Jury Awards Millions For Pesticide Exposure

Jessica Pieklo of Care2.com reports that 14 years after Todd and Cynthia Ebling sued Prestwick Square Apartments and its management company alleging that pesticides used in their apartment caused sever neurological problems in two of their children, a southern Indiana jury awarded the couple $23.5 million in connection with the claim.  According to the lawsuit, the children suffered from seizures after coming in contact with the spray.

Shortly after moving into an apartment in 1994 the children were hospitalized with seizures and other neurological problems.  The family moved about a year later.

According to their attorney, the children’s health problems were caused by exposure to Creal-O, a chemical based on the pesticide Diazinon.  The pesticide was eventually banned for residential use in 2004 by the Environmental Protection Agency.

According to the suit, the chemical was applied in the wrong fashion, even though at the time it was legal to use in a residential context.  More was applied than should have been and it was applied in a careless manner.  The result was pesticide on the base boards, carpeting, and wall coverings.

Exposure resulted in tragic health effects on the children.  Their now 20 year old daughter is  developmentally stalled at two years old.  The other child, while not as severely injured as his sister, struggles academically and socially.  The family unit has been disrupted as a result.  Todd and Cynthia are now divorced and had been struggling to provide for the cost of care for their daughter.

The tragedy of the Ebling case is that it took so long for both the judicial system and the regulatory system to remedy the obvious wrong -- exposure to a toxic chemical.

* * * 

Australian Government Bans Toxic Pesticide 'Endosulfan'

Reversing previous rulings that claimed that the toxic pesticide endosulfan was “safe,” the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) announced its decision Tuesday to finally cancel the registration of the highly hazardous chemical. Recent assessments by the Australian government’s Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (DSEWPC) concluded that the prolonged use of endosulfan is likely to lead to adverse environmental effects via spray drift and run-off, and that these long-term risks could not be mitigated merely through use restrictions or label changes. Australia joins over 60 countries, including to the U.S. to have banned endosulfan.

 

Endosulfan is an organochlorine insecticide that was first registered for use in the U.S. in the 1950s. It is an endocrine disruptor and exposure in male children may delay sexual maturity and interfere with sex hormone synthesis. Endosulfan also decreases semen quality, sperm count, spermatogonial cells, and sperm morphology, and contributes to other defects in male sex hormones. It is volatile, persistent, and has a high potential to bio-accumulate in aquatic and terrestrial organisms. Two-headed bass, for example, were found in the Noosa River resulting from surrounding pesticide drift from neighboring farms in Queensland, Australia. The pesticides, endosulfan and carbendazim, were implicated in the contamination of the river, which has yielded thousands of chronically deformed fish.

In December 2009, the Stockholm Convention Persistent Organic Pollutants Review Committee (POPRC) recommended that urgent “global action” was needed to address health and environmental impacts of the toxic pesticide. Scientific experts at the POPRC concluded that endosulfan is likely to cause significant adverse human health and environmental effects as a result of the chemical’s medium- and long-range transport on a global scale and subsequent accumulation in nearly all environmental media.

In June, 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it would take action to end all uses of the insecticide endosulfan, deciding that new data presented to the agency in response to its 2002 Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED), which shows that risks faced by workers are greater than previously known. In completing revised assessments, EPA concluded that endosulfan’s significant risks to wildlife and agricultural workers outweigh its limited benefits to growers and consumers. EPA also found that there are risks above the agency’s level of concern to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife, as well as to birds and mammals that consume aquatic prey which have ingested endosulfan.

EPA’s decision followed a lawsuit that was filed on behalf of environmental and farmworker groups, including Beyond Pesticides, on July 24, 2008. The suit cited a glaring omission in the EPA’s decision in its failure to consider risks to children: a 2007 study found that children exposed to endosulfan in the first trimester of pregnancy had a significantly greater risk for developing autism spectrum disorders. It also poses risks to school children in agricultural communities where it has been detected at unsafe levels in the air. In addition, endosulfan has been found in food supplies, drinking water, and in the tissues and breast milk of pregnant mothers.

According to APVMA, endosulfan will be discussed in October 2010 at a scientific advisory meeting of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants. This meeting will determine whether to recommend to the Conference of the Parties meeting in April 2011 to globally ban or restrict endosulfan. For more information on APVMA’s decision, see the agency’s Chemicals in the News page.

* * *  

Source: BeyondPesticides.org

Non-Toxic Bedbug Treatments

 A resurgence of bedbugs across the U.S. has homeowners and apartment dwellers
taking desperate measures to eradicate the tenacious bloodsuckers, with some relying
on dangerous outdoor pesticides and fly-by-night exterminators. However, these measures pose more dangers than any perceived short-term benefit, as non-toxic alternatives are not widely discussed.

Bed bugs can be effectively controlled without the use of dangerous chemical pesticides. Heat treating infected spaces or items such as
furniture and laundering linens in hot water will kill bed bugs. Habitat modification, such as sealing cracks, and removing clutter,
can prevent an infestation from occurring.

Some steps you can take to treat for bed bugs include:

• Eliminate clutter –clutter provides places for bed bugs to hide!
Getting rid of as much clutter as possible will help you locate and
get rid of infestations.

• Caulk and Seal Crevices to prevent bed bugs from entering your home.

• Encase mattresses and box springs –make sure the encasement has been
tested for bed bugs and will not rip and does not contain synthetic
pesticides impregnated in the material. If left on, it will eventually
kill all bed bugs inside, and will make finding bed bugs on the
surface much easier.

• Laundering Fabrics and Clothing – run clothing through 30 minutes or
a full cycle at the hottest setting the fabric will allow. Dry clean
only clothes can simply be put into the dryer. If the fabric is too
delicate for the hottest temperature, place it on a lower heat setting
and let it run for the full cycle. Be sure to use a different bag for
infested clothing and clean clothing, or, better yet, wash the bag
with the clothing! Seal non-essential clothing in a plastic bag for
the duration of treatment.

• Vacuuming –this will only remove visible bed bugs. This is important
to help eliminate sources of food (dead skin!) and will get rid of
dead bugs. Use a stiff brush to dislodge eggs in cracks and crevices
and use a vacuum attachment that does not have bristles to get into
the corners. Be sure to discard the bag immediately after vacuuming,
or vacuum up a desiccating dust or some corn starch to prevent bed
bugs from spreading.

• Steam Treatment –if applied properly, steam treatment will kill all
stages of bedbugs. Move the nozzle over the bed bugs at a rate of 20
seconds per linear foot, and wrap a piece of fabric over the
upholstery nozzle to reduce water pressure to make sure bed bugs don’t
blow away. Many pest control companies have this as an option but due
to the amount of time it takes, don’t provide it, so make sure you ask
if this is available and request that it’s used.

• Heat Treatment –companies can use fans and a heat source to heat an
area (either a whole room or a smaller container) to 120 degrees F.
Ambient heat can provide complete control of bed bugs if all areas of
infestation reach 120 degrees F.

The bedbug problem has worsened and spread to more states across the
U.S. This prompted the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to
issue a warning this month against the indoor use of chemicals meant
for the outside. The agency also warned of an increase in pest control
companies and others making “unrealistic promises of effectiveness or
low cost.” EPA also cautions against the use of a product or pest
control operators that treat homes with products that are not named to
control bed bugs on the product label. In a joint statement on bed bug
control, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and
EPA highlight emerging public health issues associated with bed bugs
in communities throughout the U.S. The statement provides background
information on the recent rise in bed bug problems, discusses the
public health implications of bed bug infestations, and stresses the
importance of controlling them with an integrated approach. It also
explains the role of government agencies at the local, state, tribal,
and federal levels in better understanding the recent resurgence of
bed bugs and developing better ways to control them.

Bedbugs, infesting U.S. households on a scale unseen in more than a
half-century, have become largely resistant to commonly used
pesticides like pyrethroids. As a result, some homeowners and
exterminators are turning to more hazardous chemicals that can harm
the central nervous system, irritate the skin and eyes or even cause
cancer.

Ohio authorities, struggling against widespread infestations in
Cincinnati, Columbus, Dayton and other cities, petitioned EPA last
fall to approve the indoor use of the pesticide propoxur, which the
agency considers a probable carcinogen and banned for in-home use in
2007, due to concerns posed to children. About 25 other states are
supporting Ohio’s request for an emergency exemption. In comments to
the agency objecting the petition for propoxur, Beyond Pesticides and
other environmental and public health advocates urged the agency to
reject the request, citing the serious public health threat associated
with the chemical, as well as the availability of alternatives. EPA
rejected Ohio’s petition in June.

In the meantime, authorities around the country have blamed house
fires on people misusing all sorts of highly flammable garden and lawn
chemicals to fight bedbugs. Experts also warn that some hardware
products such as bug bombs and other pesticide products claim to be
lethal, but merely cause the bugs to scatter out of sight and hide in
cracks in walls and floors. Despite these warnings, many have resorted
to dangerous practices in an effort to rid bedbugs. A pest control
company in Newark, N.J., was accused in July of applying chemicals not
approved for indoor use throughout 70 homes and apartments units, even
spraying mattresses and children’s toys. In Cincinnati, an unlicensed
applicator saturated an apartment complex in June with an agricultural
pesticide typically used on golf courses. Seven tenants got sick and
were treated at the hospital. The property was quarantined, and all
tenants were forced to move. Authorities are pursuing criminal
charges.

Though propoxur is still used in pet collars, it is banned for use in
homes because of the risk of nausea, dizziness and blurred vision in
children. Steven Bradbury, director of the EPA’s pesticide program,
said the problem is that children crawl on the floor and put their
fingers in their mouths.
Critics in the pest control industry say that the federal government
is overreacting in its precautions aimed to protect children from
hazardous pesticides. Many in industry say other in-home pesticides
aren’t as lethal as propoxur, requiring several treatments that can
push extermination costs to $500 or $1,500, depending on the size of a
home. Marion Ehrich, PhD, a toxicologist at the Virginia-Maryland
Regional College of Veterinary Medicine, said the EPA is showing
appropriate caution. She said other scientists who have studied the
bedbug problem are not eager to see propoxur released in homes.

“Propoxur is not a silver bullet, and given time, bedbugs would likely
become resistant to it, too,” said Lyn Garling, an entomologist at
Penn State University.

Experts say it is going to take a comprehensive public health campaign
— public-service announcements, travel tips and perhaps even taxpayer-
funded extermination programs for public housing — to reduce the
bedbug problem. People can get bedbugs by visiting infested homes or
hotels, where the vermin hide in mattresses, pillows and curtains. The
bugs are stealth hitchhikers that climb onto bags, clothing and
luggage.

For more information on treating bedbugs, read our factsheet, “Bed
Bugs: Back with a Vengeance Detection, Prevention and Least Toxic
Control of Bed Bugs.”



Source: BeyondPesticides.org 

* * *