| WASHINGTON,
DC, November 10, 2004 (ENS): The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) is delaying a controversial
study to measure pesticide exposure in babies, from
birth to age three, who have pesticides sprayed in their
homes.
EPA is paying families in Jacksonville, Florida who
“spray or have pesticides sprayed inside your
home routinely” to study the resulting chemical
exposure in their infant children.
In a memo dated Monday and distributed to EPA employees,
William McFarland, the acting deputy assistant administrator
for science, wrote that the agency would subject the
study to further review that “may refine the study
design” but that the study would proceed in the
spring.
The EPA is sending the study design for review by an
expert panel made up of members of the EPA Science Advisory
Board, the EPA Science Advisory Panel and the EPA Children’s
Health Protection Advisory Committee. It is anticipated
that this review will be completed, and that a report
will be forwarded to EPA Administrator Mike Leavitt,
in the spring of 2005.
The study has already been reviewed on ethical grounds
and approved by three Institutional Review Boards for
the Protection of Human Subjects - the University of
Florida in May, Battelle Memorial Institute in August,
and the University of North Carolina in September. "These
boards include outside, independent experts in the fields
of medicine, ethics and community advocacy," McFarland
said in the memo. A fourth decision by the Florida Department
of Health is pending.
Critics of the study point out that Battelle is the
primary contractor for the study and therefore could
not be independent in its assessment.
The study, called the Children’s Environmental
Exposure Research Study (CHEERS), pays participating
families $970 for participating throughout the two year
study period. Families who complete the study get to
keep the camcorder they are provided to record their
babies’ behavior, plus bibs, t-shirts and other
promotional items.
The families are recruited from public clinics and
hospitals. EPA selects infants based upon pesticide
residue levels detected in “a surface wipe sample
in the primary room where the child spends time.”
Citing “recent news articles" that have
"mischaracterized the study,” McFarland said
the further review “will ultimately enable us
to be more protective of children’s health,”
according to memo.
“EPA seems to think that the problem with this
study is one of public relations, not morality,”
said Jeff Ruch, executive director of Public Employees
for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), whose organization
is working with agency scientists who are questioning
the ethics of the study. “Regardless of the number
of reviews, paying poor parents to dose their babies
with commercial poisons to measure their exposure is
just plain wrong.”
Conducted with funding from the American Chemistry
Council, which represents 135 companies including pesticide
manufacturers, the study looks at 60 infants and toddlers.
Pesticide companies want data on actual infant exposure
levels to persuade the EPA to drop its rules requiring
that pesticide exposures to small children must be ten
times more protective than adults, Ruch says.
According to published reports, the Bush administration
will soon announce the repeal of the Clinton-era rules
against testing pesticides on humans. "EPA wants
to use CHEERS as the opening for a new policy on accepting
testing on humans to determine pesticide toxicity,"
says Ruch.
EPA scientists are also expressing concern that corporations
are now influencing EPA research through direct financial
contributions. The American Chemistry Council, which
contributed $2 million to CHEERS, successfully lobbied
to include exposure to flame retardants and other household
chemicals in the study. The EPA now has 80 similar research
agreements with industry, including three with the American
Chemistry Council.
. |
