ECOWATCH: “Trump’s EPA Won’t Ban Brain-Damaging Pesticide”

“Siding with pesticide corporations over the health and well-being of kids is the new normal at the EPA. Today’s decision underscores the sad truth that as long as the Trump administration is in charge, this EPA will favor the interests of the chemical lobby over children’s safety.” 

Ken Cook – President, Environmental Working Group

 

President Donald Trump‘s U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will not ban the agricultural use of chlorpyrifos, a toxic pesticide that the EPA’s own scientists have linked to brain damage in children.

The decision, announced Thursday, was a response to a petition from public health and environmental groups who had pushed for a ban. The agency ruled that “critical questions remained regarding the significance of the data” on the pesticide’s health effects.

The ruling is the latest in a series of Trump EPA decisions that weaken chemical safety rules. In April, it opted against a full ban on asbestos in favor of restrictions that critics say could usher in new uses. Also this year, it issued restrictions on a paint-stripping chemical that were weaker than a ban proposed during the Obama years. Finally, just last week, it widely expanded the use of the pesticide sulfoxaflor, which its own scientists have shown can harm bees.

“Siding with pesticide corporations over the health and well-being of kids is the new normal at the EPA,” Environmental Working Group President Ken Cook said in a statement. “Today’s decision underscores the sad truth that as long as the Trump administration is in charge, this EPA will favor the interests of the chemical lobby over children’s safety.”

The EPA’s decision came after a federal court ordered the agency to make a final call on the ban by mid-July. Chlorpyrifos has been banned for home use since 2000, but farmers have continued to spray it on crops like apples, strawberries, broccoli and corn. The Obama administration had initiated a ban on agricultural uses of the pesticide, but Trump’s EPA reversed it, setting off a legal battle with environmental advocates. In the absence of federal action, states have moved against the pesticide on their own. Hawaii became the first state to ban chlorpyrifos in 2018, and California announced it would ban the chemical in May. New York is also moving towards a ban.

Research has linked chlorpyrifos exposure to lower IQ, memory loss, breathing problems and increased risk of autism in babies born to mothers who lived near farms where it was sprayed.

“What we have with chlorpyrifos is multiple academic research projects that have shown that actual children who actually live in California are being harmed by this chemical,” said Center for Environmental Health senior scientist Caroline Cox. “It’s pretty rare that you have that kind of evidence for any toxic chemical.”

So how was the EPA able to decide that the science wasn’t conclusive? The ruling was a direct consequence of former EPA administrator Scott Pruitt‘s decision to limit the kinds of studies that regulators could use to make decisions.

Under Mr. Pruitt, the agency proposed a rule saying it could not consider scientific researchunless the raw data behind it was made public, saying the issue was a matter of transparency. Scientists argued that studies measuring human exposure to pesticides and other chemicals often rely on confidential health information and argued the E.P.A.’s real motivation was to restrict the ability to develop regulations.

In opting not to ban chlorpyrifos, the E.P.A. rejected a major study conducted by Columbia University on its effects on children in New York City. The E.P.A. said because it was unable to obtain the raw data and replicate that study, which linked the insecticide to developmental delays, it could not independently verify the conclusions.

The 12 groups who brought the petition against the EPA vowed to keep fighting.

“We will continue to fight until chlorpyrifos is banned and children and farmworkers are safe from this dangerous chemical,” they said in a joint statement reported by Earthjustice, the legal organization that represented the groups.

Former senior EPA attorney Kevin Minoli thought that federal courts would ultimately rule in favor of a ban.

“To me, this starts the clock on the use of chlorpyrifos on food crops in the US.”

 

~via EcoWatch.com

ARJUN WALIA: “The Trump Administration Just Lifted The Ban On Bee-Killing Pesticides & GMOs”

“Is Donald Trump’s administration really Donald Trump‘s administration? Was the Obama administration really the Obama administration? Was the Bush administration really the Bush administration? The answer by now should be an obvious ‘no’, as so many examples abound where corporate dominance influences and controls the political will of their puppets.”

~Arjun Walia

 

In Brief

The Facts:

The Trump administration has rescinded an Obama-era ban on the use of pesticides linked to declining bee populations and the cultivation of genetically modified crops in dozens of national wildlife refuges where farming is permitted.

Reflect On:

After so many years of evidence and activism, why was this really overturned? What’s the corporate relationship with government, and how does that influence policy?

Is Donald Trump’s administration really Donald Trump‘s administration? Was the Obama administration really the Obama administration? Was the Bush administration really the Bush administration? The answer by now should be an obvious ‘no’, as so many examples abound where corporate dominance influences and controls the political will of their puppets. Yes, this includes Donald Trump, even though he’s not an insider the same way the Bushes, the Clintons and Obama were.

Powerful forces still impact the Trump administration, perhaps not to the extent that they would have for Hillary, who was nothing but a spokesperson for the corporatocracy. Goldman Sachs wrote many of her speeches, as outlined by Wikileaks, among many other things. Of course, the establishment tried to debunk Wikileaks, and blame Russia, but that’s another story. At the end of the day, they are all puppets in one way or another. Governments now sit functionally under the corporations, and the corporations sit under the financial sector, all the way up to the Bank of International Settlements.

If you follow the money, it’s not hard to see.

Puppet Administrations

We have yet to see a presidency that does not place corporate puppets or people of great power into office since, perhaps, John F. Kennedy. Administrations now brainwash and use propaganda and patriotism to create followers and to drive the masses to accept anything they propose. Roosevelt was clear in noting that political parties no longer exist to execute the will of the people:

“Political parties have become the tools of the corrupt interests which use them to serve their selfish purposes. Behind the ostensible government, sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day. Unhampered by tradition, uncorrupted by power, undismayed by the magnitude of the task, the new party offers itself as the instrument of the people, to sweep away old abuses, to build a new and nobler government.”

–Roosevelt

Dozens of presidents and politicians have outed the secret government over the years. Today they refer to it as the Deep State.

This is why we can never really know what’s going on, and exactly why presidential candidates make promises they can never keep. Almost every other world leader of a country that is not in an alliance with the United States, as well as leaders who are, have continuously spoken out about this secret government. The latest examples would be President Bashar Al Assad in Syria, or Vladimir Putin, who said after a US president is elected, “men in dark suits” come in and give him instructions.

So, either a president can bow and support and follow the will of their masters, or he can oppose them. Who knows what tools the Deep State uses to push our “leaders” into their decision making? Today, especially when we speak of developed countries, there are indeed governments within governments

EPA Ban Lifted

This is why it’s no surprise that the EPA ban on deadly pesticides has been lifted. These pesticides are not only harmful to human beings, but have also been strongly linked to a major decline in the global bee population. Some could argue that that industry is pushing bee deaths, like they push the war on terror, in order to drive the population into acceptance of a heightened national security state, or perhaps, in this case, the acceptance of GMOs within protected areas, a true natural hazard. As Jenny Keating, federal lands policy analyst for the group Defenders of Wildlife says,

‘’Industrial agriculture has no place on refuges dedicated to wildlife conservation and protection of some of the most vital and vulnerable species.”

It’s always necessary to think deeply and critically about these things, given the amount of corruption that plagues politics, government and it’s organizations like the EPA. These pesticides should not be sprayed, and the science is clear on that. The science concerning GMOs, as well, is very concerning. In fact, hundreds of scientists have now told the world that the GMO & Cancer link is real. This is important to note, because the bans of the cultivation of genetically modified crops in dozens of national wildlife refuges, where farming is permitted, is also a part of this.

It’s also concerning because multiple lawsuits have shown the corruption behind these products, be it glyphosate, or engineered foods. A 1998 lawsuit actually forced the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to divulge its files on genetically engineered foods. The files showed that scientists were lied to, brainwashed, as well as corrupted when it came to information and science. The lawyer published a book about it, called Altered Genes, Twisted Truth: How the Venture to Genetically Engineer Our Food Has Subverted Science, Corrupted Government, and Systematically Deceived the Public. It has some great reviews by some of the leading scientists currently in the field.

It’s hard to believe that all the work that was done by activists to prohibit farmers on refuges from planting biotech crops, such as soybeans and corn, engineered to resist insect pests and weed-controlling herbicides, has been reversed. That being said, it’s clear that consciousness has shifted, the people don’t really want this stuff, so as we continue to move on into the future, you will see more health conscious people, less meat-eaters, fewer GMO eaters, more organic eaters, no matter how hard they make it for us.

As the Guardian Points out,

That policy also had barred the use on wildlife refuges of neonicotinoid pesticides, or neonics, in conjunction with GMO crops. Neonics are a class of insecticides tied by research to declining populations of wild bees and other pollinating insects around the world. Rather than continuing to impose a blanket ban on GMO crops and neonics on refuges, Fish and Wildlife Service deputy director Greg Sheehan said decisions about their use would be made on a case-by-case basis.

Despite the fact that we are making changes in our lives, the animals and the insects do not know, and we must speak for them, and be their voice, because they aren’t even given a choice.

 

~via Collective-Evolution.com