EPA delays paraquat decision
Agency says it needs more time to examine health effects of pesticide linked to Parkinson's; In other news, UCSF team targets "corporate harm"
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is moving to withdraw its interim regulatory decision on paraquat, announcing that it needs more time to examine the potential health effects of the weed killing chemical that has been widely used in agriculture for decades, but also linked for years to the incurable brain ailment known as Parkinson’s disease.
The EPA had promised to issue a report by Friday, January 17 updating its position on paraquat after a petition filed by the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research and several other health advocacy organizations challenged the EPA’s 2021 interim registration review decision in which the agency concluded that there was “insufficient” evidence linking paraquat exposure to Parkinson’s.
That interim EPA decision did call for certain mitigation measures to reduce risks the agency said it found necessary to protect human health and the environment, and labels on paraquat products were amended in 2022 to reflect those measures. But critics have pressed the EPA to go further and ban the pesticide entirely.
The petition, filed in the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals, challenged not only the agency’s position on Parkinson’s risk, but also the EPA’s analysis of respiratory and dermal exposures, exposure risks from paraquat drift, and how to balance paraquat’s risks and benefits.
As part of the process of reexamining its interim decision, the agency said a year ago that it would spend 2024 analyzing new information about paraquat health effects and considering public comments about the issue. The agency said last year it would issue a final document and potential next steps for paraquat use by the mid-January 2025 date.
Instead, on Friday, the EPA said it is delaying any action. The agency issued a statement saying it had “determined that additional data are necessary to resolve the uncertainty” surrounding certain paraquat risks.
And on Friday, the EPA asked the 9th Circuit to allow it to withdraw its interim decision on paraquat while it further investigates the concerns surrounding the chemical.
“EPA intends to withdraw the Interim Decision and will promptly do so once the Court rules on this motion,” the agency states in its court filing. If the court agrees, the case brought by the health advocacy groups will become moot, the EPA argues in the filing.
Syngenta, the longtime maker and marketer of paraquat products, is being sued by thousands of people suffering from Parkinson’s who blame exposure to paraquat for causing their diseases.
Internal corporate documents obtained by The New Lede reveal that Syngenta was aware many years ago of scientific evidence that paraquat could impact the brain in ways that cause Parkinson’s, and that it secretly sought to influence scientific research to counter the evidence of harm. Syngenta was allegedly aided in suppressing the risks of paraquat by a “reputation management” firm called v-Fluence, The New Lede and The Guardian reported in September.
Internal documents also show that the company withheld damaging internal research from the EPA for many years, and worked to try to discredit a prominent scientist whose work connected paraquat to Parkinson’s.
Read the rest of the story at The New Lede.
In other - though not unrelated - a team of researchers last week launched a “Center to End Corporate Harm” to develop strategies “to counter the destructive influence of polluters and poisoners,” according to a press release announcing the launch.
The center is based at the University of California San Francisco (UCSF).
“Industries that produce health-harming products, including fossil fuels, plastics, petrochemicals, tobacco, and ultra-processed foods, have waged a decades-long assault on government regulatory agencies and policymaking to rig rules in their favor at the expense of public health. At the same time, these health harming products have contributed to a rise in chronic disease. We are working to change that,” the center states on its website.
Read more about the initiative at The New Lede.
And a belated Happy New Year to all of you who read and follow my work - friends and foes alike!
If you have not visited The New Lede (TNL), a journalism initiative of the Environmental Working Group, I hope you’ll give it a try and sign up for the newsletter here.
Sadly, our fight to stop being poisoned never ends, it seems. … My father died from parkinsons a couple years ago. He suspected paraquat, but we have no proof and my family doesn’t want to get involved. It was a several year suffering process for the whole family, along with his own personal horrendous struggles, right up until the day he died.
I have been battling with the County and the State MDT (Montana Department of Transportation) for a couple of years now over their “weed and mosquito” poison spraying program which is directly beside my home and property, as I live on the highway so close that I can spit over my fence into the barrow pit. I have an organic food forrest I have been developing for decades now, not to mention animals, including myself. I have been poisoned by these “hired lackeys” a couple times to where my lips and tongue were numb and tingling and I felt dizzy. This was when I declared WAR on my attackers!
My battle is a lonely one so far, and according to the Department of Agriculture representative I talk to often in this fight, I am the only person he knows of to be fighting these idiots whom are indescriminatly poisoning me, the citizens, the landscape, and the wildlife. I had the head of the Cascade County spraying operation, Josh, who is located for work down at the county shop, say to me in a phone call, “what we spray isn’t nearly as toxic as you think!” ……. WTF? …. Does “TOXIC” all of a sudden have a new definition since I went to school?
After much wrangling by me, the “county officials”, in their typical government display of wisdom, gave the Dept of Ag representative (2) “stop spraying/ start spraying” signs to give to me, for “ME” to “put up” on the highway right of way, as a “SOLUTION” to stop their lackies from poisoning me. I suspect a (excuse my french) “trick-f#ck” psyop operation was effectuated to cause me problems, or they possibly acted just out of sheer ignorance, as it’s hard to say considering their definition of “TOXIC”. … Beyond the apparent legal issues involved with a private citizen planting 6”x 6” x 12’ posts, upon which to attach to the tops with signs, on the state right of way, there’s also the issue of my physical, mechanical, and financial ability to do so. The Ag guy and I had a good banter and chuckle about them giving the signs to him, since he is a “good guy”, and I sent them back with him to return to the county “clown show” shop.
I have managed to have the spraying stopped by my property being conducted by both the State and County, also, now they all know my name and agenda and have adopted a sense of self preservation towards dealing with me, but I have yet to get the State to put up the signs, and I fully expect their lackeys to screw the pooch and poison me and mine, again, before I can get the State to install the signs, so the battle continues. My true goal NOW is to stop ALL the POISON spraying, everywhere in Montana, and have these poisons banned in Montana, but, I am only one person, and I am up against the corporate scourge and the many brainwashed citizens, farmers, and ranchers, of whom all have been groomed by the public fool system and the MSM, to believe that chemicals and poisons are “WONDERFUL” and helpful. I disagree emphatically with any such notion. I also hope that some legal angel may hear my story.
These battles are long and hard, and I can only imagine I will be fighting these “geniuses” for some time to come, and, as I can only imagine, if I do get the signs posted, other citizens will see them and want the same signs posted by their properties, and this, I believe, is the conundrum and the pariah that the state “officials” of whom I am up against, currently realizes.
I just wanted to add this extremely condensed version of my personal “WAR” against poisons to the “toxin” conversation, and attempt to let everyone who may read this know, that it takes “you” to get involved if you want to avoid being poisoned, and it’s well worth the time and effort, as you have but one life! Thanks for your time that you took out of your day to suffer my diatribe.
Many blessings🙏