I recently subscribed to a few EPA generated listservs, including one on
pesticides and one on toxins.  There were also a couple others to which I
subscribed.  These listservs basically disseminate current EPA status of
various substances, and give whomever, a chance to state their
opposition/support for the chemical being presented.  I decided to start my
own personal PD campaign against any new pesticides and also the concept of
'safe' levels of exposure.  I figured I'd send a copy of a letter, which I
just wrote, to the list here, for anyone who's interested in possibly doing
the same.  Attached to my letter is the original EPA message about proposed
tolerance levels for this pesticide.  If anyone is also interested in
subscribing to any of these EPA listservs, I can post the info.  I decided
not only to pester congress/senate about the Udall Bill, but to also pester
other government agencies who hold power over other aspects of government
policy-making, which may also have direct effects on our lives and health.
 Luckily for me, e-mail and the copy/paste functions will make this an easy
task.  As I get each new pesticide brief, I intend to resend this letter,
along with one of my poems.  Gotta start somewhere I guess.
 
Wendy T.
*****************************
 
                                                                     3
September 1995
 
To Whom It May Concern:
 
This letter represents opposition to the tolerance levels proposed for the
pesticide, Norflurazon (reference:  document control number PP4E4383/P627).
 More specifically, it expresses opposition to ANY proposed tolerance levels
that could possibly be suggested.
 
I am a young victim (31 years old) with Parkinson's Disease (PD).  There is
on-going research into the possible role of the environment in the etiology
of PD, with much focus on the neurotoxicity of pesticides and the incidence
of PD in exposed populations, primarily rural.  From the literature,
including abstracts available on-line via Medline, and other information to
which I have been 'exposed', I am convinced of the risk that these chemicals
pose for human and non-human health, including Parkinsons Disease.  I am no
longer willing to be a passive participant in this insanity.
 
I believe the concept of "NOEL" (No Observed Effect Level) in toxicity
studies to be inadequate and misleading.  Prior to the release of a new drug,
many human, as well as animal, studies are performed, costing huge amounts of
money.  This drug testing uses the widely accepted 'double-blind'
methodology, of which there can be no possible equivalent prior to the
release of new chemicals such as pesticides.  Animal models do not
sufficiently represent all possible human reactions to a potentially toxic
substance as obviously, every species has a different physiology than the
other and in the case of PD, no other species, other than humans, develop PD
'naturally'.  Only with the tragic discovery of the toxic effects of the drug
derivative MTPP on the basal ganglia, that portion of the brain affected by
PD, were researchers able to begin creating an animal model of PD.  This
chemical, MTPP, is also chemically similar to the pesticides/herbicides
Paraquat and Diquat.  This is only one of many indications of the link
between pesticide exposure and the incidence of PD.
 
Furthermore, a test that simply tries to identify the toxicity of a rather
short term exposure to ONE pesticide, doesn't begin to truly model the
current external environment.  There are probably at a minimum thousands of
different pesticide formulas currently in use, not to mention all of the
other chemicals and their by-products which are used/generated by industry.
 The most likely scenario leading to disease, versus a simple case of
chemical poisoning, involves a synergistic and cumulative effect due to
multiple exposures to many chemicals over a longer period of time.  Most
species do not live on a time scale near that of humans, and with that,
humans are now living even longer lives.  It is impossible to simulate in an
animal these synergistic and cumulative effects over a human lifetime.  A
substance that cannot be completely understood prior to its release,
particularly if it isn't REALLY necessary, should never reach anything beyond
the chemist's imagination.
 
There are many alternatives to the use of these toxic chemicals in pest
control management.  I would rather see my tax money spent, particularly by
an Envinronmental PROTECTION Agency, on researching and promoting these
safe/safer alternatives, rather than continuing with this pointless and cruel
research.  Pointless, because these toxic pesticides are not necessary, and
pointless because this animal research cannot possibly represent all possible
human reactions.  I for one am growing weary of seemingly being the final
'guinea pig' in the testing process.   Cruel, for the waste of animal life
and pain they must suffer for our 'benefit', and cruel for subjecting
millions of unsuspecting potential victims, both human and wildlife, to these
chemicals which destroy life (as that is their purpose, hence the names
'pesticide', 'herbicide', etc.).
 
Thank you for the opportunity to express my views, such as they are.  As a
parting 'gift', I am also attaching one of many poems which I have written
relative to this general subject.
 
Sincerely,
 
Wendy M. Tebay
e-mail:  [log in to unmask]
 
************************************************************
 
SUNNY YELLOW FLAGS
 
Sunny yellow flag, waving happily in the breeze, Proclaims:
"Beware - Pesticide Treated Area."
 
Walking my dog alongside perhaps dozens of these innocuous messengers,
I wonder about the unspoken irony,
WHO are the pests?
 
Is it the insects?
No, that is too simple.
 
Could it be - Dogs with their noses close to the ground?
Or perhaps all of the children, playing and running around?
Both make noise and often annoy those of the 'mature' human variety.
 
There are those communities, I've encountered,
who seem to protect their children (or rather the pristine Lawn God),
by making it forbidden to play on the communal lawn.
 
I guess one must weigh the odds,
sunny yellow flags
or
automobiles?
 
Am I a pest?
"It could be so,"
respond the flag messengers as I walk by.
 
"But I am HUMAN, and we kill pests,
Not in reverse."
 
"Depends on your point of view," one replies.
 
Again and again, "Who is the pest?"
Echoes 'round in my mind
As I pass one flag after another.
 
Suddenly I freeze, as
The TRUTH called out to me...
 
I am the pest and also the source of my disease!
 
I am aging before my years,
With shaking and rigidity I shouldn't acquire
For many decades.
 
"Don't worry, it's not personal,"
Consoles the nearest flag,
Hating to see any sadness.
 
"I'm just doing the job I was developed to do:
Rid the earth of pests,
And frankly, what are humans,
If not pests?"
 
"They take and take and never give back.
Just like larvae, which ultimately kills its host.
Only since there is no where else to go,
The host cannot die, or with it goes all life."
 
So the obvious solution is the hardest to accept,
"Survival of the fittest" - Isn't that the Law?
 
I used to be fit,
Until you and your army of yellow
Appeared regularly in my world.
 
If you want an Answer,
Just ask the cockroach,
He holds the secret of survival.
 
*****************
I'll post the original EPA message about this pesticide later, so as  to  not
overwhelm anyone!  WT