Government: "Pesticides...Bad?"

TUESDAY NOVEMBER 16 2004 9:59 AM

Submitted by MC_Dove. Edited By legionnaire.

A recent study that planned to observe how children absorb certain chemicals and pesticides has been put on hold for ethical concerns. Apparently, the threat of neurological damage to children due to these products has made some people uneasy. Imagine that.

The Environmental Protection Agency said it would ask an outside panel of scientists to review its planned two-year study involving the families of 60 children in Duval County, Fla., and report back by spring. The study's design has already been reviewed by four other external boards, including two universities.

There are also concerns that mainly families with low income would participate due to the reward involved, including children's clothing, a video camera, and $970.

The trade group said in a statement that more review is useful, but it still supports the study ``because of the great importance of increasing understanding of the exposures of young children to pesticides and other chemicals they naturally encounter in their daily lives.''

Maybe now would be a good time to bring up the idea of finding alternatives for pesticides, rather than spraying our children with them...just a thought.

3 Comments

KaraLynn

Beverly Hills, CA

April 2004

NOV 16, 2004 10:11 AM

This all depends on if these are families and children who live in areas where they automatically get exposed to pesticides. IE farming areas or cities that regularly spray for skeeters. I grew up in one of those places and it probably wouldn't have been a bad idea to follow the residents. Since many of the area hospital employees easily notice that area has a much higher than average cancer rate.

I agree alternatives need to be found. But the study doesn't necessarily add to the amout of exposure.

Ethics get involved in the above case when the study people begin to see a huge correlation between exposure and illness and don't warn participants, like with the estrogen replacement therapy studies.

[Edited on Nov 16, 2004 1:13PM]

ankiel66

Seattle, WA

June 2003

NOV 16, 2004 10:52 AM

As an environmentalist it's a study that I am ethically against. The downside to not having a study though is that it is dificult to get certain chemicals banned if no one knows the actual effects of them.

Of course a study for increase of cancer risk due to exposure would take 40 years or more to complete.

X

Lansing, MI

February 2003

NOV 16, 2004 07:26 PM

im confused... the pestisides are to dangours to test on children in a controled research enviroment, but safe enough to consume in food on a daily bassis.