--- Timothy Cowdery <cowdery@usgs.gov> wrote:
> Date: Fri, 30 Jul 1999 09:34:39 -0500
> From: Timothy Cowdery <cowdery@usgs.gov>
> Organization: U.S. Geological Survey
> To: Kirsten Saylor <kir139@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Fwd: RE: Cancer and free PR
>
> Kirsten,
>
> From what I could find in some references (available
> by request, 1983,
> 1993), 2,4-dinitrophenol is an organic molocule of
> no cited use, but a
> chemical closely related (structurally, but not
> necessarily
> degradationally) to both dinoseb
> (2,4-dinitro-6-sec-butylphenol) and
> 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol (which are not the same thing).
> All 3 are phenols
> with 2 nitro groups attached. Dinoseb and
> 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol are
> pesticides (The former used as an herbicide,
> especially on corn and the
> latter and ovicide on fruit trees) and have carbon
> groups attached to the
> phenol. Dinoseb degrades to "persistant polar
> compounds" that could not
> be identified.
>
> I'm not sure what the arguement is here.
> 2,4-dinitrophenol does not
> appear to be a pesticide, it may be a pesticide
> metabolite, and is a
> chemical found in both chemical synthesis and in the
> environment. It is
> toxic to many forms of life including bacteria,
> algae, protozoa,
> arthropods, and fish. It is unclear how toxic it is
> to humans but must be
> at some concentration.
>
> I did read Dale Wilson's message and I think he
> makes many good points.
>
> 1) One must take concentration into account.
> Toxicity has everything to
> do with concentration, not detection. As our
> detection limits continue to
> decline, detection rates will increase, even if
> there is no increase in
> environmental concentration.
>
> 2) One must make the methods and purposes for which
> data is collected
> clear. His point on the European rain data is a
> very good one.
>
> 3) There is a very big difference between suspicion
> of a toxic effect and
> proof of a toxic effect. When dealing with the
> suspicion of a toxic
> effect, risk analysis (cost-benefit) must be
> employed and risk analysis is
> notoriously full of assumptions and values not
> everyone shares. Most
> people really don't understand risk.
>
> 4) Get your information from both sides of an issue.
>
> Initial rain concentrations of 4,000 nanograms per
> liter is 4 micrograms
> per liter (the units we measured groundwater at).
> This is high for a
> pesticide in ground water. However, rain is not
> ground water and the
> average concentration in all rainwater is probably
> 3-4 orders of magnitude
> lower. Do I want this stuff in my rain? No. Do I
> want my food grown from
> pesticides that probably degrade into this stuff?
> No. Am I willing to pay
> much more for food grown without pesticides? Yes.
> Do I even care if this
> stuff is basically harmless to life? No. But these
> are my answers based
> on my values (my risk assessment). I think I am in
> the minority.
>
> Also, when evaluating risk, one really has to
> prioritize. The automobile
> has done more damage to the physical, spiritual, and
> mental health of our
> civilization than the entire pesticide industry. Of
> course I realize that
> the automobile and pesticide industries leap from
> the same mind set.
>
> Sorry for going bla bla bla...
>
> > Tim
> -----------------------
Dear Tim,
> > > Here's an argument -- that I
> > thought your water-pesticide expertise could help
> > solve. Is the 2,4 - dinitrophenol a derivative of
> a pesticide? Degraded from something else? Is
> there a right, wrong or just poorly misunderstood?
> > Anyway, your help is much appreciated.
> >
> > Kirsten
> >-----------------------------------
> > --- Bunny Snow <sksnow@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> > > Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 12:00:16 -0500
> > > From: Bunny Snow <sksnow@worldnet.att.net>
> > > Reply-to: sksnow@worldnet.att.net
> > > Organization: Pollution Solution
> > > To: SANET-mg <sanet-mg@ces.ncsu.edu>
> > > Subject: RE: Cancer and free PR
> > >
> > > <<Cited from Rachels by Alex:
> > > "Stephan Muller at the Swiss federal Institute
> for
> > > Environmental Science
> > > and Technology in Dubendorf reported finding one
> > > sample of rain
> > > containing 4000 nanograms per liter of
> > > 2,4-dinitrophenol, a common
> > > pesticide (not to be confused with the weed
> killer
> > > 2,4-D).>>
> > >
> > > Cited by Dale Wilson at:
> > >
> >
>
<http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail/html-home/35-html/0470.html>
> > > <2,4 DNP is not a pesticide. The most closely
> > > related pesticide was
> > > dinoseb, I think it was 2,4-dinitrocresol, a
> > > herbicide. This was taken
> > > off the market a decade ago. Who the hell knows
> why
> > > Muller found "one
> > > sample" contaminated with DNP, or where it came
> > > from.>
> > >
> > > According to Marion Moses, M.D., M.P.H.:
> > > ''Pesticides are toxic
> > > substances deliberately added to our environment
> to
> > > kill or harm living
> > > things. They can also kill or harm human beings.
> The
> > > 1947 federal
> > > pesticide law defined pesticides as 'economic
> > > poisons.' Pesticides are
> > > named according to the kind of pest they are
> used
> > > against'' --herbicides
> > > for weeds, insecticides for insects; fungicides,
> > > bactericides, and so
> > > forth. Hence, contrary to what Dale Wilson
> claims,
> > > 2,4 DNP is a
> > > pesticide, just like Roundup is a pesticide!
> > >
> > > Bunny Snow
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu
> with
> > > the command
> > > "unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the
> digest
> > > format, use the command
> > > "unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
> > > To Subscribe to Digest: Email
> majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu
> > > with the command
> > > "subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
> > >
> > > All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
> > > http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail
> > >
> >
> >
>
_____________________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Free instant messaging and more at
> http://messenger.yahoo.com
>
> --
> Tim Cowdery, hydrogeologist
> U.S. Geological Survey
> Water-Resources Division
> Minnesota District
> Minneapolis, Minnesota
> (612) 783-3273 cowdery@usgs.gov
>
>
_____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail