Article 4626 of misc.rural:
Xref: samba misc.rural:4626 talk.environment:6696 sci.environment:21393
Newsgroups: misc.rural,talk.environment,sci.environment
Path: samba!concert!gatech!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uunet.ca!geac!zooid!r-node!ndallen
From: ndallen@r-node.pci.on.ca (Nigel Allen)
Subject: Pesticide Reform: NDRC reponds to EPA statement
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1993 18:57:41 GMT
Message-ID: <1993Feb2.185741.21146@r-node.pci.on.ca>
Lines: 43

Here is a press release from the Natural Resources Defense Council.

 NRDC Responds to EPA Statement on Pesticide Reform
 To: National Desk, Environment Writer
 Contact: Al Meyerhoff or Lawrie Mott, 415-777-0220; or
          Erik Olson or Sarah Silver, 202-783-7800, both
          of the Natural Resources Defense Council

   WASHINGTON, Feb. 2  -- The Natural Resources Defense 
Council (NRDC) said today that with today's release by EPA of
a list of 35 carcinogenic pesticides in food that violate the Delaney
Clause of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act and therefore should be
banned, the stage is set for a full debate on reform of the federal
pesticide statutes.
   The nation's pesticide laws have proven to be an abysmal failure
and need complete overhaul.
   "What we need is more, not less, protection from carcinogenic
pesticides in food -- at a time when cancer strikes one in three
Americans," said Al Meyerhoff, senior attorney at NRDC.  Legislation
providing a uniform health-based standard for pesticides in food that
protects all consumers, especially children, is essential.  "Any
reopening of the Delaney Clause must incorporate its fundamental
premise -- that is to prevent cancer not manage it," said Meyerhoff.
   "NRDC's ultimate food safety goal is the development of non-toxic,
environmentally-sound alternatives to pesticides," said Erik Olson,
senior attorney with NRDC.  "We are eager to work with EPA and USDA
to encourage development of these alternatives but until such options
exist, the Delaney Clause must be enforced."
   "The Delaney Clause is not only a way to protect public health, it
is the best weapon in the war to replace carcinogenic pesticides in
the food system with healthier, safer choices," Olson stated further.
   Improving the federal laws is only part of the package of needed
pesticide reforms.  The new administration must make sustainable
agriculture a top priority.  "The best way to protect public health
and the environment from pesticides is to reduce their use," said
Lawrie Mott, senior scientist with NRDC.  "Decreasing agricultural
chemical use is technically feasible and makes environmental and
economic sense."  A 1991 report by the NRDC found that methods
already available could cut pesticide applications by 25 to
80 percent.
 -30-
-- 
Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario    ndallen@r-node.pci.on.ca


Article 4631 of misc.rural:
Xref: samba misc.rural:4631 talk.environment:6708 sci.environment:21404
Path: samba!concert!gatech!paladin.american.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!linac!att!bu.edu!dozonoff
From: dozonoff@bu.edu (david ozonoff)
Newsgroups: misc.rural,talk.environment,sci.environment
Subject: Re: Pesticide Reform: NDRC reponds to EPA statement
Message-ID: <109283@bu.edu>
Date: 3 Feb 93 21:06:00 GMT
References: <18283@umd5.umd.edu>
Sender: news@bu.edu
Followup-To: misc.rural
Lines: 31
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

Bill Williams (bwilliam@oyster.smcm.edu) wrote:
: In article <1993Feb2.185741.21146@r-node.pci.on.ca> Nigel Allen,
: ndallen@r-node.pci.on.ca writes:
: >Here is a press release from the Natural Resources Defense Council.
: 
  He (Donald Kennedy, former head of FDA) opined that the Delaney
: ammendment was basically superfluous -- plenty of regulations already
: required that food be "safe," and obviously if it causes cancer it
: ain't safe -- and potentially unduly restrictive -- as the ability to
: detect trace amounts of materials increases, many perfectly safe food
: substances would be in technical violation of the clause, because they
: 
I believe the Delaney clause only pertains to intentional food 
additives. Moreover, yes, it is restrictive, allowing the agency
no discretion, and yes, they do have other options if they want them
(e.g., the General Duty Clause). But the point was that they abused
their discretion and were unduly influenced by the food industry. The
reason we have regulations like Delaney is because the agencies 
cannot be trusted to do what is proper. They have only themselves to
blame.
	As to why focusing on cancer, we don't know how to identify
those additives that might risk Alzheimer's, etc. We DO have a fairly good
way to identify carcinogens (animal bioassays).

--
Dave Ozonoff
dozonoff@med-itvax1
Boston University School of Public Health
80 East Concord St., T3C
Boston, MA 02118
(617) 638-4620


Article 4626 of misc.rural:
Xref: samba misc.rural:4626 talk.environment:6696 sci.environment:21393
Newsgroups: misc.rural,talk.environment,sci.environment
Path: samba!concert!gatech!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uunet.ca!geac!zooid!r-node!ndallen
From: ndallen@r-node.pci.on.ca (Nigel Allen)
Subject: Pesticide Reform: NDRC reponds to EPA statement
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1993 18:57:41 GMT
Message-ID: <1993Feb2.185741.21146@r-node.pci.on.ca>
Lines: 43

Here is a press release from the Natural Resources Defense Council.

 NRDC Responds to EPA Statement on Pesticide Reform
 To: National Desk, Environment Writer
 Contact: Al Meyerhoff or Lawrie Mott, 415-777-0220; or
          Erik Olson or Sarah Silver, 202-783-7800, both
          of the Natural Resources Defense Council

   WASHINGTON, Feb. 2  -- The Natural Resources Defense 
Council (NRDC) said today that with today's release by EPA of
a list of 35 carcinogenic pesticides in food that violate the Delaney
Clause of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act and therefore should be
banned, the stage is set for a full debate on reform of the federal
pesticide statutes.
   The nation's pesticide laws have proven to be an abysmal failure
and need complete overhaul.
   "What we need is more, not less, protection from carcinogenic
pesticides in food -- at a time when cancer strikes one in three
Americans," said Al Meyerhoff, senior attorney at NRDC.  Legislation
providing a uniform health-based standard for pesticides in food that
protects all consumers, especially children, is essential.  "Any
reopening of the Delaney Clause must incorporate its fundamental
premise -- that is to prevent cancer not manage it," said Meyerhoff.
   "NRDC's ultimate food safety goal is the development of non-toxic,
environmentally-sound alternatives to pesticides," said Erik Olson,
senior attorney with NRDC.  "We are eager to work with EPA and USDA
to encourage development of these alternatives but until such options
exist, the Delaney Clause must be enforced."
   "The Delaney Clause is not only a way to protect public health, it
is the best weapon in the war to replace carcinogenic pesticides in
the food system with healthier, safer choices," Olson stated further.
   Improving the federal laws is only part of the package of needed
pesticide reforms.  The new administration must make sustainable
agriculture a top priority.  "The best way to protect public health
and the environment from pesticides is to reduce their use," said
Lawrie Mott, senior scientist with NRDC.  "Decreasing agricultural
chemical use is technically feasible and makes environmental and
economic sense."  A 1991 report by the NRDC found that methods
already available could cut pesticide applications by 25 to
80 percent.
 -30-
-- 
Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario    ndallen@r-node.pci.on.ca


