Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
Speaking of the EPA, more good news for Corteva
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - General Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 15
| visibility 554

Speaking of the EPA, more good news for Corteva


Jul 19, 2019, 12:15 AM

but this time it's children instead of honeybees.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/18/climate/epa-chlorpyrifos-pesticide-ban.html

The Trump administration took a major step to weaken the regulation of toxic chemicals on Thursday when the Environmental Protection Agency announced that it would not ban a widely used pesticide that its own experts have linked to serious health problems in children.

The decision by Andrew R. Wheeler, the E.P.A. administrator, represents a victory for the chemical industry and for farmers who have lobbied to continue using the substance, chlorpyrifos, arguing it is necessary to protect crops.

It was the administration’s second major move this year to roll back or eliminate chemical safety rules. In April, the agency disregarded the advice of its own experts when officials issued a rule that restricted but did not ban asbestos, a known carcinogen. Agency scientists and lawyers had urged the E.P.A. to ban asbestos outright, as do most other industrialized nations.

In making the chlorpyrifos ruling, the E.P.A. said in a statement that the data supporting objections to the use of the pesticide was “not sufficiently valid, complete or reliable.” The agency added that it would continue to monitor the safety of chlorpyrifos through 2022.

The substance, sold under the commercial name Lorsban, has already been banned for household use but remains in widespread use by farmers for more than 50 fruit, nut, cereal and vegetable crops. In 2016, more than 640,000 acres were treated with chlorpyrifos in California alone.

Representatives of Corteva Agriscience, the maker of chlorpyrifos, did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the decision.

The Obama administration announced in 2015 that it would ban chlorpyrifos after scientific studies produced by the E.P.A. showed the pesticide had the potential to damage brain development in children. That ban had not yet come into force when, in 2017, Scott Pruitt, then the administrator of the E.P.A., reversed that decision, setting off a wave of legal challenges.

Those lawsuits culminated in April when a federal appeals court ordered the E.P.A. to issue a final ruling on whether to ban chlorpyrifos by this month.

Patti Goldman, a lawyer for Earthjustice, an environmental group that brought a legal challenge against the E.P.A.’s 2017 decision on behalf of farmworker organizations and others, criticized the decision. She said groups would sue again and ask the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to expedite the case.

“By allowing chlorpyrifos to stay in our fruits and vegetables, Trump’s E.P.A. is breaking the law and neglecting the overwhelming scientific evidence that this pesticide harms children’s brains,” Ms. Goldman said in a statement.

Representatives of the chemical industry expressed satisfaction with the decision. “The availability of pesticides, like chlorpyrifos, is relied upon by farmers to control a variety of insect pests and by public health officials who work to control deadly and debilitating pests like mosquitoes,” Chris Novak, chief executive of CropLife America, said in a statement.
Hawaii banned chlorpyrifos in 2018. California and New York are considering similar actions. The European Commission is under pressure from consumers and environmental groups to ban the pesticide.

The Trump administration has issued several other decisions in recent months relaxing environmental regulations. This week, the E.P.A. acknowledged a new policy doing away with surprise inspections of chemical and power plants. The “no surprises” policy is aimed at fostering better working relationship between the agency and states, E.P.A. officials wrote.

Last week, the E.P.A. approved broad use of the pesticide sulfoxaflor, which is known to harm bees. And this year the agency announced curbs on a lethal chemical found in paint-stripping products that represented a weakening of a ban that the Obama administration proposed.

Senator Tom Udall, Democrat of New Mexico, who introduced legislation to ban chlorpyrifos nationwide, said there was “no excuse” for keeping chlorpyrifos in use.

“The science on chlorpyrifos is clear and unambiguous,” he said. “It damages the developing brains of children and causes serious health problems in those who have been exposed to it.”

The E.P.A. decision is also one of the first concrete results of a separate Trump administration effort to restrict the use of scientific studies involving human subjects.

Under Mr. Pruitt, the agency proposed a rule saying it could not consider scientific research unless the raw data behind it was made public, saying the issue was a matter of transparency. Scientists argued that studies measuring human exposure to pesticides and other chemicals often rely on confidential health information and argued the E.P.A.’s real motivation was to restrict the ability to develop regulations.

In opting not to ban chlorpyrifos, the E.P.A. rejected a major study conducted by Columbia University on its effects on children in New York City. The E.P.A. said because it was unable to obtain the raw data and replicate that study, which linked the insecticide to developmental delays, it could not independently verify the conclusions.

Angela Logomasini, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a free-market think tank that rejects the established science of climate change, expressed strong support for the decision. She called the E.P.A.’s Science Advisory Panel decision on which the original ban was based “junk science.”

Kevin Minoli, a former senior E.P.A. lawyer who is now a partner at the Washington law firm Alston & Bird, predicted the courts would ultimately ban chlorpyrifos. He called Thursday “the beginning of the end” for the chemical.

The E.P.A. may argue that the science showing chlorpyrifos is unsafe is unclear. But Mr. Minoli said under the Food Quality Protection Act, the E.P.A. must prove that there was a reasonable certainty that the pesticide would not cause harm.

“Whatever you think about the science, there’s at least a question about that,” Mr. Minoli said.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


I'm sure this is just a coincidence, tho


Jul 19, 2019, 12:21 AM

"..the White House quietly named a long-time pesticide executive as chief scientist for the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

If approved by the Senate, Scott Hutchins will be the third major player from Dow Chemical’s pesticide/seed division — now known as Corteva, after Dow’s 2017 merger with DuPont — to hold a high post in Trump’s USDA. Back in April, the administration tapped Ken Isley, a 30-year Dow Agroscience/Corteva veteran, to lead the USDA’s Foreign Agricultural Service. In October 2017, another former Dow man, Ted McKinney, was confirmed by the Senate as undersecretary for trade and foreign agricultural affairs. McKinney had served for 19 years on Dow Agroscience’s government affairs (read: lobbying) team."

https://www.motherjones.com/food/2018/07/trump-just-nominated-a-pesticide-exec-to-oversee-science-at-usda/

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: I'm sure this is just a coincidence, tho


Jul 20, 2019, 10:46 AM

What part of Trump draining the Swamp aren't you getting?

Back to indoctrination for you young man!

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Speaking of the EPA, more good news for Corteva


Jul 19, 2019, 12:40 AM

It is concerning naming cabinet officials to posts where their previous jobs were in some instances a polar opposite of what their current job should be doing. In regards to pesticides though in all fairness we are stuck between a rock and hard place in regards to feeding the masses. Without them it is likely food production would rise in cost and supplies would decrease. Not a fan of Monsanto’s genetically modified stuff either though.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

What a clickbait bunch of ########....


Jul 19, 2019, 11:39 AM

"The Trump administration took a major step to weaken the regulation of toxic chemicals on Thursday when the Environmental Protection Agency announced that it would not ban a widely used pesticide that its own experts have linked to serious health problems in children."

I like how the decision to not ban something that isn't currently banned is considered a major step to weaken regulation.

Did they feel this way when the Obama Administration didn't ban it either?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

They did ban it


Jul 19, 2019, 2:07 PM

The Obama administration announced in 2015 that it would ban chlorpyrifos after scientific studies produced by the E.P.A. showed the pesticide had the potential to damage brain development in children. That ban had not yet come into force when, in 2017, Scott Pruitt, then the administrator of the E.P.A., reversed that decision, setting off a wave of legal challenges.

Those lawsuits culminated in April when a federal appeals court ordered the E.P.A. to issue a final ruling on whether to ban chlorpyrifos by this month.


badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Speaking of the EPA, more good news for Corteva


Jul 19, 2019, 3:09 PM

It really is remarkable to me that people would rather a company they have no personal connection to make a profit than their children be cancer-free.

Oh, and #### sea turtles while we're at it. People are crazy.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Speaking of the EPA, more good news for Corteva


Jul 20, 2019, 2:30 PM

It is not really about them making a profit PU17, most every chemical has an impact on environment or human health. WHat ist has to do with is allowing to produce food in sufficient supplies and a reasonable cost. One is not gonna feed 7.5 billion folks fighting 10 quintillion insects for said food supply. All human activity comes with risk and harm, just a simple fact. Folks like you say just ban stuff, use something else but it does not always work that way. It takes at times decades to know whether the supposed safe replacement is indeed safe, we know right away whether it is effective.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Speaking of the EPA, more good news for Corteva


Jul 20, 2019, 3:30 PM

I get locally grown organic produce from the farmers market that is cheaper than the grocery store. Sure the tomatoes are oddly shaped and do not keep as long, but a big part of he cost is in transporting produce. Can't get much in the way of greens, apples, pears, etc.. here though.

badge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Speaking of the EPA, more good news for Corteva


Jul 20, 2019, 4:14 PM

Careful with that organic labeled stuff Balm, I worked out in California for a period and in addition to offshore oil work we also sprayed crops with helicopters. Well, an apple orchard called and we laid down some serious pesticides but it was too late, pest put holes in the apples. I asked the farmer what he was gonna do, he said simple, I'll lable them organic and sell them for a higher cost. One of the pilots had worked for Kellog's cereal and he said they nuked those fields to where he would not eat anything made by them.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

there are no lables


Jul 20, 2019, 4:16 PM

I am buying them from the growers themselves, are you calling them liars?

badge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: there are no lables


Jul 20, 2019, 4:24 PM

Just saying what I have witnessed from a grower. Also have know those road side/parking lot shrimp sellers to rinse old shrimp in a bleach solution to perk'em up and kill the off odor.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

who buys sea food from a road stand?


Jul 20, 2019, 4:26 PM

and some where along the line you have concluded that i am complete moron, it is unbelievable that I managed to live this long. If I have any more life coach questions for you, I will shoot you a tmail dad. :)

badge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: who buys sea food from a road stand?


Jul 20, 2019, 4:32 PM

That was a good one Balm, nope I do not think you to be a complete moron at all. Yeah, that roadside/parking lot shrimp thing was big in Louisianna. I passed as I went straight to the boats when living there, same as in Saudi Arabia. Miss the prices in KSA though was able to buy 32 kilos for right at $70. Sucked heading and tailing them before dropping in clean milk jugs to freeze in water as it took hours. DId make some Cajuns laugh one night though as they were watching me and a pilot shuck oysters with a hammer and chisel, got tired of gouging my hand.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: who buys sea food from a road stand?


Jul 20, 2019, 4:35 PM

I am too much of a snob with sea food, I like my oysters pre shucked and with a nice side of horseradish, the real stuff that clears out your sinuses. I am fortunate to live in a town where I can get Dorado caught that day, expertly seared, and brought to my table by pretty girl with nice cleavage.


this is my local haunt.



http://crawdaddysjensenbeach.com/

badge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: who buys sea food from a road stand?


Jul 20, 2019, 4:50 PM

I hear ya, decent seafood is few and far between where I live. My buddy has several hundered acres under water for crawfish, couple years back he put in a processing plant so he keeps me supplied with tails. 1-2 times a year he will send me a sack of live for a good ole boil. Sadly the folks who come are served by an old grizzled puck. As to horseradish I prefer Wasabi myself, though it is getting harder to find real stuff instead of dyed green horseradish.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Replies: 15
| visibility 554
Archives - General Boards Archive
add New Topic