CU's analysis of the very limited progress made by EPA in dealing with
List One chemicals under the FQPA is posted, along with the press release,
statement, detailed tables, etc on the FQPA webpage at:
This morning, EPA finally released details of its actions on methyl parathion
and azinphos-methyl. My quick assessment follows --
Twenty-four food uses were voluntarily canceled. Of these
∑ 17 had no use reported by USDA in its most recent chemical use
This means there was less than 1 percent of the national acreage treated (9
cases) or the crop was not surveyed (8 cases).
∑ EPA actions impacted crops accounting for 8.6 percent of methyl
parathion pounds applied across all crops (see Table below) and 16.9
∑ Use on fresh sweet corn has apparently been continued. 15 percent of
the nationís acres were treated in 1998, accounting for 21,600 pounds
Use was most intensive in Michigan, where the insecticide was applied 2.4
on 11 percent of the acres.
Twenty-four food uses were retained. No final and official
has been released to date regarding reductions in tolerances on these uses.
The cabbage use was retained even though only 1 percent of the
acres where treated in 1998. This could emerge as a high-exposure and risk
There is little or no residue data on nearly half of the remaining
so it is not possible to verify EPA claims regarding the impact of the actions
taken relative to the methyl parathion Reference Dose.
Actions taken will have little or no impact on use of
key childrenís foods or residues in the diet. Continued azinphos-methyl
two crops apples and pears will take up essentially all the allowable
exposure to organophosphates (OPs), placing in jeopardy most other OP uses
result in residues in food.
The farm-worker provisions may reduce exposures somewhat, but will
clearly not bring Margins of Exposure to acceptable levels.
The EPA announced no estimates of the impact on azinphos-methyl use
because none is expected.
This list has discussed lately why industry seems to have such
inordinate influence on government decisions in the biotech arena. The same
questions arise in the area of pesticide regulation, and have for years. One
of the major reasons why is laid out in discomfortingly frank detail in a
recent EWG report entitled "From Bureaucrats to Fat Cats: EPA Pesticide
is a 'Farm Team' for the Pesticide Lobby." This short, readable report can be
It is not a pretty picture; I could add a few personal details from my
dealing with the same people, but there is no need.
Charles Benbrook 208-263-5236 (voice)
Benbrook Consulting Services 208-263-7342 (fax)
5085 Upper Pack River Road firstname.lastname@example.org [e-mail]
Sandpoint, Idaho 83864 http://www.pmac.net
To Unsubscribe: Email email@example.com with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
To Subscribe to Digest: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at: