For Immediate Release: Wednesday, October 7, 2015
Montgomery County Councilmember Marc Elrich made the following statement after the County Council today approved amended Bill 52-14 that will restrict use of pesticides on County-owned and private lawns. Councilmember Elrich was a co-sponsor of the original bill.
NOTE: Attached electronically to this release is more in-depth information on the studies and information referenced in the statement.
The complete text of Councilmember Elrich’s statement:
Today, the County Council approved legislation that restricts the use of pesticides on lawns, playgrounds and children’s facilities. The legislation also puts the Parks Department on a path to pesticide-free athletic playing fields, beginning next year with a pilot program of five fields—four local and one regional.
I believe that this legislation is an important step toward protecting our public health and environment. This legislation restricts the use of, and exposure to, pesticides—and it does so based on the scientific evidence. I think as the public understands the science, they will appreciate our action.
Here are my reasons for supporting this legislation:
1. We cannot count on the federal government to act. The actions of federal regulatory agencies do not keep pace with scientific findings. We have acted at the County level before without waiting for federal action—we banned transfats, coal tar, smoking in certain places and menu labelling. We are leading the way on addressing the impact of fumes from idling cars on nearby individuals.
2. The Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) does not even follow its existing regulations and procedures. Just last month a federal appeals court ordered the EPA to withdraw its approval of a pesticide, sulfoxaflor because its approval was based on “flawed and limited data”.[1] According to the court, EPA had not followed their own guidelines in approving this neonictinoid.[2]
3. Businesses are responding to consumer concern about chemicals. There is now a recognition that even if the Federal government allows chemicals to be used, it does not mean that they are safe. Target has a list of more than 600 substances it wants removed from its products and Walmart has a list of more than 1,000 chemicals. [3]
4. Inaction has its own potentially enormous costs. “Exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals likely costs the European Union . . . $209 billion a year in actual health care expenses and lost earning potential,” according to a new series of studies published in the Endocrine Society’s Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism . . . In the EU, researchers found the biggest cost driver was loss of IQ and intellectual disabilities caused by prenatal exposure to pesticides containing organophosphates.[4]
5. Precautionary action is supported by the science. One of the most powerful research reports is the Kaiser mother-daughter study released this summer. The researchers found that elevated levels of DDT in the mother's blood were associated with almost a four-fold increase in her daughter's risk of breast cancer. Barbara A. Cohn, one of the study's authors and the director of Child Health and Development Studies at the Public Health Institute in Berkeley, Calif., said the 54-year study is ‘the first to provide direct evidence that chemical exposures for pregnant women may have lifelong consequences for their daughters' breast cancer risk.’[5] We did not ban DDT in 1972 because of human health impacts; we banned it because it was endangering our national bird, the bald eagle. If we had waited for the proof that DDT caused cancer, it would have been used for 40 additional years, and many more women would have been at increased risk for breast cancer. I voted for this legislation because I did not want to look back in 20 years and say that we could have acted.
The Science on Health
Children are particularly vulnerable. Dr. Phillip Landrigan, Professor of Pediatrics, Chair of the Department of Preventive Medicine and Dean for Global Health at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, explained that children are at much greater risk from chemical exposure. ‘[I]nfants and children [are] at increased risk for harmful effects of pesticide exposures, which may be permanent and irreversible.’
Research shows an association for the following:
• Childhood cancers – leukemia and brain tumors
• Breast cancer
• Non-hodgkins Lymphoma
• Birth malformations
• Parkinsons
• Lupus and rheumatoid arthritis
• Attention problems, decreased IQ
• Respiratory symptoms
More recent science about chemical exposure is showing that low-doses can have significant impact and that low-doses of multiple exposures of chemicals may contribute to cancer development. Cancer does not develop all at once. It happens through a series of mutations and genetic changes that collectively transform normal cells into aggressive cancer cells – the ‘multiple hits’ model. Many chemicals that can interfere with individual cancer-related processes are not complete carcinogens, but exposure to combinations of these substances could interfere with multiple cancer-related processes, overwhelm the body’s defense mechanisms, and result in cancer.[6]
Lower doses of pesticides are linked to antibiotic resistance. A study published earlier this year links Dicamba, 2,4-D and glyphosate to increased antiobiotic resistance. [7] The active ingredient in RoundUp, glyphosate, was classified as ‘probably carcinogenic to humans’ by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. The science to have it classified as ‘carcinogenic to humans’ (the only classification higher than probably) is not doable with this type of chemical because there is no dose data to allow scientific comparisons. Tobacco is a known carcinogen because the dose (number of cigarettes) can be measured. There is no ethical way to do this with glyphosate.
The weed killer, Atrazine, has been found in drinking water. The New York Times reports that ‘new research suggests that atrazine may be dangerous at lower concentrations than previously thought. Recent studies suggest that, even at concentrations meeting current federal standards, the chemical may be associated with birth defects, low birth weights and menstrual problems. ’[8]Environmental Impacts
Canada’s pesticide ban resulted in a dramatic reduction in pesticides in the water. One year after the pesticide ban in Canada, concentrations of three pesticides: 2,4-D, dicamba and mecoprop in urban stream water were significantly lower. Median concentrations decreased by 81 percent for 2,4-D, 83 percent for dicamba and 71 percent for mecoprop.[10]
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) . . . conducted a groundwater-quality investigation . . . in the shallow groundwater underlying the Anacostia River and Rock Creek watersheds in Washington, D.C. . . . Twenty-seven pesticide compounds, reflecting at least 19 different types of pesticides, were detected in the groundwater samples . . . The presence of banned and restricted-use pesticides illustrates their continued persistence and resistance to complete degradation in the environment. The presence of the replacement pesticides indicates the susceptibility of the surficial aquifer to contamination irrespective of the changes in the pesticides used.[9]
[1] Pollinator Stewardship Council, et al. v. US EPA, US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 13-72346, Filed September 10, 2015, page 2.
[2] Ibid. pg. 13
[3] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-28/target-expands-list-of-chemicals-it-wants-out-of-consumer-goods
[4] https://www.endocrine.org/news-room/current-press-releases/estimated-costs-of-endocrine-disrupting-chemical-exposure-exceed-150-billion-annually-in-eu
[5]Startling link between pregnant mother’s exposure to DDT and daughter’s risk of breast cancer,” by Arianna Eunjung Cha, The Washington Post, 6/17/15. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2015/06/16/ddts-breast-cancer-legacy-pregnant-mothers-exposure-linked-to-four-fold-increase-in-daughters-risk/
[6] http://www.ewg.org/research/rethinking-carcinogens/halifax-project-complete-vs-partial-carcinogens
[7] “Sublethal Exposure to Commercial Formulations of the Herbicides Dicamba, 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid, and Glyphosate Cause Changes in Antibiotic Susceptibility in Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica serovar, Typhimurium”, Mbio, American Society of Microbiology, Published March 24, 2015. http://mbio.asm.org/content/6/2/e00009-15
[8] “Debating How Much Weed Killer Is Safe in Your Water Glass,” by Charles Duhigg, New York Times, 8/23/09.
[9] Pesticides in Groundwater in the Anacostia River and Rock Creek Watersheds in Washington, D.C., 2005 and 2008, by Michael T. Koterba, Cheryl A. Dieter, and Cherie V. Miller, USGS, Scientific Investigations Report 2010-5130. ations Report 2010–5130
[10] “Pesticide Concentrations in Ontario’s Urban Streams One Year after the Cosmetic Pesticides Ban,” IPM Symposium, 1/10/11, Aaron Todd, Ontario Ministry of the Environment.