|
Fluoride Action Network
March 29, 2004
Groups challenge EPA's approval of Dow's Sulfuryl fluoride:
EPA
allows 5 times higher levels for Infants than Adults
On March 22, 2004, the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) formally challenged
US EPA's approval of Sulfuryl fluoride for use as a fumigant on
a wide variety of foods.
EPA identified fluoride as the major toxicological endpoint of
concern for exposure to Sulfuryl fluoride. In its Risk Assessment,
which served as the basis for approval, EPA made an unprecedented
decision to allow an acceptable dosage for infants (0.571 mg/kg
bodyweight/day) which is five times higher than for adults (0.114
mg/kg/day).
The Washington, DC-based Beyond Pesticides joined FAN in submitting
Written Objections
and a Request for a Hearing, the process necessary to formally
challenge EPA's decision.
This is the first time that Sulfuryl fluoride, produced by Dow
AgroSciences, has been approved for food use. In its approval, EPA
set the highest levels of fluoride residues "in or on food"
in US history. As a fumigant it will be used on over 40 foods that
include nuts, dried fruit, rice, wheat, barley, etc. Fumigants are
used to kill the bugs that infest and destroy stored foods.
Sulfuryl fluoride is Dow's alternative to Methyl bromide, the ozone-destroying
food fumigant that has a phase-out deadline of January 1, 2005,
for developed countries.
FAN says there are alternatives available to Methyl bromide and
Sulfuryl fluoride (both made by Dow) which would allow the US phase-out
date to be met. And because alternatives are available, it is unnecessary
to allow anyone, particularly the workers who will spray it, to
be put at such risk.
EPA alters safety standard
According to Paul Connett PhD, Executive Director of FAN, and Professor
of Chemistry at St Lawrence University in Canton NY, "EPA's
data showed that some children were already receiving more fluoride
than EPA's existing safety standard allowed. Such a situation should
have been grounds for rejecting Dow's request to add an additional
source of exposure to the diet."
However, instead of denying Dow's request, the EPA has opted to
increase the tolerable dose for children.
Since children are already receiving excess fluoride from sources
such as fluoridated water, toothpaste, and processed foods, Connett
states that "EPA was basically faced with one of two choices:
reject Dow's request or loosen the safety standard. The EPA chose
the latter option."
"The science does not support EPA's decision to again support
corporate greed instead of children's health," said Jay Feldman,
executive director of Beyond Pesticides, a Washington-DC based national
clearinghouse and advocacy organization. He continued, "It
is time for the Bush Administration to stop using EPA to support
pollution and poisons for political benefit."
"Unprecedented": EPA sets higher safe dose for
infants than adults
EPA's move has left scientists familiar with risk assessment shaking
their heads. In loosening the safety standard for children, EPA
has created a situation where the acceptable dose for infants is
five times higher than the acceptable dose for adults.
According to Connett, "We feel this is an unjustified and
unprecedented decision by EPA, which runs counter to their mandate
under the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) to set standards that
are more protective of children, not less."
According to Chris Neurath, Research Associate with FAN: "If
EPA's pesticide division had followed their statutory mandate they
should have set a standard for children ten times more protective
than for adults. Instead they have brazenly manipulated normal protocol
and assigned a sensitivity for infants that is 5 times less protective!
For infants to be deemed less sensitive than adults is unprecedented."
"There is every reason to believe that children are more sensitive
to fluoride than adults," notes Connett. "EPA has cited
no new data to justify its decision. We find this to be completely
unacceptable."
Several senior scientists at EPA concur.
Speaking on condition of anonymity, senior scientists at EPA -
familiar with pesticide risk assessment - explained to FAN that
they "have not seen any case where an acceptable dosage for
children is higher than for adults."
"EPA's action is irresponsible," they declared.
Profits for Dow, Risks for the Public
"We are deeply concerned," says Connett. "Based
on the near epidemic rate of dental fluorosis in our children, it
is clear that fluoride exposures need to be reduced, not increased."
Dental fluorosis, a mineralization disorder of teeth, is caused
by excess ingestion of fluoride during a child's teeth-forming years.
The condition is now seen in up to 50% of children in fluoridated
areas, and in some children requires expensive cosmetic treatment.
But dental fluorosis is not FAN's only concern.
"The fortunate thing about dental fluorosis is that we can
see it. We can see the white spots on a child's tooth and say 'yes,
fluoride has caused cellular damage in that tooth.' But what about
the internal organs - the ones we can't see?" asks Connett.
Recent reseach indicates that fluoride accumulates in the pineal
gland, which is located between the two hemispheres of the brain.
EPA knows that the pineal, an endocrine gland, contains hydroxyapatite
(the same as bone) and that fluoride has been found to accumulate
to even greater levels in the pineal than in the bone. The pineal
gland produces the hormones melatonin and seratonin.
According to Connett, "Animal studies indicate that fluoride
lowers the production of melatonin. One of the risks we may be taking
by exposing our whole population to fluoride is interfering with
delicate regulatory timing processes, from the onset of puberty
to the aging process. However, EPA has chosen to ignore this concern."
Risk to Workers
Workers are at risk not only from the acute toxicity of Sulfuryl
fluoride but also the potential for brain, lung, kidney, and bone
effects.
Results reported from animal studies (rats, mice, dogs, rabbits)
exposed to Sulfuryl fluoride all share these effects: holes in the
brain, necrosis of the brain, and effects on the white matter of
the brain (particularly the female species). These results, which
come from tests performed by Dow scientists, are not without their
limitations. Researchers did not test male rats in acute neurotoxicity
tests. In subchronic neurotoxicity tests, the examination of nervous
system tissues were only performed on the highest dosed animals,
while a developmental neurotoxicity study has yet to be performed.
Over the past 4 years, the Fluoride Action Network has been working
to raise awareness about recent research indicating the potential
for human harm from current fluoride exposures.
According to FAN, a growing body of research suggests that fluoride
may be associated with several serious health problems, including
arthritis, hip fractures, bone cancer, kidney damage, infertility,
and brain disorders.
"There is a profound need for precaution on the fluoride issue,
and yet a profound absence of it exists in Washington," adds
Connett.
(end)
LINKS
* EPA's
Final Rule
* March 2004
Submission to EPA from FAN & Beyond Pesticides
* Beyond Pesticides
CONTACTS:
Paul Connett: 315-229-5853 or 315-379-9200
Jay Feldman: 202-543-5450
|