Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 16 submissions in the queue.

California Defies White House To Ban Controversial Pesticide

posted by janrinok on Friday August 16 2019, @05:40AM   Printer-friendly
from the politics-versus-health dept.

Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:

California will outlaw the use of a pesticide linked to developmental problems in humans after President Donald Trump's administration scrapped plans for a nationwide ban, state health officials said Wednesday.

The decision to ban chlorpyrifos in the agriculturally rich state follows "mounting evidence" of serious health effects for exposed children and other vulnerable people, two California health agencies said in a statement.

Toxic effects including "impaired brain and neurological development" occur at lower levels of the pesticide than previously thought, said the California Department of Food and Agriculture and the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR).

Farmers using the product will have 15 days to challenge the ban notice in court before it comes into effect, the DPR told AFP.

Virtually all residential uses of the pesticide has been banned since the end of 2001 throughout the United States.

[...] The European Commission announced this month it will recommend chlorpyrifos does not have its license renewed when it expires in January, following a negative assessment by the EU's food safety watchdog. Eight European countries have already individually banned products containing the pesticide.

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
California Defies White House To Ban Controversial Pesticide | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 44 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 2, Touché) by khallow on Saturday August 17 2019, @11:55AM (9 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday August 17 2019, @11:55AM (#881496) Journal

    Because, bottom line, you either stop shitting in your home (the planet Earth) or you will live with the stench the nature will throw back to you.

    Everything shits on planet Earth. Yet we're not swimming in a bottomless sea of shit. You don't have to stop shitting, just don't shit more than your infrastructure and environment can handle. California regulators aren't an indication that has happened yet.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Touché=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Touché' Modifier   0  
    Total Score:   2  

  • (Score: 3, Informative) by c0lo on Saturday August 17 2019, @09:34PM (8 children)

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Saturday August 17 2019, @09:34PM (#881574) Journal

    Heh, can't expect khallow to get out of 'nothing happens until it happens' mind-set, even if he's usually fast to use the slippery slope args when it comes to capital.

    California regulators aren't an indication that has happened yet.

    Nature doesn't care whether or not you know that you shat too much.

    How about [wikipedia.org]

    n 2011, EPA estimated that, in the general US population, people consume 0.009 micrograms of chlorpyrifos per kilogram of their body weight per day directly from food residue.[64] Children are estimated to consume a greater quantity of chlorpyrifos per unit of body weight from food residue, with toddlers the highest at 0.025 micrograms of chlorpyrifos per kilogram of their body weight per day. People may also ingest chlorpyrifos from drinking water or from residue in food handling establishments. The EPA’s acceptable daily dose is 0.3 micrograms/kg/day.[64] However, as of 2016, EPA scientists had not been able to find any level of exposure to the pesticide that was safe.

    Translation: can't avoid food-chain contamination and found unsafe at any level of exposure.

    To practice your dismissal skills over the weekend, here's another: PFOA and PFAS ban looming [acs.org] over US [acs.org] - the latter finds that minimal risk levels are one order of magnitude lower than the currently approved limits.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford

    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday August 18 2019, @01:14AM (4 children)

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday August 18 2019, @01:14AM (#881621) Journal

      and found unsafe at any level of exposure.

      So what? Unsafe doesn't mean unsafe in the usual sense of the word, they're just making a claim about the slope of harm versus dose near zero - low dosage still means low harm. As usual, dose makes the poison and you've already noted that the vast majority of the US population doesn't get anywhere near the EPA's recommended threshold, much less a dangerous dosage level.

      • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Sunday August 18 2019, @12:38PM (3 children)

        by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Sunday August 18 2019, @12:38PM (#881720) Journal

        So what?

        That's for you to discover.

        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford

        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday August 18 2019, @11:41PM (2 children)

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday August 18 2019, @11:41PM (#881893) Journal
          Coy answer, but you have yet to explain why "unsafe at any level" is even remotely relevant.

          • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday August 19 2019, @12:49AM (1 child)

            by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Monday August 19 2019, @12:49AM (#881906) Journal

            Coy answer, but you have yet to explain why "unsafe at any level" is even remotely relevant.

            I would, if I wanted to accept your application to a health-terminology class that I would supposedly teach.
            As I actually don't intend to, we can let it there and a whole world of consequences suddenly opens: from you learn it yourself to the nature will sort it out irrespective if you learned it or not.

            --
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford

            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday August 19 2019, @01:15PM

              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday August 19 2019, @01:15PM (#882101) Journal

              I would, if I wanted to accept your application to a health-terminology class that I would supposedly teach.

              It would be a waste of students' time. That's not health terminology to assert without any understanding of what "safe" and "unsafe" means that something is "unsafe at any level".

              As I actually don't intend to, we can let it there and a whole world of consequences suddenly opens: from you learn it yourself to the nature will sort it out irrespective if you learned it or not.

              Not if those consequences never open up. You're just spouting a variant of the precautionary principle without, as usual, any evidence it should ever be applied. As already has been noted, nature doesn't care that you've consumed trace amounts of toxins. As of present, you have no evidence that you should care either.

    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday August 19 2019, @02:34AM (2 children)

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday August 19 2019, @02:34AM (#881929) Journal

      Heh, can't expect khallow to get out of 'nothing happens until it happens' mind-set, even if he's usually fast to use the slippery slope args when it comes to capital.

      Care to mention an example of that "slippery slope" argument?

      • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday August 19 2019, @03:13AM (1 child)

        by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Monday August 19 2019, @03:13AM (#881941) Journal

        Will keep your request in mind and signal to you for the future; apologies, I don't have time ATM for a search.

        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford

        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday August 19 2019, @01:21PM

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday August 19 2019, @01:21PM (#882103) Journal
          Reasonable. But please be aware that I probably will inquire again in the future, if you're still accusing me without evidence.