That’s because California farms now use about 1 million tons
of it yearly on crops, about one-fourth of the national total.
The
bottom line: It’s high time California rids itself of this highly hazardous
pesticide, tainted origins and all. But that won’t happen without EPA action.
Which justifies the Becerra move to help force an EPA ruling, even if there’s
unquestionably some political motivation behind it.
-30-
Email Thomas Elias
at tdelias@aol.com. His book, "The Burzynski Breakthrough: The Most
Promising Cancer Treatment and the Government’s Campaign to Squelch It,"
is now available in a soft cover fourth edition. For more Elias columns, visit www.californiafocus.net
No comments:
Post a Comment