Utah Legislature Appropriates $280,000 to UDAF For Poison to Control Morman Cricket Problem

For Immediate Release - March 28, 2003 - Contact Fran Tully 801-949-3570

Please contact the Department of Agriculture immediately (801-538-7123) and urge them to consider a non-poisonous insecticide.

The Utah Department of Agriculture and Food (UDAF), along with the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal Plant Health and Inspection Service (APHIS), estimate the 2003 Mormon cricket and grasshopper infestation in Utah will cover between five to six million acres--nearly double the area of last year's outbreak. The UDAF will again offer a 50-50 cost sharing program to help private agricultural land owners combat the insects. As in the past, the UDAF will pay half the costs of obtaining and applying insect control bait around private property. The USDA/APHIS will conduct control efforts from both the ground and the air.

Recently, the Utah Legislature appropriated $280,000 to the UDAF for cricket and grasshopper control on state and private lands.

According to the USU Extension Office: The most effective way to reduce Mormon cricket populations is to use carbaryl bait. The trade name is Sevin bait. This is usually oatmeal coated with the chemical insecticide carbaryl. The recommended application rate is 10 pounds to the acre.  Using hand-held fertilizer spreaders can spread the bait or large machines that blow the poisoned grain a long distance. Bait is also applied along roadsides to reduce the risk of car accidents from large numbers of crickets crossing highways.  Insecticide sprays such as Malathion could be effective against the Mormon cricket if they were sprayed during the nymphal stage. These insecticide sprays usually aren't recommended. Sevin bait is the preferred control method at this time in Utah.

I have been following the Mormon cricket issue with great interest and my concern is that the amount of poison being sprayed is not only dangerous to insects, but also to humans and the environment.

As the Utah distributor for Perma-Guard, I would like to direct the reader to links of hundreds or articles on the damage that chemical insecticides do to humans, animals, the water, and the environment. See http://www.freshwaterorganics.com/poisons.htm .  Instead of poisons, I would like to propose that Perma-Guard Garden and Plant Insecticide (D-21) be used on a portion of the infested areas. D-21 is a diatomaceous earth based product that is extremely effective in killing insects with NO harmful effects to the earth, water, birds, humans, or the environment. The cost of spraying (wet or dry) is approximately $5 per acre – in line with the other types of treatment. So with so many lawsuits against chemical sprays and poisons, why doesn't the state consider a safer method?

I urge all private land owners to consider the safer, more effective of  treatment. 

PERMA-GUARD insecticides have passed exhaustive tests, many of them under the scrutiny of the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Kansas State University, and other schools such as Purdue, Kentucky, Arizona, Michigan, and Minnesota and the Food & Drug Administration. Over the years these products have scored dramatic successes in protecting stored grain, growing crops, homes and industrial plants from insect infestations.  

These products do not contain chlorinated organic phosphates, systemic poisons or compounds commonly found in most commercial insecticides. Perma Guard is a revolution in the insecticide field. 

Perma-Guard kills physically, by puncturing the insects exoskeleton, disrupting its soft waxy shell structure, chewing up its digestive organs and causing death in a short time by dehydration. Moreover, the products, applied dry, have a remarkable repellency factor. As long as it is present, insects tend to stay away. Also, the more it is used, an environment is being created that tends to make insects feel unwelcome.  

Poisons have been poured over the soil over the past 45 years at an alarming rate.

It will be many years before we know just how much damage had been done by the continuous use of poisons. We do know that both our land and ground water are affected.

When Perma-Guard is used, there have been no reported incident of soil fertility being affected. There are virtually no negatives to the using our  Diatomaceous Earth Products.

Face the fact that it is your primary responsibility as to what is used on your land. Start now in getting the Conventional pesticides off your land. Also, take the responsibility of helping your neighbors to understand. If they are using conventional pesticides, you and yours are getting part of it.  

If you wish to purchase Perma-Guard D-21 in Utah for your home, garden or farm, the Utah distributor is Freshwater Organics at 801-949-3570.

Despite the evidence of harm to children, EPA allows sale of products with dursban and lorsban to continue for 18 months after ban.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - JUNE 7, 2000 - Contact: Jay Feldman or Kagan Owens 202-543-5450

Victims of Third Most Commonly Used Home-Use and Commercially Applied Pesticide, Chlorpyrifos (DursbanTM), Want It Fully Banned.

With EPA's June 8 decision on the future of the third most commonly used home-use and commercially applied pesticide, chlorpyrifos (DursbanTM), pending, victims express concern that the agency will not fully stop public exposure and will continue to compromise the public's health.

(Washington, D.C., June 7, 2000) As the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) prepares to release its long-awaited decision on new restrictions for the widely used insecticide chlorpyrifos (DursbanTM), those who have been poisoned are saying that the agency should stop compromising with the public's health. With 11 million pounds of the chemical active ingredient chlorpyrifos applied annually, this insecticide ranks third among all pesticides applied by homeowners and commercial applicators. It is used extensively in commercial buildings, schools, daycare centers, hotels, restaurants, hospitals, stores, warehouses, food manufacturing plants, vehicles (i.e. buses, planes, trains), and agriculture. In agriculture, 13 million pounds are applied annually, which ranks chlorpyrifos thirteenth among all agricultural pesticides. EPA released a risk assessment of chlorpyrifos in October, 1999.

Chlorpyrifos is in the family of approximately 40 widely used organophosphate pesticides, known neuro-toxic chemicals that together can cause cumulative adverse effects. Because of its high volume and common uses, chlorpyrifos represents one of the most significant sources of organophosphate exposure in non-occupational settings. Between the years 1993-1996, the most recent reporting years, 17,771 cases of unintentional residential chlorpyrifos exposures were reported to poison control centers. EPA's pesticide program, which disbanded its Pesticide Incident Monitoring System in 1981, does not collect adverse effects reports of pesticide poisoning, except those reported by the chemical industry.

"Nothing short of a ban of all uses of chlorpyrifos will protect the public from the chemical's adverse effects to the nervous system," said Jay Feldman, Executive Director of Beyond Pesticides/National Coalition Against the Misuse of Pesticides. "Since less toxic and non-toxic alternatives are available for all chlorpyrifos uses, it is wrong and unnecessary to allow chlorpyrifos uses to continue," said Mr. Feldman. EPA has a history of striking compromises on chemicals like chlorpyrifos. In 1999, despite headlines indicating the banning of two organophosphate pesticides, methyl parathion and azinphos-methyl, EPA's decision left on the market many uses that account for a significant portion of the chemicals' overall poundage.

If reports of an EPA ban of over-the-counter chlorpyrifos products are correct, Beyond Pesticides remains extremely concerned about the continued commercial and agricultural uses, exposure through residues in and on food, farmworker exposure, and direct public exposure from mosquito control and termite applications made by pesticide applicators. A decision limited to over-the-counter uses is inadequate to the protection of the public's health, according to Beyond Pesticides. "EPA should be in the business of preventing harm rather than calculating acceptable risk levels that allow people to be hurt, despite the availability of safer alternatives," said Mr. Feldman.

Dow AgroSciences and predecessor chlorpyrifos producers have received thousands of poisoning reports. Victims of chlorpyrifos poisoning want EPA to stop the pesticide poisoning of all people.

Chlorpyrifos (DursbanTM) Victims

Beyond Pesticides maintains a database of people who are willing to share their stories associated with the tragedy of chlorpyrifos and other pesticide poisoning. The chlorpyrifos data base has been developed with assistance from the Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides. The list, representative of a larger group, includes 108 people from 33 states who have been hurt as a result of chlorpyrifos use in homes, offices, schools, and agriculture.

The following are examples of chlorpyrifos poisonings from the Beyond Pesticides/NCAMP data base. Please contact Beyond Pesticides/NCAMP if you would like to contact these or other people.

Raymond and Lois Flory, Lafayette, Louisiana, were exposed to chlorpyrifos in 1993 when their home was treated for termites by a professional pesticide applicator, who told Mr. and Mrs. Flory that the chemical was safe and they could stay in the house while the treatment occurred. While the applicator trenched around their home with the chemical, the fumes overcame Mr. and Mrs. Flory. They suffer from continuing medical problems including chemical encephalopathy, visual and strength loss, mood swings, and depression.

Janie Emerson, La Jolla, California, was exposed to chlorpyrifos in her home in 1993. Medical test results indicated cholinesterase levels affected her health and chlorpyrifos residues were found in her urine. Her health was severely affected by the exposure and continues today. Emerson is chemically sensitized as a result of this particular pesticide poisoning incident.

Middle school students, Charleston, South Carolina, in 1998 were exposed to chlorpyrifos applied in a classroom, soaking carpets and desks where students sat the next morning. The school did not notify parents until more than a month had passed and did not do a thorough cleanup until months after the application. The school has now notified all parents in an effort to monitor students’ health, which parents had urged them to do from the beginning. At least 40 children were affected by the pesticide exposure. Some are still ill. The most common health effects experienced were aggravated asthma and coughing, peeling hands and feet, headaches and nausea.

Jane Thomassen, Gouldsboro, Pennsylvania, continues to have numerous health effects due to routine monthly spraying that occurred at the school where she taught in the 1980's. One of the routine treatments occurred while she was in her classroom preparing for school to open. The commercial applicator sprayed pesticides in the halls and rooms of the school, including her classroom. As a result of this exposure, she has become intolerant to chemicals, has had muscle, bone and joint problems, and reproductive and immune system dysfunction. She is now disabled and no longer able to work. Dr. Zamm of Kingston New York identified the cause of her illness to be related to pesticide exposure while at school.

The Trimper family, Rotterdam, New York, was exposed to Dursban TC and LO in 1996 on two separate occasions when the pesticide was applied to their home. Following the second treatment, their three-year-old son became ill with high fevers and respiratory problems. Mrs. Trimper had two miscarriages after the exposure. An investigation found that after each treatment, injected through/in cinder blocks, they had leakage of the chemical the following day and a strong odor that is still present in their home. No ventilation was installed or plastic covering laid in an elevated sub-floor area to prevent the chemicals from coming up into their living quarters. Air testing found levels as high as 720 ppm of chemicals like benzene, xylene and toluene.

Farmworker Community Poisoned by Pesticide Drift

February 18, 2000

In early November 1999, mist from a sprinkler application of the soil fumigant metam sodium blew into Earlimart, a small town in California's San Joaquin Valley. About 150 people, nearly all farmworkers, were forced to evacuate their homes. At least 24 people were sent to local hospitals complaining of nausea, vomiting, headaches, burning eyes and shortness of breath.

After their exposure, residents were scared and humiliated when local authorities ordered them to take their clothes off and be sprayed with water by men wearing masks and green splash suits--the hazardous materials team. Only a small plastic tarp was held between the victims and a crowd of at least 100 emergency personnel, television crews and other spectators.

County agriculture officials said it appeared the company, Wilbur-Ellis Co., followed county regulations in applying the pesticide. For three days, the product was applied and then sprayed with water to activate the chemicals. Water reacts with metam sodium to form a gas that kills nematodes, fungi, weed seeds and other organisms in the soil. One of metam sodium's break down products is methyl isothiocyanate (MITC), a powerful irritant of soft tissue such as eyes and lungs.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), exposure to this pesticide can cause acute skin irritation and serious irritation of respiratory mucous membranes, eyes and lungs. EPA lists metam sodium as a probable human carcinogen. The state of California lists the chemical as causing both cancer and birth defects in laboratory animals.

After the incident, it took nine days--and organized community pressure--before a county health team came to Earlimart to treat poisoning victims who could not afford medical care. Residents also had to pressure the local health clinic to bill for services instead of demanding up-front payments to treat poisoning victims. Billing, however, did not resolve the victims' financial burden. Josefina Murgia, a mother of three, received a $6,000 bill for her trip to the hospital. "I don't have that type of money," she said. "Paying the bill would mean my family would go hungry."

This was not the first large-scale problem with metam sodium in California. A mid-1990s train wreck dumped metam sodium into the Sacramento River, killing all fish for miles downstream. A subsequent state study found elevated rates of both new and more severe cases of asthma among residents in the area of the spill. In May 1999, students were evacuated from New Cuyama elementary school near Santa Maria after exposure to the pesticide. A previous poisoning occurred at the New Cuyama school in 1992. In 1996, there were two major incidents in Stockton and Fresno where metam sodium drifted from fields where it was applied resulting in a total of 41 reported probable poisoning cases. From 1991 to 1998, use of metam sodium in California increased from less than 5 million pounds to nearly than 14 million pounds.

A coalition including the United Farm Workers, AFL-CIO and community representatives are urging Tulare County to prohibit sprinkler application of metam sodium. They are also calling on the Director of California EPA to re-evaluate use of metam sodium in light of its health effects on farm workers and other rural residents and to conduct a thorough investigation into the full health impacts from the Earlimart community's exposure to this dangerous chemical. California's Department of Pesticide Regulation has recently agreed to move enforcement authority in this case from the county level to the state level where fines for violations may be substantially greater.

Contact: United Farmworkers of America, AFL-CIO; 326 No. Third

Street, Porterville, CA 93257; phone (559) 783-8390; fax (559)
783-8393; http://www.ufw.org/releases/earlimart.html.
Sources: "Pesticide mist forces evacuations," Associated Press, Nov. 15, 1999; "Residents sickened by pesticide cloud: Ag officials consider changing rules," Associated Press, Dec. 7, 1999; "California community humiliated in pesticide scare," Associated Press Dec. 9, 1999; "Earlimart residents present county leaders with 183 sickness complaints," Associated Press, Dec. 9, 1999; the Fresno Bee. November 16 and November 18, 1999; the Bakersfield Californian,
Nov. 15 and Dec. 8, 1999.

Pesticide Disaster in Paraguay

===========================================
P A N U P S
Pesticide Action Network Updates Service
===========================================

Pesticide Disaster in Paraguay

June 21, 1999

An international trade union federation has called upon a U.S.-based seed company to assume responsibility for the environmental and public health disaster created in Paraguay by its local subsidiary. The International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers' Associations (IUF) is demanding that Delta & Pine Land, the world's largest cottonseed producer, remove pesticide-contaminated cotton seed that its subsidiary dumped near a rural community in Paraguay. Delta & Pine Land is in the process of being acquired by the Monsanto Company through a share swap to be completed later this year.

Last November, 30,000 sacks of expired cottonseed, weighing approximately 660 tons, were dumped near a small village 120 kilometers from the capital Asuncisn. The seeds were treated with high concentrations of toxic pesticides, including the organophosphates acephate and chlorpyrifos. The label on the seed sacks states that the acephate compound (trade name: Orthene 80 Seed Protectant) "contains material which may cause cancer, mutagenic or reproductive effects based on laboratory animal data. Risk of cancer depends on duration and level of exposure." The sacks were spread over one-and-a-half hectares and were covered with only a thin layer of soil. The disposal site is on private land in the center of a rural population of three thousand and less than 170 meters from a primary school with 262 pupils.

Symptoms of pesticide poisoning such as vertigo, nausea, headaches, neurological disorders, memory loss, insomnia and skin rashes, appeared immediately in the surrounding population and worsened after the first rains.

On December 28, a local resident died. His official death certificate states that he was treated by the attending physician for "acute poisoning due to pollution caused by toxins of the Delta & Pine Land seed deposited on the property of Julio Chavez." According to his widow, he fell ill on December 26 and by the next day could no longer get out of bed. Mr. Ruiz, a father of five, was thirty years old at the time of his death.
Medical testing of the residents has produced irrefutable evidence of acute pesticide poisoning. The Ministries of Agriculture and of Public Health have acknowledged the results of the tests but have not taken action. The IUF has met with the Minister of Health and the president of Paraguay, and has helped to organize demonstrations and support for the victims of the contamination. Still, the government refuses to act.

In August, the case will be the subject of an inquiry in Asuncisn organized by the Ethical Tribunal against Impunity in Paraguay with the support of the Latin American Regional Secretariat of the IUF.

The IUF is demanding:

* Immediate action to remove the toxic seed and decontaminate the area;

* Immediate and comprehensive medical treatment for the victims;

* A program of long-term medical and environmental surveillance, including regular monitoring of water supplies;

* Adequate compensation for the victims, their families and the wider community;

* Full and public disclosure of the circumstances surrounding the dumping.

The thirty thousand sacks of seeds buried in the area were part of a larger shipment of 84,000 bags of Delta & Pine Land cotton seeds authorized for importation by the Paraguayan Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock in 1997. There is no information about the location of the remaining seed. The IUF is trying to determine if the seeds were already past their expiry date at the time of export from the United States and whether they were exported rather than destroyed in the U.S. where costly disposal procedures would have been required.

The International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers' Associations (IUF) is an international trade union federation composed of 329 trade unions in 118 countries with an affiliated membership of 2.6 million members. It is based in Geneva, Switzerland.

Source: IUF press release, June 15, 1999.

Contact: International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers' Associations (IUF), Rampe du Pont-Rouge, 8, CH-1213 Petit-Lancy, Switzerland; phone (41-22) 793 22 33; fax (41-22) 793 22 38; email iuf@iuf.org; web site http://www.iuf.org.

===========================================
Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA)
49 Powell St., Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94102 USA
Phone: (415) 981-1771
Fax: (415) 981-1991
Email: panna@panna.org
Web: www.panna.org

About Lindane

Lindane. Is yet another EPA registered, chlorinated hydrocarbon poison. Most registered uses were banned in 1983, but this terrible poison is still legally registered and used as an insecticidal poison treatment for lumber, seed grains, and livestock, and in dog dips, pet and human (baby) shampoos for treatment of fleas, ticks, lice, sarcoptic mange and scabies. Only 1-1/2 teaspoons of lindane taken orally will kill a man. Lindane is described by its manufacturer as a powerful contact and internal poison.

Lindane has been banned in 18 countries and severely restricted in 10 others. It has not been produced in the U. S. since 1977, but it is still imported here. You may still find lindane as the active poison ingredient in flea collars, moth and other household sprays. As a scabicide poison (against lice) on children it may be present in lotions, creams and shampoos.

Lindane is considered to be cumulative, a possible carcinogen and mutagen; a teratogen, immunotoxin and neurotoxin whose other long-term effects on human health include aplastic anemia, liver, testicular, bone marrow and kidney damages. Most registered uses were supposedly banned or at least severely restricted in 1983, but I still find gallons of lindane concentrate on farms, in offices and homes and it still is sold over the counter as a general use in Michigan.

The basic manufacturer of hexachlorocyclohexane was Hooker Chemical. Transformation products include hydrogen chloride, 2,4,6-trichlorophenol, benzene, pentachlorobenzene (which is cumulative), pentachlorophenol and phosgene gas!

Lindane is a known hemotoxin - blood poison. Lindane exposure from recommended (labeled) dosages has resulted in blood diseases, e.g., aplastic anemia, which is a precursor to leukemia. It has caused blood disorders, seizures, reproductive problems, changes in levels of sex hormones and death. There are several reports of 6-fold increases in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in farmers exposed to lindane.

In 1990, Finnish researchers reported that women with breast cancer had higher concentrations of lindane-like residue (contamination) in their breasts than did women that did not have breast cancer. Still used to control lice on kids and fleas on pets. The Leukemia Society’s brochure states the only two known causes of leukemia are radiation and benzene. Please see the radioactive note later in this chapter and the benzene note earlier in this chapter.

The Author has reviewed other acute leukemia case-control studies that show a significant relationship exists between acute leukemia with an exposure to pesticides/insecticides (poisons) and/or “weed” killers. In the 1993, Vol. 24 issue of “Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology” a study documented a relationship between childhood brain cancers in Missouri children. Compared to healthy children, brain cancer was nearly 5 times more likely for children treated with Kwell (lindane poison) shampoo!

Lindane can remain in the air for up to 17 weeks and travel (and contaminate) long distances. It can accumulate in the fatty tissue of fish. Lindane was found in large quantities in Love Canal, NY. Pesticides are poisons that, obviously, kill more than what they are labeled for.

Pesticide Poses Reproductive Risks to Birds

panupdates@igc.apc.org wrote:

February 8, 1999

Action Alert: Cotton Pesticide Poses Reproductive Risks to Birds

The American Bird Conservancy's Pesticides and Birds Campaign urges the scientific, conservation and advocacy communities to call on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to deny registration of the insecticide chlorfenapyr because of reproductive risks to birds. Chlorfenapyr has been characterized by EPA as "one of the most reproductively toxic pesticides to avian species that Environmental Fate and Effects Division has evaluated." Because of the agency's concerns regarding ecological risks, EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs has opened a public comment period through February 19.

American Cyanamid has proposed use of chlorfenapyr (brand names Pirate and Alert) as an insecticide and miticide on cotton. It is touted as one of the most effective controls available for beet armyworm in chemically intensive cotton agriculture. Applications for use on citrus and vegetables and for termites and ants are also pending. Chlorfenapyr belongs to a new class of chemical called "pyrrole" -- never before registered by EPA. When metabolized, it acts on the mitochondria and disrupts production of ATP (adenosine triphosphate), leading to cell death and, ultimately, mortality.

The following ecological concerns are detailed in the EPA risk assessment:
** In a chronic reproductive study of mallards, declines were seen in number of eggs laid (-41%), number of viable embryos (-44%), and number of normal hatchlings (-56%). A decrease in body weight of adult males and females (males: -14%; females -15%) was also evident and in females appeared in the first few weeks of exposure.

** American Cyanamid's testing shows chlorfenapyr to be persistent in soils, with a half-life of one or more years. Applications made to the same fields in consecutive years can result in a build-up in the soil to as much 2.5 times the annual application rate. Such persisting residues could contribute to levels of dietary exposure higher than those suggested by a single year of application.

** Chlorfenapyr residues are found in avian food items including weed seeds, insects and foliage. Levels of chlorfenapyr in avian diets may be as much as 68 times higher than the EPA threshold for reproductive effects, and EPA states that these toxicological thresholds may be exceeded for up to five weeks after initial application to cotton crops.

** The timing of chlorfenapyr applications coincides with critical reproductive events for most, if not all, of the more than 50 avian species that, according to American Cyanamid, are associated with cotton fields. Many of the tested species are showing downward population trends in cotton growing states.

American Cyanamid has proposed numerous mitigation measures and restrictions for use of chlorfenapyr; however, EPA believes that such measures "still yield dietary exposure estimates that exceed chronic toxicity thresholds for birds." In addition, EPA's risk assessment does not include effects of ingestion of the chemical through preening or via drinking water, dermal exposures or inhalation of suspended particles. American Cyanamid also has not provided a field study of chlorfenapyr that specifically addresses avian reproductive effects.

At least 13 pesticides documented as causing die-offs in migratory birds are currently registered for use on cotton. The American Bird Conservancy is concerned that the addition of another chemical with evidence of reproductive risks for avian species is imprudent.

Send comments to the EPA by February 19 asking EPA to deny registration status for chlorfenapyr under Section 3 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) given its reproductive toxicity for birds. In addition, call for EPA to discontinue the registration process for all other applications of chlorfenapyr. Comments that add scientific information on chlorfenapyr and its particular effects on avian species are extremely valuable, as are comments on the scientific soundness of EPAUs ecological risk and/or economic benefit characterizations.

Include docket number OPP-34162 and send to: Public Information and Records Integrity Branch, Information Resources and Services Division (7502C), Office of Pesticides Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St. SW, Washington DC 20460. Email can be sent to opp-docket@epamail.epa.gov as an ASCII attachment without special characters or encryption codes.

Full text of the chlorfenapyr risk benefit assessment can be found at: www.epa.gov/pesticides/reg_assessment. Additional information can be found at the American Bird Conservancy web site: www.abcbirds.org

Source/contact: Kelley R. Tucker, Director, Pesticides and Birds
Campaign, American Bird Conservancy, 1250 24th St. NW, Washington,
DC 20037; phone (202) 778-9666; fax (202) 778-9778; email
ktucker@abcbirds.org.

January 20, 1999

New Report Highlights Risk of Pesticides Used on Aircraft

Airline passengers and crew can be exposed to hazardous pesticides without their knowledge, according to a report recently released by the Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides (NCAP). "Flyers Beware: Pesticide Use on International and Domestic Aircraft and Flights" states that pesticides are commonly used on both cargo planes and passenger aircraft in the U.S. and in other countries. Some airlines spray voluntarily, while others spray to comply with U.S. regulations or requirements of other countries. Pesticides are used in occupied or unoccupied passenger cabins, galleys, cockpits and cargo holds. NCAP calls for U.S. airlines to implement non-toxic pest prevention and management practices and for the U.S. government to put greater pressure on other countries to prohibit or discourage use of hazardous pesticides on aircraft.

On flights to at least six countries (Trinidad and Tobago, Grenada, Madagascar, Kiribati, India, and Uruguay), passengers are directly sprayed with pesticides while still strapped in their seats after landing. According to one airline attendant, passengers' clothing, skin and hair may be soaked with the pesticide.

On flights to many other countries, passengers are exposed to pesticides sprayed prior to boarding -- without their knowledge. This type of spraying leaves long-lasting insect-killing residues in the passenger cabin and is required on some or all flights to Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, Barbados, Panama, Fiji and Guam.

Passengers on domestic U.S. flights may also be exposed to residues of insecticides sprayed on planes. In fact, many pesticide products are registered in the U.S. for use on aircraft, including in passenger cabins, and these chemicals can be used immediately prior to boarding. Several insecticide active ingredients commonly used on aircraft, including permethrin, cypermethrin and piperonyl butoxicide, are classified by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as possible human carcinogens. Others are classified as reproductive hazards or suspected endocrine disrupting chemicals.

NCAP's report urges passengers to contact airlines, U.S. government agencies, and international tourism bureaus to protest the practice of spraying passengers and aircraft cabins with toxic pesticides. The report also urges flyers to contact U.S. Congressional representatives and agencies to press for requirements that airlines at least provide advance notification to passengers if sprays will be used on or before a flight. The report provides contacts at airlines for information about spraying policies in general as well as whether a particular flight will be sprayed.

The report summarizes incidents where people have reported illnesses and even one death due to in-flight spraying. It also describes complaints made by flight attendants and passengers that such spraying has caused headaches, nausea, fatigue, seizures and, in extreme cases, memory loss, a reduction in cognitive skills or a depressed immune system.

The U.S. stopped spraying occupied aircraft in the 1970s, citing health risks to passengers. U.S. health officials report that there have been no outbreaks of vector-borne disease since then that can be attributed to hitchhiking insects arriving on incoming aircraft.

The full report on aircraft spraying is available on NCAP's Web site at http://www.efn.org/~ncap/AirlineSpray.pdf.
Source/contact: Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides (NCAP);
PO Box 1393, Eugene, OR 97440;
phone (541) 344-5044; fax (541) 344-6923;
email info@pesticide.org; web www.efn.org/~ncap

What's In Your Food?
Play 'Pesticide Roulette' at http://www.foodnews.org/

WASHINGTON -- What's for lunch? Whether you eat a hamburger, a salad or simply a piece of fruit, you're probably eating something you didn't plan on: an unknown dose of toxic pesticides.

But now, for the first time, you can go online to instantly find out what pesticides are on the foods you eat, feed your children, and buy at the grocery store. Then you can follow simple tips for reducing your intake of pesticides -- just like you cut back on calories, fat or cholesterol.

A new, interactive Web site, www.foodnews.org, allows users to discover what pesticides they consume on a daily basis, and what the potential health effects are. The site was developed by the non-profit Environmental Working Group (EWG), known for its computer-powered research on pesticides and other environmental issues.

"When our internal analyses showed that people might eat 20 or more bug killers or other pesticides in their meals every day, we knew we had to make the information available to consumers," said EWG President Ken Cook. "Despite repeated promises, the government is simply not acting to protect children or anyone else from these toxic chemicals. Consumers have to protect themselves."

By clicking through a menu of hundreds of foods, visitors to www.foodnews.org can tap into EWG's powerful search engine that randomly matches a food selection against more than 90,000 government lab test results for pesticides in food. Digital diners will have the following options:


* Daily Fare. Select breakfast, lunch, dinner and a snack from among more than 150 foods and dishes. Or just pick a peach or an apple. You'll be amazed at how many pesticides you eat in the course of a day.
* Kids' Menu. Find out which pesticides are in foods children commonly eat, including processed baby foods. And check to see if your child's diet exceeded government safety standards for pesticides that harm the
* The EWG Supermarket. Pop in for a few items or wander the aisles and fill your shopping cart, from pastas to veggies to seafood. We'll tell you which pesticides you brought home in your grocery bags, and what their health risks are.
* Fruit Salad Roulette. Mix a bowl from more than 20 fruits and find out how many pesticides you ate.


Previous EWG research has shown that every day hundreds of thousands of children under age 5 are already exceeding government safe levels for pesticides that affect the nervous system. Other pesticide residues generally are at levels that are "legal" now, but probably will be deemed unsafe if the government overcomes chemical company pressures and takes action to protect children under a 1996 pesticide reform law (the landmark Food Quality protection Act).

In addition to being a great source of information, www.foodnews.org also will help consumers take action. With direct e-mail links, consumers can voice their concerned directly to supermarket chains, food companies, and Washington officials, including Vice President Al Gore.

"The government has heard plenty from pesticide companies, but not enough from parents," said EWG's Cook. "It will only take a minute for consumers to send a powerful message that they want dangerous pesticides out of their favorite foods. That minute will make a huge difference to food companies and politicians who are sensitive to consumer concerns."

Bill Walker, California Director
Environmental Working Group
P.O. Box 29201 * The Presidio
San Francisco, CA 94129
Tel. (415) 561-6698 * Fax (415) 561-6696
http://www.ewg.org/

EWG Air Monitoring Finds Toxic Pesticides Drifting From California Farm Fields
Airborne Poisons Found in More than 60 Percent of State Tests

CONTACT: Bill Walker, Environmental Working Group: (415) 561-6698
Joan Clayburgh, CPR: (415) 981-3939, ext. 5

EWG Air Monitoring Finds Toxic Pesticides Drifting From California Farm Fields Airborne Poisons Found in More than 60 Percent of State Tests

SACRAMENTO -- Two years of independent scientific monitoring by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) detected an array of toxic pesticides drifting into the air Californians breathe -- the tip of a 100-million-pound iceberg of hazardous chemicals emitted statewide each year as a result of pesticide use.

From June 1996 to September 1998, EWG collected nearly 100 air samples in Sonoma, Contra Costa, San Mateo, Santa Cruz, Monterey, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Ventura counties, which were then analyzed by a certified laboratory in Oakland. Almost two-thirds of the EWG air samples contained pesticides known to cause cancer, brain damage, birth defects, acute poisoning or other illnesses.

At the same time, an EWG analysis of the latest available state data found that pesticides drifting into the air at the time of application are only a small part of the air pollution caused by pesticide use. An estimated 100 million pounds a year of smog-forming volatile organic chemicals contained in pesticides or formed by the breakdown of pesticides also evaporate into the air after application -- four times more than all the oil and gas refineries in California.

EWG and Californians for Pesticide Reform (CPR) said the monitoring results and statistical analysis provide strong evidence that the state is failing to adequately regulate pesticides in air, placing millions of Californians at risk of exposure. They called on the new Davis Administration to clean house at the state Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR), and shift authority over airborne pesticides to the Air Resources Board (ARB).

"DPR is in denial about the public health risks of the excessive use of pesticides in California," said Bill Walker, state director of Environmental Working Group and a principal author of the group's report, What You Don't Know Could Hurt You: Pesticides in California's Air. (Available online at www.ewg.org.) "The evidence shows that pesticide use routinely exposes Californians to multiple hazardous chemicals in the air where they live, work or attend school. For the state to claim that's not a problem is unacceptable."

Levels of airborne pesticides detected by EWG monitoring were in most cases relatively small, but that does not necessarily mean they were safe. Health-based safety standards for most pesticides in air have not been established, and those that do exist are not set to protect children or other sensitive populations, but are based on supposedly safe levels of exposure for the average adult.

"For communities near heavy pesticide use, the issue is not whether DPR considers the amount of poison in the air to be safe," said David Chatfield, executive director of CPR. "The real issue is the right not to be poisoned at all."

EWG's monitors collected 55 air samples to test for multiple pesticides. Twenty-nine samples, or 53 percent, tested positive for pesticides known or suspected to cause cancer, birth defects or damage to the brain, nervous, endocrine or reproductive systems. Separately, 39 air samples were collected to test for methyl bromide, a fumigant known to cause nerve damage and birth defects and erode the ozone layer. Thirty-one samples, or 80 percent, tested positive.

In most of the counties where EWG found drifting pesticides, DPR has never conducted air monitoring. Between 1991 and 1995, DPR monitored only 50 times in 14 locations -- about one test for every 84,000 pesticide applications in the state.

But pesticide drift during applications is only part of the problem. After application, pesticides give off large quantities of reactive organic gases (ROGs, also known as volatile organic chemicals), which can cause cancer, birth defects, nerve damage and kidney and heart disease. ROGs also contribute to the formation of smog.

According to the ARB, some 98.9 million pounds of ROGs are emitted from pesticides each year -- nearly four times the total of ROG emissions from petroleum refining (25.5 million pounds annually) and more than double the ROG emissions from all other industrial sources (46 million pounds.) In the San Joaquin Valley, one of five areas in the state where air quality fails to meet federal standards, pesticides emit an estimated 34 million pounds of ROGs a year -- 13 percent of the region's total ROG emissions.

Kelly Campbell
Californians for Pesticide Reform

Town Humiliated in Pesticide Scare
01:28 AM ET 12/09/99

Town Humiliated in Pesticide Scare
By CHRISTINE HANLEY, Associated Press Writer

EARLIMART, Calif. (AP) _ Sickened by a mysterious stench that wafted across this tiny community, two dozen people sat in a grassy field on a chilly evening and waited for emergency crews to decide what to do.
At the time, no one knew what was causing their eyes to water, lungs to burn, stomachs to retch. Amid the chaos, as a precaution, a decontamination line was ordered.
One by one, those sickened, most of them women, were sprayed with water by men wearing masks and green splash suits: the hazardous materials team.
Lupe Baeza, a 56-year-old grandmother, was first.
``They said to take off all my clothes. I left my underwear on. I said, 'I'm not taking them off,''' she said, recalling how her protest was in vain, as a paramedic pulled them off. ``He said I had to.''
Nearly a month later, Baeza and the others remain humiliated by the treatment, frightened by their exposure to what turned out to be a cancer-causing soil fumigant and saddled with thousands of dollars in medical bills they cannot afford.
Tired of getting no answers, some residents on Wednesday gave a representative of the Board of Supervisors at least 183 complaints about illnesses believed to be related to their exposure on Nov. 13.
They are demanding a more organized evacuation system, reimbursement for ambulance and hospital expenses and, most importantly, stricter pesticide regulations and air monitoring standards. A meeting was planned today with the Tulare County Agriculture Commissioner.
``If something like this happened in Berkeley or Sacramento, to people who vote or ordinary middle-class citizens, legislators would be tripping over themselves to get something done about it,'' said Dr. Marion Moses of the Pesticide Education Center in San Francisco.
Most of the 3,000 or so residents of Earlimart, about 70 miles south of Fresno, are Hispanic or Filipino. Some are transient. Nearly all earn their living picking grapes or pruning vines.
Wilbur-Ellis Co. was applying a fumigant known by the trade name Sectagon 42 to a 75-acre potato field owned by Vignolo Farms when the smell drifted over the town that Saturday afternoon.
Sectagon 42 contains metam sodium, which is on the state's list of cancer-causing pesticides.
The compound is fast becoming an alternative to methyl bromide, a highly toxic fumigant prized by farmers but being phased out worldwide. From 1991 to 1998, use of metam sodium jumped from about 5 million pounds statewide to more than 15 million pounds. Restrictions are tightest in a few counties where similar accidents were reported.
County agriculture officials say it appears the company followed county regulations: meeting the per-acre ratio, posting warning signs and staying within a required 500-foot buffer zone.
Still, the fumes escaped.
``Rotten eggs. Really rotten eggs,'' Lucy Huizar said of that first whiff.
About 150 people were evacuated from their homes. Following sheriff's orders, Huizar, a single mom, took three of her kids to a middle school and waited with others on the football field. Because of the contamination potential, they were not allowed inside. Mothers cradled their infants. Some people vomited.
Ambulance workers called for the decontamination line because they are not allowed to transport contaminated passengers.
Humiliation followed.
Though plastic tarps offered a partial shield, Huizar and the others said they were forced to strip down to nothing in an area within view of a crowd of at least 100 emergency personnel, TV crews and other spectators.
``It felt like we were raped,'' said Huizar, 42, reenacting how she was told to lift up her arms and turn in circles as she walked down the line.
Firefighters and agriculture officials say the possible consequences outweighed privacy issues.
``I know some people were humiliated. But it's life or death sometimes,'' said Tulare County Fire Capt. Patricia Granillo. ``Prior to them being washed down, we didn't know what the chemical was. It was just standard operating procedure.''
Hazardous materials crews are required to carry CD-Roms with pesticide information. Otherwise, they are instructed to contact local agriculture officials, who had reached the potato field and interviewed the applicator by the time decontamination began.
Both groups should have been aware of Sectagon 42's contents, said Glenn Brank, spokesman for the state Department of Pesticide Regulation.
Huizar and the others were examined at various hospitals and sent home, told they were exposed to a gas that is nothing more than an irritant.
Moses disputes that. She said even the fumes of metam sodium are a toxin capable of disrupting reproductive systems.
The treatment didn't come cheap, either. Ambulance rides cost $885 for Huizar and each of her three kids. The doctor's advice cost nearly $200 apiece.
The bills included this advice: ``Get rest, lots of fluids and avoid re-exposure.''

Cancer-Causing Pesticide Use Rising in California
Report Shows Total Use Remains Alarmingly High

Use of Most Toxic Pesticides Reaches Record High in Ventura County
Total Pesticide Use at All Time High in Santa Barbara County

VENTURA—Use of cancer-causing pesticides in California has more than doubled in the past 8 years, up 127% between 1991 and 1998, according to a report released today. Since 1996, use of carcinogens has remained within 0.5 million pounds of the highest level ever reported, with no downward trend in sight. The report, Hooked on Poison: Pesticide Use in California 1991-1998, authored by Pesticide Action Network, was released by the statewide coalition Californians for Pesticide Reform. The coalition was joined by cancer and health organizations and physicians who signed a joint letter to Governor Davis calling for leadership to end the use of carcinogenic pesticides.

“Pesticide use trends show that California is hooked on toxic pesticides,” stated Margaret Reeves, Ph.D., staff scientist at Pesticide Action Network. “Use of the most toxic pesticides, including carcinogens remains alarmingly high, indicating that the state is on the wrong track.”



“As a cancer survivor, I am deeply disturbed, but more important - as a parent I am appalled that we knowingly, legally are increasing use of carcinogenic pesticides in California,” said Elise Wright, Board Member of Community & Children’s Advocates Against Pesticide Poisoning. “Common sense and medical science tell us that the most sensible way to approach cancer is to prevent it before it starts. We need to adopt a precautionary approach and phase out the use of cancer-causing pesticides.”

Between 1991 and 1998 more than 1.5 billion pounds of pesticides were applied in California. Hooked on Poison finds that total reported pesticide use rose 40% between 1991 and 1998, and that over the last three years, use has remained at alarmingly high levels. These use patterns show no trend toward decreasing dependence on toxic pesticides.

Approximately one-third of pesticides used in 1998 are known to be particularly toxic to humans. These pesticides are classified as acute poisons, carcinogens, neurotoxins, reproductive or developmental toxins or are known to have contaminated groundwater in California. Use of these most hazardous, “California Bad Actor” pesticides rose sharply between 1991 and 1998 from 50.4 million pounds to 63.9 million pounds, peaking in 1995.

Ventura county ranks tenth among all 58 California counties for overall pesticide use, and sixth for use of the most toxic, “California Bad Actor” pesticides. Overall use in Ventura county increased from 4.9 million pounds in 1991 to 6.6 million pounds in 1998 with a peak in 1996. Use of carcinogenic pesticides in Ventura county increased from 260,000 pounds in 1991 to 440,000 pounds in 1998. In Ventura county, the top crops for carcinogenic pesticide use are celery, strawberries, leaf lettuce and spinach.

The three top “California Bad Actor” pesticides most heavily used include methyl bromide a developmental toxicant and acute poison; chloropicrin, an acute poison; and metam sodium, a carcinogen and developmental toxicant.

Santa Barbara county ranks 15th among all 58 California counties for overall pesticide use, and eighth for use of the most toxic, “California Bad Actor” pesticides. Overall use in Santa Barbara county increased from 3.1 million pounds in 1991 to an all time high of 4.0 million pounds in 1998. Use of carcinogenic pesticides in Santa Barbara county increased from 370,000 pounds in 1991 to 1.04 million pounds in 1998. In Santa Barbara county, the top crops for carcinogenic pesticide use are carrots, leaf lettuce, head lettuce and broccoli.

The three top “California Bad Actor” pesticides most heavily used include metam sodium, a carcinogen and developmental toxicant; methyl bromide a developmental toxicant and acute poison; and chloropicrin, an acute poison.

The report finds that government agencies have no coherent, long-term strategy guiding growers and other users to transition their pest control practices to least-toxic approaches. It recommends that the California Department of Pesticide Regulation and US Environmental Protection Agency take a proactive stance to reduce pesticide use, including the following elements:

? Phase out use of the worst pesticides, including carcinogens, acute poisons, reproductive and developmental toxicants, neurotoxins and pesticides that are known to contaminate California groundwater.

? Increase funding and grower support for a transition to least-toxic pest control

“Currently state and federal agencies have an inadequate, haphazard patchwork of programs and regulations to promote alternatives—but pesticide use trends show these efforts aren’t nearly enough,” said Stephan Orme, data specialist at Pesticide Action Network and report co-author. “We need to see a comprehensive plan to research and promote sustainable agriculture.”

The report analyzed data from the California Department of Pesticide Regulation annual pesticide use reports from 1991 to 1998, the latest year for which data is available. The Pesticide Use Reporting (PUR) system tracks use of pesticide active ingredients used commercially in agricultural and urban applications. It does not include consumer or most institutional uses of pesticides.

###

To order a copy of Hooked on Poison: Pesticide Use in California 1991-1998, call Californians for Pesticide Reform, 888-CPR-4880 (in California) or visit www.igc.org/cpr.

Californians for Pesticide Reform is a coalition of over 130 organizations in California dedicated to turning the tide on toxic pesticide use.

Pesticide Action Network is an international coalition of over 400 citizens groups in more than 60 countries working to oppose the misuse of pesticides and to promote sustainable and ecologically sound pest management.
Community & Children’s Advocates Against Pesticide Poisoning is an all volunteer grassroots organization in Ventura County working to reduce the use of toxic pesticides, especially where children may be exposed, and to promote local sustainable agriculture.

An education in pesticides

Study: 88% of schools use some toxic chemicals

By ERIC STEVICK and WARREN CORNWALL Herald Writers
Daily Herald, Everett, WA

Chances are that pesticides that can cause cancer and other serious health problems are being used at a school near you.

Eighty-eight percent of the school districts surveyed across the state reported using pesticides during the 1997-98 school year, according to the Washington Toxics Coalition study released Tuesday. Five of those districts were from Snohomish County.

The study examined chemicals used to kill weeds, insects and rodents but did not compare previous years. The largest volumes of pesticides were used for weed control.

"I don't think people freak out so much that (they say), 'Oh my God, my kid is going to get cancer,' " said Elizabeth Loudon, pesticide policy analyst for the toxics coalition. "But people are concerned that harmful pesticides are being used around their children, and when they find out, they want it changed."

Children are more likely to be exposed than adults because they are lower to the ground, run around on the grass more and put their hands to their mouths more, according to the toxics coalition.

Scientific studies have linked the pesticides commonly used in schools to learning disabilities and behavior problems, damage to the nervous system and cancer, the coalition reports.

School districts say they have dramatically reduced their pesticides use over the last decade.

Consider the logistical challenges in the sprawling Edmonds School District where there are 42 buildings, including 34 schools, spanning 400 acres. Nine groundskeepers and a mechanic maintain the properties. That means roughly five people are mowing full time over nine months of the year.

Paul Koehn, grounds foreman who has been working in the Edmonds district for 19 years, said the district has taken a "reduce the use" approach to pesticides. When he started, the strategy was to apply pesticides in anticipation of problems. Now, it is to analyze and react to each problem as it comes up.

"The idea is if you absolutely have to apply a herbicide on something, that you are doing it with the right thing in the right way," Koehn said.

District staff members reported that they have reduced outdoor pesticide use by 90 percent in the past several years, the coalition report said.

Loudon, of the toxics coalition, said more can and should be done to reduce pesticide use. She pointed to the use of the insect spray Rid in the Edmonds district to control lice. An Environmental Protection Agency manual for schools says, "Never, under any circumstances, should lice sprays be used."

At the Lakewood School District, maintenance workers last year dealt with ant problems with a swift squirt of insecticide, said Fred Owyen, director of support services for the district. That changed after district officials met early in 1999 with the toxics coalition and learned the sprays might pose more health risks than benefits, he said.

Now, workers will block up holes ants use to get into buildings or spread a natural and less harmful substance that repels the insects.

"Rather than going up there with the shotgun approach, we're going up there with the least toxic approach first," he said.

Loudon compared the issue to openly smoking tobacco in restaurants and public places 20 years ago. What was acceptable then is not acceptable now.

"Schools need to provide a healthy environment for children to learn," she said. School districts need to adopt policies that require the use of alternatives to pesticides."

Some schools have taken the initiative to severely restrict, and in some cases eliminate pesticide use. They are using volunteers and alternative pest and weed management techniques.

Two years ago, Columbia Elementary in the Mukilteo district became the first school in the state to sign a pledge to refrain from using chemicals and, if they are necessary, to only use the least dangerous.

Martha Lake Elementary also has been using volunteers. Parents there have been working with the school, the PTA and the Edmonds district to find alternatives to spraying.

Some districts, such as Stanwood, are taking spraying concerns into account when they design the grounds for new schools. For instance, mowing edges can be made easier by pouring concrete along the bottom of fence lines, or plants that are more weed resistant can be used for landscaping.

You can call Herald Writer Eric Stevick at 425-339-3446 or send e-mail to stevick@heraldnet.com .

You can call Herald Writer Warren Cornwall at 425-339-3463 or send e-mail to cornwall@heraldnet.com .

Health warning dropped from report

Associated Press

TAMPA -- A draft report by the state Department of Health warned that Florida agriculture officials should stop spraying against the Mediterranean fruit fly, but the recommendation was dropped from the final version.

Memoranda, e-mail and other documents indicate the changes may have been made because of objections by the state Department of Agriculture, The Tampa Tribune reported Sunday.

The newspaper cited a memo written by Omar Shafey, the epidemiologist who wrote the report, in which he alluded to ''political realities'' behind the revisions.

The changes were based on ''the need to avoid'' making health recommendations that agriculture officials find ''problematic,'' Shafey wrote Jan. 4 to Brian Hughes, head of environmental epidemiology at the Department of Health.

Shafey wrote he could not ''in good conscience'' remove recommendations needed to prevent a recurrence of hundreds of health complaints received in 1998 and 1997, when fly fighters conducted a 10-week aerial malathion campaign in Hillsborough County.

Hughes said Friday he has ''no actual knowledge'' of political pressures to change the report.

The Medfly can damage more than 250 kinds of fruit and vegetables. Failure to defeat it risks severe economic impact because of restrictions on the state's produce.

The Health Department documented cases in which people became sick and were sometimes hospitalized after malathion bait spray was showered on four counties last year, the newspaper reported.

If the state Department of Agriculture continues spraying urban Florida, the state should be prepared to compensate people who are hurt and to provide public shelters outside spray zones for those who wish to leave their homes, according to the draft report dated Sept. 30.

But those recommendations -- and many more -- were stripped from the final report on malathion-related complaints in Miami-Dade, Lake, Manatee and Highlands counties.

The amended report, made public last week, instead calls for further studies, saying ''the findings ... do not allow an association between malathion/bait applications and reported adverse health effects to be established.''

The original draft, however, recommended an end to aerial spraying ''in light of documented adverse health affects attributable to 1998 Medfly Program operations.''

Of the 230 Medfly spray-related reports that health officials received between April 30 and Sept. 30, 123 were classified as probable or possible cases of acute pesticide-related illness.

That represents an average rate of about nine out of 10,000 residents in the spray zones. Most suffered respiratory problems or rashes and had pre-existing conditions such as asthma, lung disorders or chemical sensitivities.

Agriculture officials ''categorically reject'' suggestions that they applied pressure on the health agency to change the report, said department spokesman Terry McElroy.

''Our only role here was to provide our technical assistance,'' McElroy said Friday.

Health officials also denied the draft's drastic alterations resulted from outside pressures.

Sharon Heber, who leads the health department's environmental health division, said she and Hughes were primarily responsible for what was or was not included in the final report.

''We felt the science wasn't there to do anything at this time,'' Heber said.

But a senior medical officer for the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, who reviewed the original draft, wrote in an October memo to state health officials that Shafey's recommendations ''appear reasonable and appropriate.''

The CDC's Geoffrey Calvart said he has not seen the final report but stands by his opinion of the draft, which he called ''excellent and thorough.''

All case histories, which provided anonymous accounts of spray-related illness, were removed from the final report. Hughes said that was to protect confidentiality.

For information, testimonials, or to purchase DE products, call Fran Tully at 801-949-3570

 With a 100% satisfaction guarantee and a guarantee against damage, why consider any other product?