News Stories relating to Organic Gardening of Importance

EPA issues Stop Sale on some of Scott's products.

CHICAGO, April 23 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ --- U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5 today issued a "stop sale, use or removal" order against Scotts Miracle Gro Co. and three affiliates, all of Marysville, Ohio, for illegal, unregistered and misbranded pesticides. EPA will also issue a stop sale order to Scotts Lawn Care Service.

Scotts has agreed to recall these products from all retail locations across the United States and to set up a process for consumers to safely
return any unregistered products they may have purchased.

An EPA consumer hotline to answer questions about the action has been
established at 888-838-1304 (9 a.m. - 4:30 p.m., Central Daylight Time).
Questions may also be answered by the National Pesticide Information Center at 800-858-7378 (6:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m., Pacific Daylight Time, including weekends). A fact sheet and regularly updated information are posted online at http://www.epa.gov/reg5rcra/ptb/news/.

At this time the risks, if any, posed by these unregistered products
are unknown. EPA and its state partner Ohio Department of Agriculture are conducting a laboratory analysis of these products. Updated information will be posted online when it becomes available. Until EPA has more information about the contents of these products, consumers are advised not to use these products and to store them in a safe, cool and dry place such as a garage or utility shed. Do not dispose of them down the drain, in the garbage or at a community disposal site.

EPA ordered the companies, collectively an international producer and distributor of lawn care products, to immediately stop selling and distributing two products which can be identified by the invalid "EPA registration number" listed on the package. Invalid registration number 62355-4 is marketed under names including "Garden Weed Preventer + Plant Food" and "Miracle Gro Shake 'n' Feed All Purpose Plant Food Plus Weed Preventer." Invalid registration number 538-304 is used primarily by Scotts Lawn Service, a lawn care company. It is marketed under names including "Scotts Lawn Service Fertilizer with .28% Halts," "Scotts Lawn Service Fertilizer 0-0-7 Plus .28% Halts Pro," "Scotts Lawn Service Fertilizer 14-2-5 Plus .28% Halts Pro" and "Scotts Lawn Service Fertilizer 22-0-8 Plus .28% Halts Pro."

In an effort to make sure these products are immediately removed from the marketplace, EPA will also issue stop sale orders to major retailers
that carry these products.

Under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, all pesticides must be submitted to EPA for review, evaluation and registration to ensure that they do not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment. EPA's review and registration process is internationally recognized. Pesticide products that have not undergone EPA review may pose risks to human health and the environment.

"A manufacturer such as Scotts cannot ignore the important legal requirement of registering its pesticides," said Region 5 Administrator Mary A. Gade. "This is a serious violation of EPA's system for protecting people and the environment from the potential harmful effects of pesticides. EPA will fully investigate this violation and take appropriate actions. We are committed to keeping the public informed about any health consequences and providing information to assure the safe recall of these products as soon as possible."

Dr. Bronner's Magic Soaps Files Lawsuit Against Major 'Organic' Cheater Brands

Offending Companies Claim "Organic" or "Organics" on Labels But Main Cleansing Ingredients Are Based on Conventional Agricultural and/or

Petrochemical Material

SAN FRANCISCO, April 28 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The family owned Dr.

Bronner's Magic Soaps filed a lawsuit

(http://www.drbronner.com/usda_organic_body_care.html) in California Superior Court today against numerous personal care brands to force them to

stop making misleading organic labeling claims. Dr. Bronner's and the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) had warned offending brands that they faced litigation unless they committed to either drop their organic claims

or reformulate away from main ingredients made from conventional agricultural and/or petrochemical material without any certified organic material. OCA has played the leading role in exposing and educating consumers about deceptive organic branding.

David Bronner, President of Dr. Bronner's Magic Soaps says, "We have been deeply disappointed and frustrated by companies in the 'natural' personal care space who have been screwing over organic consumers, engaging in misleading organic branding and label call-outs, on products that were not natural in the first place, let alone organic." Dr. Bronner's has determined, based on extensive surveys, that organic consumers expect that

cleansing ingredients in branded and labeled soaps, shampoos and body washes that are labeled Organic", "Organics" or "Made with Organic" will be from organic as distinct from conventional agricultural material, produced without synthetic fertilizers, herbicides or pesticides, and free of petrochemical compounds.

For example: The major cleansing ingredient in Jason "Pure, Natural & Organic" liquid soaps, body washes and shampoos is Sodium Myreth Sulfate, which involves ethoxylating a conventional non-organic fatty chain with the

carcinogenic petrochemical Ethylene Oxide, which produces caricinogenic 1,4-Dioxane as a contaminant. The major cleansing ingredient in Avalon "Organics" soaps, bodywashes and shampoos, Cocamidopropyl Betaine, contains

conventional non-organic agricultural material combined with the petrochemical Amdiopropyl Betaine. Nature's Gate "Organics" main cleansers

are Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate (ethoxylated) and Cocamidopropyl Betaine. Kiss My Face "Obsessively Organic" cleansers are Olefin Sulfonate

(a pure petrochemical) and Cocamidopropyl Betaine. Juice "Organics", Giovanni "Organic Cosmetics", Head "Organics", Desert Essence "Organics", and Ikove "Organic" all use Cocamdiopropyl Betaine as a main cleansing ingredient and no cleansers made from certified organic material. Due to the petrochemical compounds used to make the ingredient, Cocamidopropyl Betaine is contaminated with traces of Sodium monochloroacetate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chloroacetic_acid), Amidoamine (AA)

(http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Amidoamine&action=edit&redlink=1

) , and dimethylaminopropylamine(DMAPA)

(http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dimethylaminopropylamine&action=

edit&redlink=1) . Amidoamine in particular is suspected of causing skin sensitization and allergic reactions even at very low levels for certain individuals. Organic consumers have a right to expect that the personal care products they purchase with organic branding or label claims, contain cleansing ingredients made from organic agricultural material, not conventional or petrochemical material, and thus have absolutely no petrochemical contaminants that could pose any concern.

Dr. Bronner's products, in contrast to the brands noted above, contain

cleansing and moisturizing ingredients made only from certified organic

oils, made without any use of petrochemicals, and contain no petrochemical

preservatives. The misleading organic noise created by culprit companies'

branding and labeling practices, interferes with organic consumers ability

to distinguish personal care whose main ingredients are in fact made with

certified organic, not conventional or petrochemical, material, free of

synthetic preservatives.

Lawsuit Also Names Estee Lauder, Stella McCartney's CARE, Ecocert and OASIS

Ecocert is a French-based certifier with a standard that allows not only cleansing ingredients made from conventional versus organic agriculture, but also allows inclusion, in the cleansing ingredients contained in products labeled as ":Made with Organic" ingredients, of certain petrochemicals such as Amidopropyl Betaine in Cocamidopropyl Betaine. Even worse, despite Ecocert's own regulations prohibiting the labeling as "Organic" of a product containing less than 100% organic content, Ecocert in practice engages in "creative misinterpretation" of its own rules in order to accommodate clients engaging in organic mislabeling. For instance, Ecocert certifies the Ikove brand's cleansing products to contain less than 50% organic content, noted in small text on the back of the product, where all cleansing ingredients are non-organic including Cocamidopropyl Betaine which contains petroleum compounds. Yet the product is labeled "Organic" Amazonian Avocado Bath & Shower Gel. Another instance is Stella McCartney's "100% Organic" CARE line certified by Ecocert that labels products as "100% Organic" that are not 100% Organic alongside ones that are; the labels of products that are not 100% organic simply insert the word "Active" before "Ingredients." In allowing such labeling, Ecocert simply ignores the requirements of its own certification standards. Furthermore, the primary organic content in most Ecocert certified products comes from "Flower Waters" in which up to 80% of the "organic" content consists merely of just regular tap water that Ecocert counts as "organic."

Explicitly relying on the weak Ecocert standard as precedent, the new Organic and Sustainable Industry Standard ("OASIS")-a standard indeed developed exclusively by certain members of the industry, primarily Estee Lauder, with no consumer input--will permit certification of products outright as "Organic" (rather than as "Made with Organic" ingredients) even

if such products contain hydrogenated and sulfated cleansing ingredients such as Sodium Lauryl Sulfate made from conventional agricultural material grown with synthetic fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides, and preserved with synthetic petrochemical preservatives such as Ethylhexylglycerin and Phenoxyethanol. [Reference: OASIS Standard section 6.2 and Anti-Microbial List] The organic content is required to only be 85%, which in water and detergent-based personal care products, means organic water extracts and aloe vera will greenwash conventional synthetic cleansing ingredients and preservatives.

The OASIS standard is not merely useless but deliberately misleading to organic consumers looking for a reliable indicator of true "organic" product integrity in personal care. Organic consumers expect that cleansing ingredients in products labeled "Organic" be made from organic not conventional agriculture, to not be hydrogenated or sulfated, and to be free from synthetic petrochemical preservatives. Surprisingly, companies represented on the OASIS board, such as Hain (Jason "Pure, Natural & Organic"; Avalon "Organics") and Cosway (Head "Organics",) produce liquid soap, bodywash and shampoo products with petrochemicals in their cleansers even though use of petrochemicals in this way is not permitted even under the very permissible OASIS standard these companies have themselves developed and endorsed.

Ronnie Cummins, Executive Director of the OCA, said: "The pressure of imminent litigation outlined in cease and desist letters sent by OCA and Dr. Bronner's in March prompted some serious discussion with some of the offending companies, but ultimately failed to resolve the core issues."

Organic weed control with vinegar: Application volumes and adjuvants

Authors
Webber, Charles
Shrefler, James - OSU, LANE, OK

Citation: Webber III, C.L., Shrefler, J.W. 2007. Organic weed control with vinegar: Application volumes and adjuvants. Proceedings of Horticultural Industry Show. 26:149-151.

vinegarSprayer

Interpretive Summary: Initial research and anecdotal testimonies have reported that vinegar (water and acetic acid) has potential as an organic herbicide, but further research is needed to better understand the relationship between the percentage of acetic acid applied and the use of spray additives to weed control. The objective of this research was to determine the effect of application volumes and spray additives (aduvants) on weed control. The experiment included three application volumes [20, 80 and 160 gallons per acre (gpa)] of vinegar (20% acetic acid) applied in combination with three additives [orange oil, non-ionic surfactant, and crop oil concentrate (COC)]. The experiment also included two weedy-checks and four replications. The orange oil, non-ionic surfactant, and COC were mixed at a 1.0% volume/volume (v/v), based on each application volume (20, 80, and 160 gpa). The weeds present at spraying included large crabgrass, goosegrass, carpetweed, cutleaf evening primrose, spiny amaranth, eclipta, and yellow nutsedge. Vinegar was more effective controlling broadleaf weeds than grass weeds. Using an additive (orange oil, non-ionic surfactant, and COC) increased the effectiveness of vinegar only at the lowest application volume (20 gpa). There were no weed control differences between the 80 and 160 gpa application volumes; therefore there was no advantage of using the highest application rate. Additional research should focus on the impact of multiple applications of vinegar at lower application volumes on weed control.

Technical Abstract: Preliminary results have indicated that vinegar has potential as an organic herbicide, but further research is needed to increase our understanding of the relationship between acetic acid concentrations, application volumes, adjuvants, weed species, and weed maturity on effectiveness of vinegar to control weeds. The objective of this research was to determine the effect of application volumes and adjuvants on weed control efficacy using vinegar with a 20% acetic acid concentration. The factorial experimental design included applications of vinegar (20% acetic acid) applied at three sprayer application volumes [20, 80 and 160 gallons per acre (gpa)] in combination with four adjuvant treatments [none, orange oil, non-ionic surfactant, and crop oil concentrate (COC)]. The experiment also included two weedy-checks and four replications. The orange oil, non-ionic surfactant, and COC were mixed at a 1.0% volume/volume (v/v), based on each application volume (20, 80, and 160 gpa). The weeds present at spraying included large crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis L.), goosegrass (Eleusine indica L., Gaetn.), carpetweed (Mollugo verticillata L.), cutleaf evening primrose (Oenothera laciniata Hill), spiny amaranth (Amaranthus spinosus L.), eclipta (Eclipta prostrata L.), and yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus L.). Total weed control ranged from 25% for the 20 gpa application volume with no adjuvant to 96% control for the application volumes of either 80 or 160 gpa used with orange oil. Vinegar was less effective in controlling grasses than broadleaf weeds. Ninety percent, or greater, grass control, primarily crabgrass, was obtained when the vinegar was applied at 80 or 160 gpa, irrespective of the adjuvant used. Broadleaf weed control was 99 or 100% for plots receiving either 80 or 160 gpa. Cutleaf evening primrose and carpetweed were the most susceptible to vinegar applications; however, this response may reflect differences in weed size rather than weed species. When averaged across adjuvants (none, orange oil, non-ionic surfactant, and COC), weed control increased as application volume increased to either 80 or 160 gpa. The selection of the adjuvant or the lack of an adjuvant did not significantly affect broadleaf weed control. The use of adjuvants did increase grass control; adding orange oil provided significantly greater control than using COC. Additional research should focus on the impact of multiple applications of vinegar at lower application volumes on weed control.

New Studies Reveal DNA Damage from Anti-Coca Herbicide

By Stephen Leahy

Scientific studies have collected evidence of the negative effects of the glyphosate-based herbicide Roundup on human and animal health. The chemical is used in aerial spraying to eliminate illicit coca crops in Colombia.

TORONTO, Jun 11 (Tierramérica).- U.S.-funded aerial spraying of suspected coca plantations in Colombia near the Ecuador border has severely damaged the DNA of local residents, a new study has found.

Blood samples from 24 Ecuadorians living within three kilometers of the northern border had 600 to 800 percent more damage to their chromosomes than people living 80 km away, found scientists from the Pontificia Catholic University in Quito, Ecuador.

The border residents who were tested had been exposed to the common herbicide glyphosate -- sold by the U.S. agribusiness giant Monsanto under the brand Roundup --during a series of aerial sprayings by the Colombian government begun in 2000, part of the anti-drugs and counterinsurgency Plan Colombia, financed by Washington.

The Ecuadorians suffered a variety of ailments immediately following the spraying, including intestinal pain and vomiting, diarrhea, headaches, dizziness, numbness, burning of eyes or skin, blurred vision, difficulty in breathing and rashes, says the study, which is to be published in the journal Genetics and Molecular Biology.

But the extensive damage to DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) found in the randomly selected individuals may activate the development of cancer or other developmental effects resulting in miscarriages, according to lead researcher César Paz y Miño, head of human molecular genetics at the Catholic University of Ecuador.

In general, everyone has some level of DNA damage due to exposure to ultraviolet radiation, air pollution, toxic chemicals and other factors. However, none of the 24 randomly-selected individuals used tobacco, alcohol or non-prescription drugs, nor did they use other herbicides or pesticides that could have caused the extensive DNA damage observed, Paz y Miño told Tierramérica.

The concentration levels of Roundup were measured at more than 20 times the maximum recommended rate and may be the reason behind the genotoxic (capable of causing genetic mutation) effect on the exposed individuals, he said.

The blood samples were collected by Spanish doctor Adolfo Maldonado, of the non-governmental Acción Ecológica, which since the beginning of this decade has been studying health, economic and social problems of Ecuadorian populations affected by the aerial herbicide spraying in neighboring Colombia.

Washington has been financing since 2000 the aerial spraying in Colombia of coca crops -- the raw material of cocaine, of which Colombia is the world's leading producer. In the past three years it has spent more than 1.3 billion dollars to combat the drug trade.

In 2006, the Colombian National Police's Anti-Narcotics Directorate (DIRAN) sprayed 171,613 hectares of illicit coca and opium poppy, according to a March 2007 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report released by the U.S. State Department.

The extent of aerial spraying has increased every year since 2000, with 24 percent more in 2006 than 2005.

Three aerial spraying units, funded and operated by the United States, work full-time in Colombia, and a fourth unit was added in 2006, the report notes.

Aerial spraying "follows strict environmental safeguards, monitored permanently by several GOC (government of Columbia) agencies," it says.

As for impacts on health, "the Colombian National Institute of Health has not verified a single case of adverse human health effects linked to glyphosate spraying," states the report.

Paz y Miño disputes that assertion. In addition to his own study, there are studies from the University of the Andes and from the National University of Colombia that also "report the damage that the aerial sprayings produces in Colombians", he said.

In fact, since 1994 there have been many studies that show potential health impacts of Roundup on people and wildlife, he said.

Roundup is a mixture of glyphosate and other chemicals designed to increase the herbicide's penetration into plants or boost its toxic effects.

But only glyphosate -- the active ingredient -- has been fully tested by U.S. regulators for its health and environmental effects.

In 2005, a team of French scientists headed by Gilles-Eric Seralin reported that Roundup was toxic to human placental cells within hours of exposure, at levels 10 times lower than those found in agricultural use.

Just last month, Seralin reported new findings which show that even diluted up 10,000 times, the chemical disrupted hormone production in placental cells.

"This work may be of help in better understating the problems of miscarriages, premature births or sexual malformations of babies," Seralin said in a statement.

In April of this year, DNA damage was also documented by Turkish scientists at Mersin University. The DNA of fish was damaged even at extremely low levels of five to 15 parts per million of Roundup.

"There is no doubt that the spraying program is killing amphibians in Colombia," said Rick Relyea, a biologist at the University of Pittsburgh, in the northeastern U.S. state of Pennsylvania.

In 2005, Relyea documented that Roundup was lethal to frogs. More than 90 percent of the tadpoles exposed to small doses were killed by a chemical called polyethoxylated tallowamine (POEA), which is part of normal Roundup formulation. POEA allows glyphosate to penetrate plant leaves.

Experiments with frogs in the United States showed that "more than 80 percent of the adults exposed to Roundup spray at normal rates died in a day." There is no data about the impacts of the spraying of Colombian frogs and amphibians.

Those findings prompted the U.S. Congress to obtain guarantees in 2006 that wetlands would not be sprayed in Colombia, Relyea told Tierramérica.

However, most frogs live in small wetlands that aren't easily detected from the air and many species in the region are found in trees and grasslands, he said.

As Roundup is the most widely used herbicide in the world, it may be a factor the dramatic global decline in frogs, but there is no firm proof, Relyea says.

But there is ample proof of the effects of aerial spraying along the Ecuadorian border, says Paz y Miño.

Destruction of legal crops, death of domestic animals and fish in hatcheries, in addition to the human health impacts have all been documented.

His research group is finishing a new set of studies on the effects of glyphosate, alone or with POEA, on insects and in vitro cultured human cells, he said.

"I could tell you, in advance, that we have found (genetic) damage in these."

* Stephen Leahy is an IPS correspondent.

Formal Recommendation from the National Organic Standards Board

Formal Recommendation from the National Organic Standards Board to the USDA National Organic Program on to ban Sodium Lauryl Sulfate for use on crops.

Full Read PDF Here >>

EPA Scientists Revolt

http://organicconsumers.org/epa7.htm

Malathion Update 2005

http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/op/malathion.htm

Greenpeace Exposes Monsanto's Attempt to Patent Pigs & Their Offspring Worldwide

Source: Greenpeace International
Posted by: Greenpeace International
Aug 2, 2005
http://www.greenpeace.org/no-pig-patent

Greenpeace reveals Biotech giant Monsanto application for global pig patent Amsterdam/New Delhi, 2 August 2005 -- Greenpeace researchers have uncovered patent application from the biotech giant Monsanto which, if granted, would give the company world-wide control over breeding of pigs and their off spring. Greenpeace warns that Monsanto's aggressive patent practices covering genetically modified (GM) crops and normal seeds threaten biodiversity, endanger world food security and ruin the livelihoods of farmers and calls for the patent applications to be withdrawn.

Speaking at an international conference on Biodiversity, Biopiracy and Patents (1), being held in New Delhi, Eric Gall of Greenpeace International said: "Monsanto is once again trying to control the food we grow. This is patenting life. This is abuse of patent laws and it is an outright offence to farmers world-wide."

Filed at the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) in Geneva (2)
the patent application stakes a claim on pig rights in more than 160
countries, including the UK, Germany, the US, Russia, Brazil, Australia,
China and India. If granted, US-based Monsanto will be in a position to prevent breeders and farmers from breeding pigs with certain characteristics or methods of breeding, or force them to pay royalties. The patents cover methods of conventional breeding and also the screening for naturally occurring genetic conditions that can make pigs grow faster.

Monsanto wants to enter a growing market with an increasing consumer demand for meat products globally. The Monsanto patents pretend to speed up breeding for higher economical profit. The hitch is that these pigs and their descendants would all be patented - and royalties would have to be paid to Monsanto.

Monsanto is already infamous for its aggressive marketing of GM crops such as GM soy and GM maize, as well as for its far-reaching monopolies on all kind of seeds (3). Greenpeace wants Monsanto to drop patent applications on farm animals and seeds, and stop the abuse of patent law, bio-piracy, animal patents and seed monopolies. Greenpeace also launched a cyberaction against Monsanto today.

"If this patent gets granted, Monsanto could control the normal breeding of pigs to a large extent, without any real invention behind it. The experience farmers have with this company so far (4) let them expect a further shocking exercise of squeezing royalties and suing farmers on global scale," warned Gall. "This patent application is so absurd we wonder what Monsanto will come up with next?"

For more information Eric Gall, Greenpeace European Unit GMO policy adviser, mobile +91 98 116 82601 (in India) and +32 (0)496 161 582 Christoph Then, GE campaigner, Greenpeace International, mobile +49 171 878 0832 Judit L. Kalovits, media officer, Greenpeace International, mobile +31 621 296 914 Notes to Editors
(1) "EU - India Dialogue cum Strategy Session on Biodiversity, Indigenous Knowledge and Intellectual Property Rights" conference between the European Union and India is held in New Delhi, India on the 1-2 August 2005.

(2) Patent applications WO 2005/017204 and WO 2005/015989 were filed in February 2005 at the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) in Geneva. There are more than 160 countries mentioned where the patent should be granted, such as in Europe, Russian Federation, Asia (India, China, Philippines) America (USA, Brazil, Mexico), Australia and New Zealand. The WIPO itself can only receive applications, but does not grant any patents; it will forward the applications to regional patent offices in the US, Europe or elsewhere. At this stage the patent are not granted yet, but they could be accepted for example under European and US Regulation. For the full document see: http://www.wipo.int/cgi-pct/guest/ifetch5?ENG+PCT-ALL.vdb+14+1147748-SCORE+ 256+4+20872+BASICHTML-ENG+1+1+1+25+SEP-0/HITNUM,B,,SCORE+2005015989

(3) The company has spent about 10 billions US $ over the last ten years to buy a large range of companies involved in seed and agricultural production. According to Greenpeace, such patents and monopolies lead to a decrease of biodiversity in agriculture, endanger global food security and put pressure on farmers' livelihoods worldwide. For more on patents at http://archive.greenpeace.org/geneng/reports/pat/intrpat.htm

(4) The way Monsanto tries to control its genetically manipulated seeds such as herbicide resistant soybeans by taking farmers to court has already led to worldwide controversies and protests. Recently it was made public that Monsanto even tries to get additional royalties for harvests from Argentinean soybean farmers exported to Europe by filing court cases in Denmark, claiming the cargo of shipments was their intellectual property.

Take Action against Monsanto at http://www.greenpeace.org/no-pig-patent.

Toxic Chemicals & Pesticides Are Concentrating in the Bodies of American Children

From: Environment News Service <www.ens-newswire.com

Cadmium, Mercury, Pesticides: Environmental Chemicals of Concern

ATLANTA, Georgia, July 22, 2005 (ENS) - A decline in exposure to secondhand smoke and continued decreases in children¹s blood lead levels represent the good news from a new report on human exposure to environmental chemicals by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). But chemicals such as cadmium, mercury and insecticides were found in the bodies of test subjects at levels that could be causing health problems, agency officials said.

National reports on human exposure to environmental chemicals have been issued by the CDC every two years since 1999. For this year¹s report, issued Thursday, CDC¹s Environmental Health Laboratory measured 148 chemicals or their breakdown products in blood or urine.

Of the chemicals tested, 38 have never been measured before in the U.S. population.

Dr. Julie Gerberding is director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta. (Photo courtesy NIH) ³This is the most extensive assessment ever of Americans¹ exposure to environmental chemicals; it shows we¹re making tremendous progress, and that¹s good news,² said CDC Director Dr. Julie Gerberding. "It really provides a giant step forward in our ability to understand the relationship between exposures to various chemicals and potential human health effects." Commenting on the report Thursday, House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi said the funding for CDC's Environmental Health Lab to conduct these studies was well spent. "The report will assist researchers in determining whether these exposures are contributing to birth defects, cancer, asthma, Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases, and other health problems," she said. ³Exposure to secondhand smoke continues to plummet and blood lead levels in children are way down," Dr. Gerberding said. "However, many challenges remain."

Cadmium, a metal primarily associated with exposure to cigarettes through tobacco use, is one of those challenges. About five percent of the population of adults 20 years and older, had cadmium levels in their urine that were close to the point at which there was concern for health effects, Gerberding said.

Finding cadmium of this level indicates a need for further research, she said.

Smoking cigarettes are associated with elevated levels of cadmium in the urine. (Photo courtesy Office of the Kentucky Attorney General) Recent studies have shown that urine levels of cadmium as low as one microgram per gram of creatinine may be associated with subtle kidney injury and an increased risk for low bone mineral density, said the CDC.

The samples for this report were collected from 2,400 people who participated in CDC's National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) from 1999 to 2002. NHANES is an ongoing national health survey of the general U.S. population. The report provides exposure data on the U.S. population by age, sex, and race or ethnicity.

Health experts determined that exposure to secondhand smoke is decreasing when they looked at levels of a chemical called cotinine, a marker of exposure to secondhand smoke in nonsmokers.

Compared with median cotinine levels for 1988-1991, median levels measured from 1999-2002 have decreased 68 percent in children, 69 percent in adolescents, and about 75 percent in adults.

Still, some people are at greater risk. The new report shows that non-Hispanic blacks have levels twice as high as those of non-Hispanic whites or Mexican Americans, and children¹s levels are twice as high as adults¹ levels.

New data on blood lead levels in children aged one to five years show that for 1999 to 2002, 1.6 percent of those children had elevated blood lead
levels. The levels of lead in their blood were 10 micrograms per deciliter or greater the CDC blood lead level of concern.

While this percentage has decreased from 4.4 percent in the early 1990s, Dr. Jim Pirkle, deputy director for science at CDC¹s Environmental Health Laboratory, said 1.6 percent still means too many children are being damaged by lead in their blood.

³Lowering blood lead levels in children is one of the major environmental health accomplishments of the past 30 years," Dr. Pirkle said. However, CDC is still concerned about exposure to lead from lead-based paint and lead-contaminated house dust, soil and consumer products."

³There is no safe blood lead level in children," he said. "Children are best protected by controlling or eliminating lead sources before they are exposed.² Dr. Gerberding says the decrease in blood lead levels is due partly to the replacement of leaded gasoline with unleaded. "I think really speaks to the removal of lead from gasoline, which was one of the major correlates of this reduction but also the lead abatement programs and other steps, being able to screen, treat and protect children from lead exposure," she said.

Tenement children are at risk of lead exposure from old paint and lead-laden dust. (Photo courtesy Battelle) Mercury is poses a health risk for 5.7 percent of women tested, the report shows.

The report provides information about exposure to methyl mercury, found in fish and shellfish. Methyl mercury is formed when metallic mercury enters the air or water from mining ore deposits, burning coal and waste, and from manufacturing plants. Methylmercury may be formed in water and soil by small organisms called bacteria. Methylmercury builds up in the tissues of fish. Mercury levels above 58 micrograms, millionths of a gram, are associated with neurodevelopmental effects in the fetus, the CDC report states "No women in the survey had mercury levels that approached this concentration," Dr. Gerberding said, "but we do see that a small percentage of women, about 5.7 percent of women had levels within a factor of ten of what has been defined as the health threshold effect."

Mercury's harmful effects that may be passed from the mother to the fetus include brain damage, mental retardation, incoordination, blindness, seizures, and inability to speak, according to the federal Agency for Toxic Substances, which operates under CDC jurisdiction. Children poisoned by mercury may develop problems of their nervous and digestive systems, and kidney damage.

For the first time, the CDC studied the effect of organochlorine based pesticides and other pesticides known as pyrethroids.

Organochlorine pesticides like Aldrin and Endrin and Dieldrin, used in the United States for decades, were mostly eliminated from use in the late
1980s. Dr. Gerberding said the exposure report shows that since these chemicals have no longer been used as pesticides, they have been "virtually eliminated" from the human population.

"So over time there's been a decay, the pesticides have been eliminated from our environment and people are no longer experiencing any potential risk from exposure to them," she said.

The pyrethroids are insecticides that are found in almost any product that we would use today when we go to the store to buy an insect agent, Gerberding explained. "We have been able to measure five of these for the first time ever in the United States population."

"What we know is that because they're used so ubiquitously, there is widespread exposure to them and our exposure report bears this out," the CDC director said. "So we have a reason now to look further to see if there are any health effects from these exposures."

"We have no evidence of that at this point in time, but, again, now that we've documented that not only are they being used in the environment, but they can be measured in the blood of people in that environment, it's our responsibility to take this to the next step and to work with our scientific partners to assess what if any health effects are a consequence of this, Dr. Gerberding said.

Spraying insecticide on lettuce (Photo courtesy UC Berkeley) CropLife America, which represents the nation¹s crop protection industry, was quick to point out the CDC conclusion that the reason so many chemicals are detect in blood is because today's tests are so technically sophisticated.

CropLife agreed with the CDC conclusion that, ³Just because people have an environmental chemical in their blood or urine does not mean that the chemical causes diseaseSSmall amounts may be of no health consequence, whereas larger amounts may cause adverse health effects.² Pesticides are the most intensely researched, tested and regulated chemicals in the United States, the industry group said, and in addition, we need them. "The benefits of having safe, affordable and nutritious fruits and vegetables are well documented and the proper use of pesticides ensures these benefits to all Americans," CropLife said.

"Pesticides and pest management products also help safeguard public health by controlling or eliminating pests that cause disease and property damage," said CropLife. "They reduce waterborne and insect-transmitted diseases such as Lyme disease and West Nile virus and protect homes and gardens from damage from termites and other pests."

For the first time, the CDC tested for a family of compounds called phthalates, used to soften vinyl plastics and in cosmetics such as nail polish.

Phthlates were identified as problem chemicals in the mid-nineties by Greenpeace, which campaigned against them for years to the ridicule of the plastics industry. But now some convincing scientific studies are in and earlier this month six phthlates were banned across the European Union. "These compounds are associated with plastics and vinyl, they come in a variety of chemical variations," said Dr. Gerberding, "and in this report our scientists were able to refine the ability to separate out the various phthalates and to look at them with much more precision individually than ever before."

"I think this is going to really help us refine our ability to study the relationship, if any, between phthalate exposure and potential immunologic and other toxicities," she said.

As the report was released, the Washington, DC research and advocacy organization Environmental Working Group (EWG) asked the agency to begin testing the umbilical cord blood of newborn babies.

EWG also sent letters to 20 top chemical manufacturers asking them to release any internal tests to determine whether their products pollute babies.

The letters follow an investigative report that EWG released last week commissioning laboratory tests of 10 umbilical cord blood samples for the most extensive array of industrial chemicals, pesticides and other pollutants ever studied in newborns.

EWG found that the babies averaged 200 contaminants in their blood, including mercury, fire retardants, pesticides and the Teflon production chemical PFOA. In total, the babies' blood contained 287 chemicals, including 209 never before detected in cord blood. The study is available at www.ewg.org/reports/bodyburden2.

"Chemical exposures during childhood can be far more harmful than those later in life. Our cord blood findings above all raise the need for testing that ensures the safety of the widespread exposures we've documented that begin even before birth," Jane Houlihan, EWG's vice president for research, said.

"CDC is uniquely positioned and funded to respond to this need through its national body burden testing program, but CDC cannot test for all 80,000 industrial chemicals registered for use today," Houlihan said. "The companies that produce these chemicals have a responsibility to know if their products end up in babies, and to share what they learn with the public."

The American Chemistry Council, which represents the industry supports the biomonitoring studies, and agrees with the CDC's cautionary statement that the mere detection of a chemical does not necessarily indicate a risk to health.

"The information in the report should not be cause for undue concern," said the Council, "but a springboard for better understanding of exposure and - with more information - how the human body interacts with the environment." The Third National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals and an executive summary are available online at: http://www.cdc.gov/exposurereport.

Questions or Comments: editor@ens-news.com

The Pollution in Newborns

A benchmark investigation of industrial chemicals, pollutants and pesticides
in umbilical cord blood

Environmental Working Group, July 14, 2005

Summary. In the month leading up to a baby's birth, the umbilical cord
pulses with the equivalent of at least 300 quarts of blood each day, pumped back
and forth from the nutrient- and oxygen-rich placenta to the rapidly growing
child cradled in a sac of amniotic fluid. This cord is a lifeline between mother
and baby, bearing nutrients that sustain life and propel growth.

Not long ago scientists thought that the placenta shielded cord blood — and
the developing baby — from most chemicals and pollutants in the environment. But
now we know that at this critical time when organs, vessels, membranes and
systems are knit together from single cells to finished form in a span of weeks,
the umbilical cord carries not only the building blocks of life, but also a
steady stream of industrial chemicals, pollutants and pesticides that cross the
placenta as readily as residues from cigarettes and alcohol. This is the human
"body burden" — the pollution in people that permeates everyone in the world,
including babies in the womb.

In a study spearheaded by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) in
collaboration with Commonweal, researchers at two major laboratories found an
average of 200 industrial chemicals and pollutants in umbilical cord blood from
10 babies born in August and September of 2004 in U.S. hospitals. Tests revealed
a total of 287 chemicals in the group. The umbilical cord blood of these 10
children, collected by Red Cross after the cord was cut, harbored pesticides,
consumer product ingredients, and wastes from burning coal, gasoline, and
garbage.

This study represents the first reported cord blood tests for 261 of the
targeted chemicals and the first reported detections in cord blood for 209
compounds. Among them are eight perfluorochemicals used as stain and oil
repellants in fast food packaging, clothes and textiles — including the Teflon
chemical PFOA, recently characterized as a likely human carcinogen by the EPA's
Science Advisory Board — dozens of widely used brominated flame retardants and
their toxic by-products; and numerous pesticides.

Of the 287 chemicals we detected in umbilical cord blood, we know that 180
cause cancer in humans or animals, 217 are toxic to the brain and nervous
system, and 208 cause birth defects or abnormal development in animal tests. The
dangers of pre- or post-natal exposure to this complex mixture of carcinogens,
developmental toxins and neurotoxins have never been studied.

Studies Show How and Why Organic Farming Must Become the Norm in the USA

Organic farming produces same corn and soybean yields as conventional farms, but consumes less energy and no pesticides, study finds Susan S. Lang Cornell University, July 13, 2005 [via agnet]

ITHACA, N.Y. -- Organic farming produces the same yields of corn and soybeans as does conventional farming, but uses 30 percent less energy, less water and no pesticides, a review of a 22-year farming trial study concludes.

David Pimentel, a Cornell University professor of ecology and agriculture, concludes, "Organic farming offers real advantages for such crops as corn and soybeans." Pimentel is the lead author of a study that is published in the July issue of Bioscience (Vol. 55:7) analyzing the environmental, energy and economic costs and benefits of growing soybeans and corn organically versus conventionally. The study is a review of the Rodale Institute Farming Systems Trial, the longest running comparison of organic vs. conventional farming in the United States.

"Organic farming approaches for these crops not only use an average of 30 percent less fossil energy but also conserve more water in the soil, induce less erosion, maintain soil quality and conserve more biological resources than conventional farming does," Pimentel added.

The study compared a conventional farm that used recommended fertilizer and pesticide applications with an organic animal-based farm (where manure was applied) and an organic legume-based farm (that used a three-year rotation of hairy vetch/corn and rye/soybeans and wheat). The two organic systems received no chemical fertilizers or pesticides.

Inter-institutional collaboration included Rodale Institute agronomists Paul Hepperly and Rita Seidel, U.S. Department of Agriculture's Agricultural Research Service research microbiologist David Douds Jr. and University of Maryland agricultural economist James Hanson. The research compared soil fungi activity, crop yields, energy efficiency, costs, organic matter changes over time, nitrogen accumulation and nitrate leaching across organic and conventional agricultural systems.

"First and foremost, we found that corn and soybean yields were the same across the three systems," said Pimentel, who noted that although organic corn yields were about one-third lower during the first four years of the study, over time the organic systems produced higher yields, especially under drought conditions. The reason was that wind and water erosion degraded the soil on the conventional farm while the soil on the organic farms steadily improved in organic matter, moisture, microbial activity and other soil quality indicators.

The fact that organic agriculture systems also absorb and retain significant amounts of carbon in the soil has implications for global warming, Pimentel said, pointing out that soil carbon in the organic systems increased by 15 to 28 percent, the equivalent of taking about 3,500 pounds of carbon dioxide per hectare out of the air.

Among the study's other findings:

In the drought years, 1988 to 1998, corn yields in the legume-based system were 22 percent higher than yields in the conventional system.

The soil nitrogen levels in the organic farming systems increased 8 to 15 percent. Nitrate leaching was about equivalent in the organic and conventional farming systems.

Organic farming reduced local and regional groundwater pollution by not applying agricultural chemicals.

Pimentel noted that although cash crops cannot be grown as frequently over time on organic farms because of the dependence on cultural practices to supply nutrients and control pests and because labor costs average about 15 percent higher in organic farming systems, the higher prices that organic foods command in the marketplace still make the net economic return per acre either equal to or higher than that of conventionally produced crops.

Organic farming can compete effectively in growing corn, soybeans, wheat, barley and other grains, Pimentel said, but it might not be as favorable for growing such crops as grapes, apples, cherries and potatoes, which have greater pest problems.

The study was funded by the Rodale Institute and included a review of current literature on organic and conventional agriculture comparisons. According to Pimentel, dozens of scientific papers reporting on research from the Rodale Institute Farming Systems Trial have been published in prestigious refereed journals over the past 20 years.

Studies Show How and Why Organic Farming Must Become the Norm in the USA

Organic farming produces same corn and soybean yields as conventional farms, but consumes less energy and no pesticides, study finds Susan S. Lang Cornell University, July 13, 2005 [via agnet]

Among the study's other findings:

In the drought years, 1988 to 1998, corn yields in the legume-based system were 22 percent higher than yields in the conventional system.

The soil nitrogen levels in the organic farming systems increased 8 to 15 percent. Nitrate leaching was about equivalent in the organic and conventional farming systems.

Organic farming reduced local and regional groundwater pollution by not applying agricultural chemicals.

**************************************************
This GMO news service is underwritten by a generous grant from the Newman's Own Foundation, edited by Thomas Wittman and is a production of the Ecological Farming Association http://www.eco-farm.org/

GMO Canola Spawns Herbicide-Resistant Superweed in UK

GM crops created superweed, say scientists Modified rape crosses with wild plant to create tough pesticide-resistant strain Paul Brown, environment correspondent
July 25, 2005 The Guardian (UK)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/gmdebate/Story/0,2763,1535428,00.html

Modified genes from crops in a GM crop trial have transferred into local wild plants, creating a form of herbicide-resistant superweed, the Guardian can reveal.

The cross-fertilisation between GM oilseed rape, a brassica, and a distantly related plant, charlock, had been discounted as virtually impossible by scientists with the environment department. It was found during a follow up to the government's three-year trials of GM crops which ended two years ago. The new form of charlock was growing among many others in a field which had been used to grow GM rape. When scientists treated it with lethal herbicide it showed no ill-effects.

Unlike the results of the original trials, which were the subject of large-scale press briefings from scientists, the discovery of hybrid plants that could cause a serious problem to farmers has not been announced.

The scientists also collected seeds from other weeds in the oilseed rape field and grew them in the laboratory. They found that two - both wild turnips - were herbicide resistant.

The five scientists from the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, the government research station at Winfrith in Dorset, placed their findings on the department's website last week.

A reviewer of the paper has appended to its front page: The frequency of such an event [the cross-fertilisation of charlock] in the field is likely to be very low, as highlighted by the fact it has never been detected in numerous previous assessments.

However, he adds: This unusual occurrence merits further study in order to adequately assess any potential risk of gene transfer.

Brian Johnson, an ecological geneticist and member of the government's specialist scientific group which assessed the farm trials, has no doubt of the significance. You only need one event in several million. As soon as it has taken place the new plant has a huge selective advantage. That plant will multiply rapidly.

Dr Johnson, who is head of the biotechnology advisory unit and head of the land management technologies group at English Nature, the government nature advisers, said: Unlike the researchers I am not surprised by this. If you apply herbicide to plants which is lethal, eventually a resistant survivor will turn up.

The glufosinate-ammonium herbicide used in this case put huge selective pressure likely to cause rapid evolution of resistance.

To assess the potential of herbicide-resistant weeds as a danger to crops, a French researcher placed a single triazine-resistant weed, known as fat hen, in maize fields where atrazine was being used to control weeds. After four years the plants had multiplied to an average of 103,000 plants, Dr Johnson said.

What is not clear in the English case is whether the charlock was fertile. Scientists collected eight seeds from the plant but they failed to germinate them and concluded the plant was not viable.

But Dr Johnson points out that the plant was very large and produced many flowers.

He said: There is every reason to suppose that the GM trait could be in the plant's pollen and thus be carried to other charlock in the neighbourhood, spreading the GM genes in that way. This is after all how the cross-fertilisation between the rape and charlock must have occurred in the first place.

Since charlock seeds can remain in the soil for 20 to 30 years before they germinate, once GM plants have produced seeds it would be almost impossible to eliminate them.

Although the government has never conceded that gene transfer was a problem, it was fear of this that led the French and Greek governments to seek to ban GM rape.

Emily Diamond, a Friends of the Earth GM researcher, said: I was shocked when I saw this paper. This is what we were reassured could not happen - and yet now it has happened the finding has been hidden away. This is exactly what the French and Greeks were afraid of when they opposed the introduction of GM rape.

The findings will now have to be assessed by the government's Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment (Acre). The question is whether it is safe to release GM crops into the UK environment when there are wild relatives that might become superweeds and pose a serious threat to farm productivity. This has already occurred in Canada.

The discovery that herbicide-resistant genes have transferred to farm weeds from GM crops is the second blow to the hopes of bio-tech companies to introduce their crops into Britain. Following farm scale trials there was already scientific evidence that herbicide-tolerant oilseed rape and GM sugar beet were bad for biodiversity because the herbicide used to kill the weeds around the crops wiped out more wildlife than with conventionally grown crops. Now this new research, a follow-up on the original trials, shows that a second undesirable potential result is a race of superweeds.

The findings mirror the Canadian experience with GM crops, which has seen farmers and the environment plagued with severe problems.

Farmers the world over are always troubled by what they call volunteers - crop plants which grow from seeds spilled from the previous harvest, of which oilseed rape is probably the greatest offender, Anyone familiar with the British countryside, or even the verges of motorways, will recognise thousands of oilseed rape plants growing uninvited amid crops of wheat or barley, and in great swaths by the roadside where the small greasy ballbearings of seeds have spilled from lorries.

Farmers in Canada soon found that these volunteers were resistant to at least one herbicide, and became impossible to kill with two or three applications of different weedkillers after a succession of various GM crops were grown.

The new plants were dubbed superweeds because they proved resistant to three herbicides while the crops they were growing among had been genetically engineered to be resistant to only one.

To stop their farm crops being overwhelmed with superweeds, farmers had to resort to using older, much stronger varieties of dirty herbicide long since outlawed as seriously damaging to biodiversity.

Q&A: What the discovery means for UK farmers

What's the GM situation in the UK?

No GM crops are currently grown commercially in the UK. Companies who wish to introduce them face a series of licensing hurdles in Britain and Europe and interest has waned in recent years amid public opposition.

Other firms have dropped applications in the wake of the government field scale trials that showed growing two GM varieties - oilseed rape and sugar beet - was bad for biodiversity.

The EU has approved several GM varieties and the UK government insists that applications will be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Where are GM crops grown?

Extensively in the wide open spaces of the US, Canada and Argentina. In Europe, Portugal, France and Germany have all dabbled with GM insect-resistant maize. Spain plants about 100,000 hectares (250,000 acres) of it each year for animal feed.

What is a superweed?

Many GM crop varieties are given genes that allow them to resist a specific herbicide, which farmers can then apply to kill the weeds while allowing the GM crop to thrive.

Environmental campaigners have long feared that if pollen from the GM crop fertilised a related weed, it could transfer the resistance and create a superweed. This gene transfer is what appears to have happened at the field scale trial site. It raises the prospect of farmers who grow some GM crops being forced to use stronger herbicides on their fields to deal with the upstart weeds.

Is it a big problem?

Not yet. Farmers in the UK do not grow GM crops commercially. If they did, then the scale of possible superweed contamination depends on two things: whether the hybrid superweed can reproduce (many hybrids are sterile) and, if it could, how well its offspring could compete with other plants. Herbicide-resistant weeds could potentially grow very well in agricultural fields where the relevant herbicide is applied. Most experts say superweeds would be unlikely to sweep across the UK countryside as, without the herbicide being used to kill their competitors, their GM status offers no advantage.

Some GM crops, such as maize, have no wild relatives in the UK, making gene transfer and the creation of a superweed from them impossible.

Is it a surprise?

On one level no, gene flow and hybridisation are as old as plants themselves. Short of creating sterile male plants, it's simply impossible to stop crops releasing pollen to fertilise related neighbours. But government scientists had thought that GM oilseed rape and charlock were too distantly related for it to occur.

The dangers of hybridisation where it does happen are well documented - experts from the Dorset centre behind the latest research published a high-profile paper in 2003 in the US journal Science showing widespread gene flow from non-GM oilseed rape to wild flowers.

Have superweeds surfaced elsewhere?

Farmers in Canada and Argentina growing GM soya beans have large problems with herbicide-resistant weeds, though these have arisen through natural selection and not gene flow through hybridisation. Experiments in Germany have shown sugar beets genetically modified to resist one herbicide accidentally acquired the genes to resist another - so called gene stacking, which has also been observed in oilseed rape grown in Canada.

—David Adam

Navigation

main page

headlines

A benchmark investigation of industrial chemicals, pollutants and pesticides in umbilical cord blood

A benchmark investigation of industrial chemicals, pollutants and pesticides
in umbilical cord blood