Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [howardpubliced] Precautionary Principle...Re: Time Sensitive...public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program

Expand Messages
  • Bruce Anderson
    Yes, there is science to support the statements that small doses of these specific substances acutely would not be expected to cause any problems in humans.
    Message 1 of 15 , Mar 5, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Yes, there is science to support the statements that small doses of these specific substances acutely would not be expected to cause any problems in humans.

      Use of pesticides has been associated with a whole lot of things.  Acutely, pesticides (like all substances) can be deadly.  Chronic, small amounts of pesticides don't "cause" the things that you have listed. 

      Regarding lower life expectancy in this generation, that's not a blanket statement about all children.  This story generated a great deal of interest in the media and was based on a New England Journal of Medicine article that was cautioning specifically about the POTENTIAL for children having shorter life expectancy due to complications of being obese. 

      Bruce


      From: Veronika Carella <jlcarella@...>
      To: howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2009 11:24:29 AM
      Subject: [howardpubliced] Precautionary Principle...Re: Time Sensitive...public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program

      

      Bruce,
       
      Do you have the science to support that statement (see email below)?  Have you ever spoken with people who became ill from such exposures?  Can you explain the rise in childhood cancers, the epidemic of childhood asthma, the alarming rate of childhood diabetes (an immune system disorder) or the other childhood illnesses that are on the rise or the rise in birth defects?   Have you sat with a child suffering the ill effects of a pesticide exposure encountered in their kindergarten class?
       
      One group that might particularly be worth speaking to is those suffering from asthma (a group directly impacted by the aerial application of pesticides). 
       
      BTW...these are not isolated exposures.  There is a synergistic effect from the numerous exposures that our children are expected to tolerate on a daily basis, which in all likelyhood contributes to the growing concern that is the first generation of children NOT expected to outlive their parents.
       
      Do you also speak for the crabs, butterflies, bees, lady bugs and other beneficial living organizes that are destroyed following such applications?  Have you studied the impact to the environment, the water you drink, etc?  Are you able to explain the feminization of male fish in our local waterways?  Are you aware that many of these toxins mimic female hormones or that the male sperm count across the nation is down 50%?
       
      We all have much to learn about these issues.  For now precaution is the best we can do, which is why I sent the email announcing the public meeting tonight.  People have the right-to-know and should be given information on how to protect themselves and their families.
       
      Just because a government agency does something, doesn't mean it is safe.  DURSBAN was on the market for 30-plus years.  The EPA collected data on this pesticide for 30+ years before they banned the chemical.  HCPSS used this product for 10 years as a means of pest control in our schools - spraying the product monthy on baseboards as a means of pest control.  Perhaps you should contact some of the people who were seriously injured as a result of the legal and EPA approved use of DURSBAN.
       
      BTW...in the 1940's 9 out of 10 physicians recommended Camel cigarettes to their patients that smoked.  Doctors recommended cigarets to pregnant women, to control morning sickness. How humorous that now sounds. 
       
      Knowledge is power. The public has the right to know.  Decisions made on assumptions are not valid.
      Advocating for Every Child,
      ...Veronika
      Howard County resident and parent
       
       
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 8:50 PM
      Subject: Re: [howardpubliced] Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program

      Summary:  Typical exposures (e.g., getting unintentionally sprayed as part of typical aerial spraying) to the agents used in the Maryland gypsy moth control program would not be expected to produce ANY toxic effects in people, including children.

      Bruce


      From: cynthia vaillancourt <CynthiaVaillancourt @...>
      To: howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com
      Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2009 8:10:12 PM
      Subject: RE: [howardpubliced] Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program

      OK, so to summarize .... directly spraying over the heads of children and staff who are entering a school building is not a good idea?

      cv



      To: howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com
      From: bda_tox@yahoo. com
      Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 15:56:24 -0800
      Subject: Re: [howardpubliced] Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program


      The labels on the products are what they are. These products are not intended to be ingested or intended to be used as home lice treatments (e.g., where large amounts of product would be directly applied to the person).  In fact, neither product would likely even work as a lice treatment.  Foray (the trade name for a product that contains BT) contains a soil organism that just happens to be an effective agent for control of some insects.  It's used often in "organic" farming.  Dimilin is a growth regulator that impairs formation of chitin in insects.  Chitin is the stuff that makes the insects outer shell hard. Bad for the bugs, not so for people.  Not sure there are even cases of people getting sick from intentionally or occupationally getting exposed to these products despite decades of use around the world. 

      Small amounts of either product from air spraying would not be expected to cause problems in people or (usual) pets... if your pet happens to be a tarantula, would keep it inside the day they do spraying, especially if its about to molt. :)

      Bruce


      From: cynthia vaillancourt <CynthiaVaillancourt @...>
      To: howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com
      Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2009 3:48:16 PM
      Subject: RE: [howardpubliced] Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program

      As reassuring as this is - and as accurate as it may be - there have been so many instances of supposedly "safe" exposures turning out to be anything but safe that it is only reasonable and prudent to avoid any and all unnecessary exposures .... like actually spraying on groups of people.

       I'll bet the labels on these "safe" products don't encourage administering them directly on humans. 

      cindy v




      To: howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com
      From: bda_tox@yahoo. com
      Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 09:50:30 -0800
      Subject: Re: [howardpubliced] Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program


      FYI:  The risks from these agents to humans is exceedingly low.

      Dimelin is a type of pesticide that's not very toxic for people.  Clipped from a major toxicology resource, PoisIndex:
      "In healthy humans, the benzoylphenyl urea insecticides are not considered to pose any significant toxicological risk"

      Foray is actually a soil organism, Bacilus thuringiensis (BT). 
      Wikipedia notes that BT products "are regarded as environmentally friendly, with little or no effect on humans, wildlife, pollinators, and most other beneficial insects."

      Bruce


      From: pamythompson <pamythompson@ yahoo.com>
      To: howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com
      Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2009 1:14:00 AM
      Subject: [howardpubliced] Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program

      Bob , may I simply kneel and address you as genius .
      Let me rephrase my question on a level that reflects your stature ,
      Did the IDIOTS use chemicals , Diflubenzuron or a biological agent Foray either of which you should avoid all human contact with . Do you as a genius know which the IDIOTS sprayed on our children or the concentration used . Are you 100% positive that it was not something like the special lunch program in the 60's when kids in public schools were given special lunch that was radio active and then monitored . No of course not , some IDIOT did not have enough common sense not to spray our children but we should believe that they had enough training to properly mix the insecticide . I am just a fear mongering moron that used to farm over 3000 acres in Howard county that just found out that some IDIOT sprayed our children with poison . I apologize for the earlier moronic outburst and defer to your superior intellect on the subject . What oh Genius did the spray on our children ? Wait , don't answer , I just realized I am too simplistic a moron to do a search of the Internet and not worthy of your answer . Would you like to know all the chemicals I sprayed on my fields , approximately 3300 acres in Howard county and all the chemicals and drugs I used on my livestock that you without a thought consumed and fed to your children . You beter damn well hope I am not moron .

      Who is Ms. Tin Foil Hat that you are so little of a man that you find it necasary to insult in your rant ?

      An Expert on Educational Assessment ? Beyond you being an expert on belittling people I have as yet had the pleasure of your conversation however I would love to have a discussion on the subject of our educational system with you and you can take this last comment as a personal challenge to your intelligence .

      Jack

      --- In howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com, "Bob Rosebrough" <bobrosebrough21045 @...> wrote:
      >
      > Hey, you frickin' Luddite moron how about doing a minor, simplistic search on the Maryland Gypsy Moth Abatement program before you run your pie hole? On second thought, keep up the nonsense as you and Ms Tin Foil hat are so amusing. Goodness, in addition to being an expert on educational assessment you now add toxicology to your bag of tricks. Ever thought about a cross train into the food service or housekeeping industries to complete you resume?
      >
      > --- In howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com, pam thompson <pamythompson@ > wrote:
      > >
      > > What pesticides did these idiots sprat our children with ?
      > >  
      > > Jack
      > >  
      > >
      > >
      > > --- On Tue, 3/3/09, Veronika Carella <jlcarella@> wrote:
      > >
      > > From: Veronika Carella <jlcarella@>
      > > Subject: [howardpubliced] Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program
      > > To: glenelghighschool@ yahoogroups. com, "howardpubliced" <howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com>
      > > Cc: "PTACHC Health & Environmental Issues Committee" <PTACHC_HEIC_ List@yahoogroups .com>
      > > Date: Tuesday, March 3, 2009, 11:32 AM
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Greetings,
      > >  
      > > The public meeting for Howard County is scheduled for
      > >  
      > >
      > > MDA's Gypsy Moth Open House Information session for Howard County residents
      > > Thursday, March 5, 2009  6:30-8:00PM
      > > Glenwood Library
      > >  
      > > In May 2007 two helicopters sprayed pesticides on students and staff (for almost 45 minutes) as they were arriving for school at Glenelg High School.  This practice will continue under the MDA's current procedures. While there are apparently no schools within this year's 20 Howard County Gypsy Moth [GM] Spray Blocks, there will be residential areas sprayed that have children waiting for school buses as well as wind-drift from these aerial pesticide applications. .  People who reside in the spray blocks may opt-out of the program, but must do so in a timely fashion, so are encourage to attend the information session..
      > >  
      > > This is an FYI,
      > > ...Veronika
      > > ----- Original Message -----
      > >
      > > From: Veronika Carella
      > > To: Debbie Ritchie - MD PTA President
      > > Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 11:10 AM
      > > Subject: Time Sensitive... Please announce public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program
      > >
      > >
      > > Debbie,
      > >  
      > > REQUEST:
      > > Good Morning.  The MD Department of Agriculture (MDA) will be conducting Public Meetings to answer questions regarding the 2009 Gypsy Moth Cooperative Suppress ion Program.  Please share this information with our locals asap and encourage PTA members to attend and become informed, so as to allow them to take protective actiion at home, at their schools and in their communities.  It is not yet apparent whether Maryland schools will fall into some of the 2009 spray blocks, however, we do know that there will be residential areas sprayed that have children waiting for school buses.  People who reside in the spray blocks may opt-out of the program, but must do so in a timely fashion.  The news of this week's meeting and those in the following weeks was only just received making wide distribution without your assistance difficult.
      > >  
      > > ISSUE:
      > > As you know, Maryland PTA is concerned about the current practices used in our state to control gypsy moths. In addition to concerns related to how and when certain chemicals are used, we have expressed particular ly concern about the impact of those chemicals on children and other sensitive populations, as well as the impact those chemicals have the environment that we live in, including air, water and soil.  We have worked to increase the practice of Integrated Pest Management in home, community, and schools.  PTA believes that pesticides should only be used as a last resort, and only when all other options have been exhausted.  In the case of Gypsy Moth Suppression, we are aware that there are a number of states, including New York, Delaware, Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut, that no longer use chemical means to control gypsy moths.  Maryland continues to spray Btk and Dimilin as well as other chemicals
      > > via private contractors.
      > >
      > >  
      > > The public is often not aware of this of MDA's Cooperative Gypsy Moth Suppression Program nor its impact to their health, homes, communities, land and waterways.  While the MDA has already identified the spray blocks (ie the blocks of land that will be treated with pesticides applied via aerial application from helicopters) - this information about the spray blocks is not yet being made available to the general public.  This is a tremendous and annual concern, as those within a five mile radius of such applications will in all likelihood experience contact with the pesticides applied - and as in the past, may experience adverse health effects especially those with asthma, weakened immune systems and others in the sensitive population (ie infants and the elderly).
      > >  
      > >
      > > At a minimum, people have the right to know that this is taking place, so that they may take steps to protect themselves.  Only those residents in the spray blocks will received notification from the MDA, other Howard County residents will only be notified via our efforts and those of our local schools systems.
      > >  
      > >
      > > BACKGROUND:
      > > As you know the Gypsy Moth Suppression Program is a voluntary program where residents may request to have their property treated via the aerial application of pesticides.  The MDA's priority in making these applications is to control Gypsy Moths.  It has been acknowledged in both public meetings (including the May 28, 2008 Maryland Pesticide Advisory Committee Meeting and others) and confirmed by the Maryland Department of Agriculture in writing that children will continue to be sprayed with pesticides, as they were at Glenelg HS (Howard County) in May 2007 under the current MDA Cooperative Gypsy Moth Suppression Program.  In addition, the health and environmental effects of Bt and Dimilin (the current pesticides of choice) do not take priority over GM eradication under this MDA Cooperative Program.  The following quotes are from the MDA’s written response to the HCPSS Superintendent' s April 16, 2008 letter of concern to MDA; 
      > >     
      > >       1) "We [MDA] cannot always schedule areas near schools and parks for the first thing in the day and, therefore, can make no guarantee that an area will only be treated before 7:00am"
      > >      
      > >       2) "Our [MDA] primary goal is to conduct a safe suppression program that is also efficient and effective to prevent environmenta l damage caused by gypsy moth infestations to forests and landscape trees."
      > >  
      > >  
      > > Thank you for your assistance in increasing public awareness of this issue.
      > > Advocating for Every Child,
      > > ...Veronika 
      > >  
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > http://www.mda. state.md. us/plants- pests/forest_ pest_mgmt/ gypsy_moth/ gypsy_moth_ public_meetings. php
      > >  
      > > 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Public Meetings
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Allegany County
      > >
      > > Date:
      > > March 10, 2009
      > >
      > > Time:
      > > 6:00-7:00pm
      > >
      > > Location:
      > > Allegany College of Maryland
      > > Continuing Education Building, Room 12
      > > Willowbrook Road
      > > Cumberland, MD 21502
      > >
      > > Anne Arundel County
      > >
      > > Date:
      > > March 5, 2009
      > >
      > > Time:
      > > 7:00-8:30 pm
      > >
      > > Location:
      > > Maryland Department of Agriculture
      > > The Wayne A. Cawley Building
      > > Front Lobby
      > > 50 Harry S. Truman Parkway
      > > Annapolis, MD 21401
      > >
      > > Baltimore County
      > >
      > > Date:
      > > March 11, 2009
      > >
      > > Time:
      > > 7:00-8:00 pm
      > >
      > > Location:
      > > Baltimore County Extension Office
      > > 1840 York Road, Suite J
      > > Timonium, MD 21093
      > >
      > > Cecil County
      > >
      > > Date:
      > > March 10, 2009
      > >
      > > Time:
      > > 7:00-8:00 pm
      > >
      > > Location:
      > > Cecil County Extension Office
      > > 126A East High Street
      > > Elkton, MD 21921
      > >
      > > Charles County
      > >
      > > Date:
      > > March 4, 2009
      > >
      > > Time:
      > > 6:30-8:00 pm
      > >
      > > Location:
      > > Hughesville Volunteer EMS and Fire Department
      > > 15245 Prince Frederick Road
      > > Hughesville, MD 20637
      > >
      > > Carroll County
      > >
      > > Date:
      > > March 9, 2009
      > >
      > > Time:
      > > 6:30-8:00 pm
      > >
      > > Location:
      > > Carroll County Extension Office
      > > 700 Agricultural Lane
      > > Westminster, MD 21157
      > >
      > > Frederick County
      > >
      > > Date:
      > > March 12, 2009
      > >
      > > Time:
      > > 6:30-8:00 pm
      > >
      > > Location:
      > > Frederick County Extension Office
      > > 330 Montevue Lane
      > > Frederick, MD 21702
      > >
      > > Garrett County
      > >
      > > Date:
      > > March 2, 2009
      > >
      > > Time:
      > > 6:00-7:00 pm
      > >
      > > Location:
      > > Ruth Enlow Library
      > > 51 Hershberger Lane
      > > Grantsville, MD 21536
      > >
      > > Harford County
      > >
      > > Date:
      > > March 5, 2009
      > >
      > > Time:
      > > 7:00-8:00 pm
      > >
      > > Location:
      > > Harford County Extension Office
      > > 2335 Rock Spring Road
      > > Forest Hill, MD 21050
      > >
      > > Howard County
      > >
      > > Date:
      > > March 5, 2009
      > >
      > > Time:
      > > 6:30-8:00 pm
      > >
      > > Location:
      > > Glenwood Library, Howard County
      > > 2350 Route 97 â€" Meeting Room
      > > Cooksville, MD 21723
      > >
      > > Montgomery County (combined with Howard County)
      > >
      > > Date:
      > > March 5, 2009
      > >
      > > Time:
      > > 6:30-8:00 pm
      > >
      > > Location:
      > > Glenwood Library, Howard County
      > > 2350 Route 97 â€" Meeting Room
      > > Cooksville, MD 21723
      > >
      > > E. Washington County
      > >
      > > Date:
      > > March 4, 2009
      > >
      > > Time:
      > > 6:30-8:00 pm
      > >
      > > Location:
      > > Washington County Cooperative Extension Office
      > > 7303 Sharpsburg Pike
      > > Boonsboro, MD 2171
      > >
      > > W. Washington County
      > >
      > > Date:
      > > March 5, 2009
      > >
      > > Time:
      > > 6:00-7:00 pm
      > >
      > > Location:
      > > Fort Frederick State Park
      > > Conference Room
      > > 11100 Fort Frederick Road
      > > Big Pool, Md. 21711
      > >
      > >
      > > Updated:   February 26, 2009
      > >
      > > If you need further information, please call 410-841-5922.
      > >
      >





      Express your personality in color! Preview and select themes for Hotmail®. See how.



      Windows Live™ Contacts: Organize your contact list. Check it out.

    • David Thalheimer
      Even though I know little about the pesticides, I am at least able to see the flaws in your assumptions. First of all, we don t have any way to verify that the
      Message 2 of 15 , Mar 5, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Even though I know little about the pesticides, I am at least able to see the flaws in your assumptions.

        First of all, we don't have any way to verify that the pesticides are being applied appropriately. Since contractors have been known to spray children entering school, that tells me they don't have any reasonable restrictions on how they do their job or precautionary measures put in place. How do we know they even mixed the right dosage? Many people die in hospitals each year due to overdoses of medication. Not everyone is good at math.

        Second, we don't know if the dosage that the government deems to be safe for the "general population" (quote from the Maryland Dept of Agriculture) isn't dangerous to those minorities with respiratory conditions or chemical sensitivities. Who is looking out for those most vulnerable?

        Third, without clear warning of sprayings, we the people are not provided the ability to protect ourselves. The government reserves the right to spray anywhere within a 14-day window without notification of changes to the plan. I don't even see a proposed schedule on their web site.

        Fourth, without real research on the cumulative effects of exposure to chemicals in our air, water, and food to a wide variety of people, we really don't know what the risks are. Shouldn't we be able to make the risk assessment rather than having to rely on some state bureaucrat whose job is to support the agricultural interests?

        Most of us may be perfectly safe, but relying on the state government to look out for our interests is not wise. Without checks and balances, we are more likely to suffer the consequences of bad decisions.

        - David T

        --- In howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Anderson <bda_tox@...> wrote:
        >
        > Am assuming that the snarky comment was for me. No snark was intended.
        >
        > Let me ask: how would you PROVE something is "safe" or non-toxic? The answer is, you can't. Everything is toxic; the dose makes the poison.
        >
        > So, back to the issue being discussed, no, no toxic effects would be expected in humans from small exposures to these products applied in the manner that they are intended to be applied.
        >
        > Bruce
        >
        >
        >
        > ________________________________
        > From: cynthia vaillancourt <CynthiaVaillancourt@...>
        > To: howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com
        > Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2009 2:29:39 PM
        > Subject: RE: [howardpubliced] Precautionary Principle...Re: Time Sensitive...public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program
        >
        >
        > Veronika,
        >
        > There have been so many instances of unintentional self-poisoning throughout known human history that it is hard to understand how anyone can deride the concept of prudent caution with such condescending snarkiness.
        >
        > Lead in water pipes, pewter, kabuki make-up...asbestos in pajamas ... ddt ... thalidomide .... des ... xrays on feet to measure for shoes ... to add just a few to your examples.
        >
        > I often wonder how those who were so "certain" there was no risk respond once it does become clear that these exposures did, in fact, create significant problems.
        >
        > Then again ... there are some contradictions in the statement "...would not be expected to produce ANY toxic effects...".
        > "Would not be expected.... " sounds kind of cautious ... but then capitalize "ANY" for effect. What exactly is the message?
        >
        > We REALLY don't think anything bad might happen, so SHUT UP and put your tin foil hat back on and leave the smart people to make these decisions.
        >
        > As for the gypsy moth spraying - it may be reasonably safe. Anyone who accidentally gets sprayed may well not suffer any ill effects. BUT it is only reasonable and prudent to inform people of the spraying so they can take steps to avoid it if they wish.... AND, steps should be taken to make certain children on their way to school will not be sprayed.
        >
        > Cindy V
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > ________________________________
        > To: howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com
        > From: jlcarella@msn. com
        > Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 11:24:29 -0500
        > Subject: [howardpubliced] Precautionary Principle... Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program
        >
        >
        > 
        >
        > Bruce,
        >
        > Do you have the science to support that statement
        > (see email below)? Have you ever spoken with people who became ill from
        > such exposures? Can you explain the rise in childhood cancers, the
        > epidemic of childhood asthma, the alarming rate of childhood diabetes (an immune
        > system disorder) or the other childhood illnesses that are on the rise or the
        > rise in birth defects? Have you sat with a child suffering the ill
        > effects of a pesticide exposure encountered in their kindergarten
        > class?
        >
        > One group that might particularly be worth speaking
        > to is those suffering from asthma (a group directly impacted by the aerial
        > application of pesticides).
        >
        > BTW...these are not isolated exposures. There
        > is a synergistic effect from the numerous exposures that our children are
        > expected to tolerate on a daily basis, which in all likelyhood contributes to
        > the growing concern that is the first generation of children NOT expected
        > to outlive their parents.
        >
        > Do you also speak for the crabs, butterflies, bees,
        > lady bugs and other beneficial living organizes that are destroyed
        > following such applications? Have you studied the impact to the
        > environment, the water you drink, etc? Are you able to explain the
        > feminization of male fish in our local waterways? Are you aware that many
        > of these toxins mimic female hormones or that the male sperm count across the
        > nation is down 50%?
        >
        > We all have much to learn about these issues.
        > For now precaution is the best we can do, which is why I sent the email
        > announcing the public meeting tonight. People have the right-to-know and
        > should be given information on how to protect themselves and their
        > families.
        >
        > Just because a government agency does something,
        > doesn't mean it is safe. DURSBAN was on the market for 30-plus
        > years. The EPA collected data on this pesticide for 30+ years before they
        > banned the chemical. HCPSS used this product for 10 years as a means of
        > pest control in our schools - spraying the product monthy on baseboards as a
        > means of pest control. Perhaps you should contact some of the people who
        > were seriously injured as a result of the legal and EPA approved use of
        > DURSBAN.
        >
        > BTW...in the 1940's 9 out of 10 physicians
        > recommended Camel cigarettes to their patients that smoked. Doctors
        > recommended cigarets to pregnant women, to control morning
        > sickness. How humorous that now sounds.
        >
        > Knowledge is power. The public has the right to
        > know. Decisions made on assumptions are not valid.
        > Advocating for Every Child,
        > ...Veronika
        > Howard County resident and parent
        >
      • Bruce Anderson
        The assumptions and caveats are what they are. If someone does something that is incorrect or uses a product inappropriately, it can cause problems. Doesn t
        Message 3 of 15 , Mar 5, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          The assumptions and caveats are what they are.  If someone does something that is incorrect or uses a product inappropriately, it can cause problems.  Doesn't matter if it's an agent used for pest control or anything else.

          So, what do you do about that? 

          RE: safe doses... the reason I noted the information I did was to provide some perspective.  These aren't the classic pesticides that people think of that cause pharmacologic-toxicologic effects of impairment of cholinesterase.  They function very differently.  The one agent is a bacterium that's been used in "organic" farming for 50 + years.  The other agent has been used extensively throughout the world for decades and has an exemplary safety record.  As I also noted, I am unaware of any reports of toxicity from these agents in people, even in populations of people that have heavy exposures like the folks that apply the product for a living (comparatively large exposures over a long period of time), those working in the manufacturing of these agents (comparatively large exposures over a long period of time), and those that for whatever reason have misued the products and have intentionally exposed themselves to large quantities of the products in an attempt to harm themselves (single, acute, massive exposures). 

          Bruce


          From: David Thalheimer <david@...>
          To: howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2009 3:49:30 PM
          Subject: [howardpubliced] Concerns about 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program

          Even though I know little about the pesticides, I am at least able to see the flaws in your assumptions.

          First of all, we don't have any way to verify that the pesticides are being applied appropriately. Since contractors have been known to spray children entering school, that tells me they don't have any reasonable restrictions on how they do their job or precautionary measures put in place. How do we know they even mixed the right dosage? Many people die in hospitals each year due to overdoses of medication. Not everyone is good at math.

          Second, we don't know if the dosage that the government deems to be safe for the "general population" (quote from the Maryland Dept of Agriculture) isn't dangerous to those minorities with respiratory conditions or chemical sensitivities. Who is looking out for those most vulnerable?

          Third, without clear warning of sprayings, we the people are not provided the ability to protect ourselves. The government reserves the right to spray anywhere within a 14-day window without notification of changes to the plan. I don't even see a proposed schedule on their web site.

          Fourth, without real research on the cumulative effects of exposure to chemicals in our air, water, and food to a wide variety of people, we really don't know what the risks are. Shouldn't we be able to make the risk assessment rather than having to rely on some state bureaucrat whose job is to support the agricultural interests?

          Most of us may be perfectly safe, but relying on the state government to look out for our interests is not wise. Without checks and balances, we are more likely to suffer the consequences of bad decisions.

          - David T

          --- In howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com, Bruce Anderson <bda_tox@... > wrote:
          >
          > Am assuming that the snarky comment was for me. No snark was intended.
          >
          > Let me ask: how would you PROVE something is "safe" or non-toxic? The answer is, you can't. Everything is toxic; the dose makes the poison.
          >
          > So, back to the issue being discussed, no, no toxic effects would be expected in humans from small exposures to these products applied in the manner that they are intended to be applied.
          >
          > Bruce
          >
          >
          >
          > ____________ _________ _________ __
          > From: cynthia vaillancourt <CynthiaVaillancour t@...>
          > To: howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com
          > Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2009 2:29:39 PM
          > Subject: RE: [howardpubliced] Precautionary Principle... Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program
          >
          >
          > Veronika,
          >
          > There have been so many instances of unintentional self-poisoning throughout known human history that it is hard to understand how anyone can deride the concept of prudent caution with such condescending snarkiness.
          >
          > Lead in water pipes, pewter, kabuki make-up...asbestos in pajamas ... ddt ... thalidomide .... des ... xrays on feet to measure for shoes ... to add just a few to your examples.
          >
          > I often wonder how those who were so "certain" there was no risk respond once it does become clear that these exposures did, in fact, create significant problems.
          >
          > Then again ... there are some contradictions in the statement "...would not be expected to produce ANY toxic effects...".
          > "Would not be expected.... " sounds kind of cautious ... but then capitalize "ANY" for effect. What exactly is the message?
          >
          > We REALLY don't think anything bad might happen, so SHUT UP and put your tin foil hat back on and leave the smart people to make these decisions.
          >
          > As for the gypsy moth spraying - it may be reasonably safe. Anyone who accidentally gets sprayed may well not suffer any ill effects. BUT it is only reasonable and prudent to inform people of the spraying so they can take steps to avoid it if they wish.... AND, steps should be taken to make certain children on their way to school will not be sprayed.
          >
          > Cindy V
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > ____________ _________ _________ __
          > To: howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com
          > From: jlcarella@msn. com
          > Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 11:24:29 -0500
          > Subject: [howardpubliced] Precautionary Principle... Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program
          >
          >
          > 
          >
          > Bruce,
          >
          > Do you have the science to support that statement
          > (see email below)? Have you ever spoken with people who became ill from
          > such exposures? Can you explain the rise in childhood cancers, the
          > epidemic of childhood asthma, the alarming rate of childhood diabetes (an immune
          > system disorder) or the other childhood illnesses that are on the rise or the
          > rise in birth defects? Have you sat with a child suffering the ill
          > effects of a pesticide exposure encountered in their kindergarten
          > class?
          >
          > One group that might particularly be worth speaking
          > to is those suffering from asthma (a group directly impacted by the aerial
          > application of pesticides).
          >
          > BTW...these are not isolated exposures. There
          > is a synergistic effect from the numerous exposures that our children are
          > expected to tolerate on a daily basis, which in all likelyhood contributes to
          > the growing concern that is the first generation of children NOT expected
          > to outlive their parents.
          >
          > Do you also speak for the crabs, butterflies, bees,
          > lady bugs and other beneficial living organizes that are destroyed
          > following such applications? Have you studied the impact to the
          > environment, the water you drink, etc? Are you able to explain the
          > feminization of male fish in our local waterways? Are you aware that many
          > of these toxins mimic female hormones or that the male sperm count across the
          > nation is down 50%?
          >
          > We all have much to learn about these issues.
          > For now precaution is the best we can do, which is why I sent the email
          > announcing the public meeting tonight. People have the right-to-know and
          > should be given information on how to protect themselves and their
          > families.
          >
          > Just because a government agency does something,
          > doesn't mean it is safe. DURSBAN was on the market for 30-plus
          > years. The EPA collected data on this pesticide for 30+ years before they
          > banned the chemical. HCPSS used this product for 10 years as a means of
          > pest control in our schools - spraying the product monthy on baseboards as a
          > means of pest control. Perhaps you should contact some of the people who
          > were seriously injured as a result of the legal and EPA approved use of
          > DURSBAN.
          >
          > BTW...in the 1940's 9 out of 10 physicians
          > recommended Camel cigarettes to their patients that smoked. Doctors
          > recommended cigarets to pregnant women, to control morning
          > sickness. How humorous that now sounds.
          >
          > Knowledge is power. The public has the right to
          > know. Decisions made on assumptions are not valid.
          > Advocating for Every Child,
          > ...Veronika
          > Howard County resident and parent
          >

        • cynthia vaillancourt
          Pardon me, but until definitive causes for all illnesses are vetted through God Almighty it is laughable to proclaim with a degree of certainty that would
          Message 4 of 15 , Mar 5, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Pardon me, but until definitive "causes" for all illnesses are vetted through God Almighty it is laughable to proclaim with a degree of certainty that would justify unconcerned exposure to chemicals that are designed to kill living things are safe for humans.

            Chronic small amounts of pesticides don't "cause" changes to the human immune system?  Or maybe it is only a problem for some sensitive individuals?   Darwin must be smiling.  We're just helping natural selection along?

            I can remember for YEARS hearing vaunted government experts deride those cowardly, malingering Gulf War veterans who were chronic complainers of non-specific illnesses just trying to get some ill-gotten gains in the form of disability pensions and health care by INSISTING that there was non such thing as Gulf War Syndrome. 

            Now that they have confessed that there is, in fact,some causal relationship and an identifiable cluster of symptoms I wonder if anyone has taken those pompous a------ out back and smacked them upside the head?

            Unless you have received an edict from on high confirming your position that there is not causal relationship between environmental toxins and chronic systemic illnesses which are not yet fully understood - I cannot imagine why you or anyone would want to take such a position. 

            It is not like anyone is claiming specific proof of a specific cause effect link right now .... what they are all saying is that as intelligent beings who can arguably learn from experience and past mistakes, it would be fool hardy to put oneself or OTHER PEOPLE's CHILDREN in a situation which may potentially be dangerous unless it is absolutely necessary. 

            Poring pesticides on them just doesn;t really seem necessary under the current circumstances.

            cindy v


            To: howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com
            From: bda_tox@...
            Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 11:21:35 -0800
            Subject: Re: [howardpubliced] Precautionary Principle...Re: Time Sensitive...public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program


            Yes, there is science to support the statements that small doses of these specific substances acutely would not be expected to cause any problems in humans.

            Use of pesticides has been associated with a whole lot of things.  Acutely, pesticides (like all substances) can be deadly.  Chronic, small amounts of pesticides don't "cause" the things that you have listed. 

            Regarding lower life expectancy in this generation, that's not a blanket statement about all children.  This story generated a great deal of interest in the media and was based on a New England Journal of Medicine article that was cautioning specifically about the POTENTIAL for children having shorter life expectancy due to complications of being obese. 

            Bruce


            From: Veronika Carella <jlcarella@msn. com>
            To: howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com
            Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2009 11:24:29 AM
            Subject: [howardpubliced] Precautionary Principle... Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program

            
            Bruce,
             
            Do you have the science to support that statement (see email below)?  Have you ever spoken with people who became ill from such exposures?  Can you explain the rise in childhood cancers, the epidemic of childhood asthma, the alarming rate of childhood diabetes (an immune system disorder) or the other childhood illnesses that are on the rise or the rise in birth defects?   Have you sat with a child suffering the ill effects of a pesticide exposure encountered in their kindergarten class?
             
            One group that might particularly be worth speaking to is those suffering from asthma (a group directly impacted by the aerial application of pesticides). 
             
            BTW...these are not isolated exposures.  There is a synergistic effect from the numerous exposures that our children are expected to tolerate on a daily basis, which in all likelyhood contributes to the growing concern that is the first generation of children NOT expected to outlive their parents.
             
            Do you also speak for the crabs, butterflies, bees, lady bugs and other beneficial living organizes that are destroyed following such applications?  Have you studied the impact to the environment, the water you drink, etc?  Are you able to explain the feminization of male fish in our local waterways?  Are you aware that many of these toxins mimic female hormones or that the male sperm count across the nation is down 50%?
             
            We all have much to learn about these issues.  For now precaution is the best we can do, which is why I sent the email announcing the public meeting tonight.  People have the right-to-know and should be given information on how to protect themselves and their families.
             
            Just because a government agency does something, doesn't mean it is safe.  DURSBAN was on the market for 30-plus years.  The EPA collected data on this pesticide for 30+ years before they banned the chemical.  HCPSS used this product for 10 years as a means of pest control in our schools - spraying the product monthy on baseboards as a means of pest control.  Perhaps you should contact some of the people who were seriously injured as a result of the legal and EPA approved use of DURSBAN.
             
            BTW...in the 1940's 9 out of 10 physicians recommended Camel cigarettes to their patients that smoked.  Doctors recommended cigarets to pregnant women, to control morning sickness. How humorous that now sounds. 
             
            Knowledge is power. The public has the right to know.  Decisions made on assumptions are not valid.
            Advocating for Every Child,
            ...Veronika
            Howard County resident and parent
             
             
            ----- Original Message -----
            Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 8:50 PM
            Subject: Re: [howardpubliced] Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program


            Summary:  Typical exposures (e.g., getting unintentionally sprayed as part of typical aerial spraying) to the agents used in the Maryland gypsy moth control program would not be expected to produce ANY toxic effects in people, including children.

            Bruce


            From: cynthia vaillancourt <CynthiaVaillancourt @...>
            To: howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com
            Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2009 8:10:12 PM
            Subject: RE: [howardpubliced] Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program

            OK, so to summarize .... directly spraying over the heads of children and staff who are entering a school building is not a good idea?

            cv




            To: howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com
            From: bda_tox@yahoo. com
            Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 15:56:24 -0800
            Subject: Re: [howardpubliced] Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program


            The labels on the products are what they are. These products are not intended to be ingested or intended to be used as home lice treatments (e.g., where large amounts of product would be directly applied to the person).  In fact, neither product would likely even work as a lice treatment.  Foray (the trade name for a product that contains BT) contains a soil organism that just happens to be an effective agent for control of some insects.  It's used often in "organic" farming.  Dimilin is a growth regulator that impairs formation of chitin in insects.  Chitin is the stuff that makes the insects outer shell hard. Bad for the bugs, not so for people.  Not sure there are even cases of people getting sick from intentionally or occupationally getting exposed to these products despite decades of use around the world. 

            Small amounts of either product from air spraying would not be expected to cause problems in people or (usual) pets... if your pet happens to be a tarantula, would keep it inside the day they do spraying, especially if its about to molt. :)

            Bruce


            From: cynthia vaillancourt <CynthiaVaillancourt @...>
            To: howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com
            Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2009 3:48:16 PM
            Subject: RE: [howardpubliced] Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program

            As reassuring as this is - and as accurate as it may be - there have been so many instances of supposedly "safe" exposures turning out to be anything but safe that it is only reasonable and prudent to avoid any and all unnecessary exposures .... like actually spraying on groups of people.

             I'll bet the labels on these "safe" products don't encourage administering them directly on humans. 

            cindy v




            To: howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com
            From: bda_tox@yahoo. com
            Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 09:50:30 -0800
            Subject: Re: [howardpubliced] Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program


            FYI:  The risks from these agents to humans is exceedingly low.

            Dimelin is a type of pesticide that's not very toxic for people.  Clipped from a major toxicology resource, PoisIndex:
            "In healthy humans, the benzoylphenyl urea insecticides are not considered to pose any significant toxicological risk"

            Foray is actually a soil organism, Bacilus thuringiensis (BT). 
            Wikipedia notes that BT products "are regarded as environmentally friendly, with little or no effect on humans, wildlife, pollinators, and most other beneficial insects."

            Bruce


            From: pamythompson <pamythompson@ yahoo.com>
            To: howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com
            Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2009 1:14:00 AM
            Subject: [howardpubliced] Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program

            Bob , may I simply kneel and address you as genius .
            Let me rephrase my question on a level that reflects your stature ,
            Did the IDIOTS use chemicals , Diflubenzuron or a biological agent Foray either of which you should avoid all human contact with . Do you as a genius know which the IDIOTS sprayed on our children or the concentration used . Are you 100% positive that it was not something like the special lunch program in the 60's when kids in public schools were given special lunch that was radio active and then monitored . No of course not , some IDIOT did not have enough common sense not to spray our children but we should believe that they had enough training to properly mix the insecticide . I am just a fear mongering moron that used to farm over 3000 acres in Howard county that just found out that some IDIOT sprayed our children with poison . I apologize for the earlier moronic outburst and defer to your superior intellect on the subject . What oh Genius did the spray on our children ? Wait , don't answer , I just realized I am too simplistic a moron to do a search of the Internet and not worthy of your answer . Would you like to know all the chemicals I sprayed on my fields , approximately 3300 acres in Howard county and all the chemicals and drugs I used on my livestock that you without a thought consumed and fed to your children . You beter damn well hope I am not moron .

            Who is Ms. Tin Foil Hat that you are so little of a man that you find it necasary to insult in your rant ?

            An Expert on Educational Assessment ? Beyond you being an expert on belittling people I have as yet had the pleasure of your conversation however I would love to have a discussion on the subject of our educational system with you and you can take this last comment as a personal challenge to your intelligence .

            Jack

            --- In howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com, "Bob Rosebrough" <bobrosebrough21045 @...> wrote:
            >
            > Hey, you frickin' Luddite moron how about doing a minor, simplistic search on the Maryland Gypsy Moth Abatement program before you run your pie hole? On second thought, keep up the nonsense as you and Ms Tin Foil hat are so amusing. Goodness, in addition to being an expert on educational assessment you now add toxicology to your bag of tricks. Ever thought about a cross train into the food service or housekeeping industries to complete you resume?
            >
            > --- In howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com, pam thompson <pamythompson@ > wrote:
            > >
            > > What pesticides did these idiots sprat our children with ?
            > >  
            > > Jack
            > >  
            > >
            > >
            > > --- On Tue, 3/3/09, Veronika Carella <jlcarella@> wrote:
            > >
            > > From: Veronika Carella <jlcarella@>
            > > Subject: [howardpubliced] Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program
            > > To: glenelghighschool@ yahoogroups. com, "howardpubliced" <howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com>
            > > Cc: "PTACHC Health & Environmental Issues Committee" <PTACHC_HEIC_ List@yahoogroups .com>
            > > Date: Tuesday, March 3, 2009, 11:32 AM
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Greetings,
            > >  
            > > The public meeting for Howard County is scheduled for
            > >  
            > >
            > > MDA's Gypsy Moth Open House Information session for Howard County residents
            > > Thursday, March 5, 2009  6:30-8:00PM
            > > Glenwood Library
            > >  
            > > In May 2007 two helicopters sprayed pesticides on students and staff (for almost 45 minutes) as they were arriving for school at Glenelg High School.  This practice will continue under the MDA's current procedures. While there are apparently no schools within this year's 20 Howard County Gypsy Moth [GM] Spray Blocks, there will be residential areas sprayed that have children waiting for school buses as well as wind-drift from these aerial pesticide applications. .  People who reside in the spray blocks may opt-out of the program, but must do so in a timely fashion, so are encourage to attend the information session..
            > >  
            > > This is an FYI,
            > > ...Veronika
            > > ----- Original Message -----
            > >
            > > From: Veronika Carella
            > > To: Debbie Ritchie - MD PTA President
            > > Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 11:10 AM
            > > Subject: Time Sensitive... Please announce public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program
            > >
            > >
            > > Debbie,
            > >  
            > > REQUEST:
            > > Good Morning.  The MD Department of Agriculture (MDA) will be conducting Public Meetings to answer questions regarding the 2009 Gypsy Moth Cooperative Suppress ion Program.  Please share this information with our locals asap and encourage PTA members to attend and become informed, so as to allow them to take protective actiion at home, at their schools and in their communities.  It is not yet apparent whether Maryland schools will fall into some of the 2009 spray blocks, however, we do know that there will be residential areas sprayed that have children waiting for school buses.  People who reside in the spray blocks may opt-out of the program, but must do so in a timely fashion.  The news of this week's meeting and those in the following weeks was only just received making wide distribution without your assistance difficult.
            > >  
            > > ISSUE:
            > > As you know, Maryland PTA is concerned about the current practices used in our state to control gypsy moths. In addition to concerns related to how and when certain chemicals are used, we have expressed particular ly concern about the impact of those chemicals on children and other sensitive populations, as well as the impact those chemicals have the environment that we live in, including air, water and soil.  We have worked to increase the practice of Integrated Pest Management in home, community, and schools.  PTA believes that pesticides should only be used as a last resort, and only when all other options have been exhausted.  In the case of Gypsy Moth Suppression, we are aware that there are a number of states, including New York, Delaware, Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut, that no longer use chemical means to control gypsy moths.  Maryland continues to spray Btk and Dimilin as well as other chemicals
            > > via private contractors.
            > >
            > >  
            > > The public is often not aware of this of MDA's Cooperative Gypsy Moth Suppression Program nor its impact to their health, homes, communities, land and waterways.  While the MDA has already identified the spray blocks (ie the blocks of land that will be treated with pesticides applied via aerial application from helicopters) - this information about the spray blocks is not yet being made available to the general public.  This is a tremendous and annual concern, as those within a five mile radius of such applications will in all likelihood experience contact with the pesticides applied - and as in the past, may experience adverse health effects especially those with asthma, weakened immune systems and others in the sensitive population (ie infants and the elderly).
            > >  
            > >
            > > At a minimum, people have the right to know that this is taking place, so that they may take steps to protect themselves.  Only those residents in the spray blocks will received notification from the MDA, other Howard County residents will only be notified via our efforts and those of our local schools systems.
            > >  
            > >
            > > BACKGROUND:
            > > As you know the Gypsy Moth Suppression Program is a voluntary program where residents may request to have their property treated via the aerial application of pesticides.  The MDA's priority in making these applications is to control Gypsy Moths.  It has been acknowledged in both public meetings (including the May 28, 2008 Maryland Pesticide Advisory Committee Meeting and others) and confirmed by the Maryland Department of Agriculture in writing that children will continue to be sprayed with pesticides, as they were at Glenelg HS (Howard County) in May 2007 under the current MDA Cooperative Gypsy Moth Suppression Program.  In addition, the health and environmental effects of Bt and Dimilin (the current pesticides of choice) do not take priority over GM eradication under this MDA Cooperative Program.  The following quotes are from the MDA’s written response to the HCPSS Superintendent' s April 16, 2008 letter of concern to MDA; 
            > >     
            > >       1) "We [MDA] cannot always schedule areas near schools and parks for the first thing in the day and, therefore, can make no guarantee that an area will only be treated before 7:00am"
            > >      
            > >       2) "Our [MDA] primary goal is to conduct a safe suppression program that is also efficient and effective to prevent environmenta l damage caused by gypsy moth infestations to forests and landscape trees."
            > >  
            > >  
            > > Thank you for your assistance in increasing public awareness of this issue.
            > > Advocating for Every Child,
            > > ...Veronika 
            > >  
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > http://www.mda. state.md. us/plants- pests/forest_ pest_mgmt/ gypsy_moth/ gypsy_moth_ public_meetings. php
            > >  
            > > 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Public Meetings
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Allegany County
            > >
            > > Date:
            > > March 10, 2009
            > >
            > > Time:
            > > 6:00-7:00pm
            > >
            > > Location:
            > > Allegany College of Maryland
            > > Continuing Education Building, Room 12
            > > Willowbrook Road
            > > Cumberland, MD 21502
            > >
            > > Anne Arundel County
            > >
            > > Date:
            > > March 5, 2009
            > >
            > > Time:
            > > 7:00-8:30 pm
            > >
            > > Location:
            > > Maryland Department of Agriculture
            > > The Wayne A. Cawley Building
            > > Front Lobby
            > > 50 Harry S. Truman Parkway
            > > Annapolis, MD 21401
            > >
            > > Baltimore County
            > >
            > > Date:
            > > March 11, 2009
            > >
            > > Time:
            > > 7:00-8:00 pm
            > >
            > > Location:
            > > Baltimore County Extension Office
            > > 1840 York Road, Suite J
            > > Timonium, MD 21093
            > >
            > > Cecil County
            > >
            > > Date:
            > > March 10, 2009
            > >
            > > Time:
            > > 7:00-8:00 pm
            > >
            > > Location:
            > > Cecil County Extension Office
            > > 126A East High Street
            > > Elkton, MD 21921
            > >
            > > Charles County
            > >
            > > Date:
            > > March 4, 2009
            > >
            > > Time:
            > > 6:30-8:00 pm
            > >
            > > Location:
            > > Hughesville Volunteer EMS and Fire Department
            > > 15245 Prince Frederick Road
            > > Hughesville, MD 20637
            > >
            > > Carroll County
            > >
            > > Date:
            > > March 9, 2009
            > >
            > > Time:
            > > 6:30-8:00 pm
            > >
            > > Location:
            > > Carroll County Extension Office
            > > 700 Agricultural Lane
            > > Westminster, MD 21157
            > >
            > > Frederick County
            > >
            > > Date:
            > > March 12, 2009
            > >
            > > Time:
            > > 6:30-8:00 pm
            > >
            > > Location:
            > > Frederick County Extension Office
            > > 330 Montevue Lane
            > > Frederick, MD 21702
            > >
            > > Garrett County
            > >
            > > Date:
            > > March 2, 2009
            > >
            > > Time:
            > > 6:00-7:00 pm
            > >
            > > Location:
            > > Ruth Enlow Library
            > > 51 Hershberger Lane
            > > Grantsville, MD 21536
            > >
            > > Harford County
            > >
            > > Date:
            > > March 5, 2009
            > >
            > > Time:
            > > 7:00-8:00 pm
            > >
            > > Location:
            > > Harford County Extension Office
            > > 2335 Rock Spring Road
            > > Forest Hill, MD 21050
            > >
            > > Howard County
            > >
            > > Date:
            > > March 5, 2009
            > >
            > > Time:
            > > 6:30-8:00 pm
            > >
            > > Location:
            > > Glenwood Library, Howard County
            > > 2350 Route 97 â€" Meeting Room
            > > Cooksville, MD 21723
            > >
            > > Montgomery County (combined with Howard County)
            > >
            > > Date:
            > > March 5, 2009
            > >
            > > Time:
            > > 6:30-8:00 pm
            > >
            > > Location:
            > > Glenwood Library, Howard County
            > > 2350 Route 97 â€" Meeting Room
            > > Cooksville, MD 21723
            > >
            > > E. Washington County
            > >
            > > Date:
            > > March 4, 2009
            > >
            > > Time:
            > > 6:30-8:00 pm
            > >
            > > Location:
            > > Washington County Cooperative Extension Office
            > > 7303 Sharpsburg Pike
            > > Boonsboro, MD 2171
            > >
            > > W. Washington County
            > >
            > > Date:
            > > March 5, 2009
            > >
            > > Time:
            > > 6:00-7:00 pm
            > >
            > > Location:
            > > Fort Frederick State Park
            > > Conference Room
            > > 11100 Fort Frederick Road
            > > Big Pool, Md. 21711
            > >
            > >
            > > Updated:   February 26, 2009
            > >
            > > If you need further information, please call 410-841-5922.
            > >
            >





            Express your personality in color! Preview and select themes for Hotmail®. See how.



            Windows Live™ Contacts: Organize your contact list. Check it out.




            Windows Live™ Contacts: Organize your contact list. Check it out.
          • cynthia vaillancourt
            From: cynthiavaillancourt@msn.com To: howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [howardpubliced] Precautionary Principle...Re: Time Sensitive...public
            Message 5 of 15 , Mar 5, 2009
            • 0 Attachment



              From: cynthiavaillancourt@...
              To: howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: RE: [howardpubliced] Precautionary Principle...Re: Time Sensitive...public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program
              Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 19:05:07 -0500

              Pardon me, but until definitive "causes" for all illnesses are vetted through God Almighty it is laughable to proclaim with a degree of certainty that would justify unconcerned exposure to chemicals that are designed to kill living things are safe for humans.

              Chronic small amounts of pesticides don't "cause" changes to the human immune system?  I beg to differ.  Triggers to the immune systems of suseptible individuals cause all sorts of chaos.  Or maybe it is o.k. if it is only a problem for some sensitive individuals?   Darwin must be smiling.  We're just helping natural selection along?

              I can remember for YEARS hearing vaunted government experts deride those cowardly, malingering Gulf War veterans who were chronic complainers of non-specific illnesses just trying to get some ill-gotten gains in the form of disability pensions and health care by INSISTING that there was no such thing as Gulf War Syndrome.  I mean they were really sure, and really smug about it.

              Now that they have confessed that there is, in fact, some causal relationship and an identifiable cluster of symptoms I wonder if anyone has taken those pompous a------ out back and smacked them upside the head?  How much crow would they need to eat to compensate the pain and suffering they caused - on top of the real physical ravages of the diseases/symptoms?

              Unless you have received an edict from on high confirming your position that there is absolutely no causal relationship between environmental toxins and the many chronic systemic illnesses which are not yet fully understood - I cannot imagine why you or anyone would want to take such a position. 

              It is not like anyone here is claiming specific proof of a specific cause effect link right now, or even protesting the prudent use of peticides .... what they are all saying is that as intelligent beings who can presumably learn from experience and past mistakes, it would be fool hardy to put oneself or OTHER PEOPLE's CHILDREN in a situation which may potentially be dangerous unless it is absolutely necessary. 

              Poring pesticides on them - (whether accidentally, through indifference or incompetence, or intentionally) -  just doesn't really seem necessary under the current circumstances.

              cindy v


              To: howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com
              From: bda_tox@...
              Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 11:21:35 -0800
              Subject: Re: [howardpubliced] Precautionary Principle...Re: Time Sensitive...public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program


              Yes, there is science to support the statements that small doses of these specific substances acutely would not be expected to cause any problems in humans.

              Use of pesticides has been associated with a whole lot of things.  Acutely, pesticides (like all substances) can be deadly.  Chronic, small amounts of pesticides don't "cause" the things that you have listed. 

              Regarding lower life expectancy in this generation, that's not a blanket statement about all children.  This story generated a great deal of interest in the media and was based on a New England Journal of Medicine article that was cautioning specifically about the POTENTIAL for children having shorter life expectancy due to complications of being obese. 

              Bruce


              From: Veronika Carella <jlcarella@msn. com>
              To: howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com
              Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2009 11:24:29 AM
              Subject: [howardpubliced] Precautionary Principle... Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program

              
              Bruce,
               
              Do you have the science to support that statement (see email below)?  Have you ever spoken with people who became ill from such exposures?  Can you explain the rise in childhood cancers, the epidemic of childhood asthma, the alarming rate of childhood diabetes (an immune system disorder) or the other childhood illnesses that are on the rise or the rise in birth defects?   Have you sat with a child suffering the ill effects of a pesticide exposure encountered in their kindergarten class?
               
              One group that might particularly be worth speaking to is those suffering from asthma (a group directly impacted by the aerial application of pesticides). 
               
              BTW...these are not isolated exposures.  There is a synergistic effect from the numerous exposures that our children are expected to tolerate on a daily basis, which in all likelyhood contributes to the growing concern that is the first generation of children NOT expected to outlive their parents.
               
              Do you also speak for the crabs, butterflies, bees, lady bugs and other beneficial living organizes that are destroyed following such applications?  Have you studied the impact to the environment, the water you drink, etc?  Are you able to explain the feminization of male fish in our local waterways?  Are you aware that many of these toxins mimic female hormones or that the male sperm count across the nation is down 50%?
               
              We all have much to learn about these issues.  For now precaution is the best we can do, which is why I sent the email announcing the public meeting tonight.  People have the right-to-know and should be given information on how to protect themselves and their families.
               
              Just because a government agency does something, doesn't mean it is safe.  DURSBAN was on the market for 30-plus years.  The EPA collected data on this pesticide for 30+ years before they banned the chemical.  HCPSS used this product for 10 years as a means of pest control in our schools - spraying the product monthy on baseboards as a means of pest control.  Perhaps you should contact some of the people who were seriously injured as a result of the legal and EPA approved use of DURSBAN.
               
              BTW...in the 1940's 9 out of 10 physicians recommended Camel cigarettes to their patients that smoked.  Doctors recommended cigarets to pregnant women, to control morning sickness. How humorous that now sounds. 
               
              Knowledge is power. The public has the right to know.  Decisions made on assumptions are not valid.
              Advocating for Every Child,
              ...Veronika
              Howard County resident and parent
               
               
              ----- Original Message -----
              Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 8:50 PM
              Subject: Re: [howardpubliced] Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program


              Summary:  Typical exposures (e.g., getting unintentionally sprayed as part of typical aerial spraying) to the agents used in the Maryland gypsy moth control program would not be expected to produce ANY toxic effects in people, including children.

              Bruce


              From: cynthia vaillancourt <CynthiaVaillancourt @...>
              To: howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com
              Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2009 8:10:12 PM
              Subject: RE: [howardpubliced] Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program

              OK, so to summarize .... directly spraying over the heads of children and staff who are entering a school building is not a good idea?

              cv




              To: howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com
              From: bda_tox@yahoo. com
              Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 15:56:24 -0800
              Subject: Re: [howardpubliced] Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program


              The labels on the products are what they are. These products are not intended to be ingested or intended to be used as home lice treatments (e.g., where large amounts of product would be directly applied to the person).  In fact, neither product would likely even work as a lice treatment.  Foray (the trade name for a product that contains BT) contains a soil organism that just happens to be an effective agent for control of some insects.  It's used often in "organic" farming.  Dimilin is a growth regulator that impairs formation of chitin in insects.  Chitin is the stuff that makes the insects outer shell hard. Bad for the bugs, not so for people.  Not sure there are even cases of people getting sick from intentionally or occupationally getting exposed to these products despite decades of use around the world. 

              Small amounts of either product from air spraying would not be expected to cause problems in people or (usual) pets... if your pet happens to be a tarantula, would keep it inside the day they do spraying, especially if its about to molt. :)

              Bruce


              From: cynthia vaillancourt <CynthiaVaillancourt @...>
              To: howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com
              Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2009 3:48:16 PM
              Subject: RE: [howardpubliced] Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program

              As reassuring as this is - and as accurate as it may be - there have been so many instances of supposedly "safe" exposures turning out to be anything but safe that it is only reasonable and prudent to avoid any and all unnecessary exposures .... like actually spraying on groups of people.

               I'll bet the labels on these "safe" products don't encourage administering them directly on humans. 

              cindy v




              To: howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com
              From: bda_tox@yahoo. com
              Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 09:50:30 -0800
              Subject: Re: [howardpubliced] Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program


              FYI:  The risks from these agents to humans is exceedingly low.

              Dimelin is a type of pesticide that's not very toxic for people.  Clipped from a major toxicology resource, PoisIndex:
              "In healthy humans, the benzoylphenyl urea insecticides are not considered to pose any significant toxicological risk"

              Foray is actually a soil organism, Bacilus thuringiensis (BT). 
              Wikipedia notes that BT products "are regarded as environmentally friendly, with little or no effect on humans, wildlife, pollinators, and most other beneficial insects."

              Bruce


              From: pamythompson <pamythompson@ yahoo.com>
              To: howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com
              Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2009 1:14:00 AM
              Subject: [howardpubliced] Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program

              Bob , may I simply kneel and address you as genius .
              Let me rephrase my question on a level that reflects your stature ,
              Did the IDIOTS use chemicals , Diflubenzuron or a biological agent Foray either of which you should avoid all human contact with . Do you as a genius know which the IDIOTS sprayed on our children or the concentration used . Are you 100% positive that it was not something like the special lunch program in the 60's when kids in public schools were given special lunch that was radio active and then monitored . No of course not , some IDIOT did not have enough common sense not to spray our children but we should believe that they had enough training to properly mix the insecticide . I am just a fear mongering moron that used to farm over 3000 acres in Howard county that just found out that some IDIOT sprayed our children with poison . I apologize for the earlier moronic outburst and defer to your superior intellect on the subject . What oh Genius did the spray on our children ? Wait , don't answer , I just realized I am too simplistic a moron to do a search of the Internet and not worthy of your answer . Would you like to know all the chemicals I sprayed on my fields , approximately 3300 acres in Howard county and all the chemicals and drugs I used on my livestock that you without a thought consumed and fed to your children . You beter damn well hope I am not moron .

              Who is Ms. Tin Foil Hat that you are so little of a man that you find it necasary to insult in your rant ?

              An Expert on Educational Assessment ? Beyond you being an expert on belittling people I have as yet had the pleasure of your conversation however I would love to have a discussion on the subject of our educational system with you and you can take this last comment as a personal challenge to your intelligence .

              Jack

              --- In howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com, "Bob Rosebrough" <bobrosebrough21045 @...> wrote:
              >
              > Hey, you frickin' Luddite moron how about doing a minor, simplistic search on the Maryland Gypsy Moth Abatement program before you run your pie hole? On second thought, keep up the nonsense as you and Ms Tin Foil hat are so amusing. Goodness, in addition to being an expert on educational assessment you now add toxicology to your bag of tricks. Ever thought about a cross train into the food service or housekeeping industries to complete you resume?
              >
              > --- In howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com, pam thompson <pamythompson@ > wrote:
              > >
              > > What pesticides did these idiots sprat our children with ?
              > >  
              > > Jack
              > >  
              > >
              > >
              > > --- On Tue, 3/3/09, Veronika Carella <jlcarella@> wrote:
              > >
              > > From: Veronika Carella <jlcarella@>
              > > Subject: [howardpubliced] Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program
              > > To: glenelghighschool@ yahoogroups. com, "howardpubliced" <howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com>
              > > Cc: "PTACHC Health & Environmental Issues Committee" <PTACHC_HEIC_ List@yahoogroups .com>
              > > Date: Tuesday, March 3, 2009, 11:32 AM
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Greetings,
              > >  
              > > The public meeting for Howard County is scheduled for
              > >  
              > >
              > > MDA's Gypsy Moth Open House Information session for Howard County residents
              > > Thursday, March 5, 2009  6:30-8:00PM
              > > Glenwood Library
              > >  
              > > In May 2007 two helicopters sprayed pesticides on students and staff (for almost 45 minutes) as they were arriving for school at Glenelg High School.  This practice will continue under the MDA's current procedures. While there are apparently no schools within this year's 20 Howard County Gypsy Moth [GM] Spray Blocks, there will be residential areas sprayed that have children waiting for school buses as well as wind-drift from these aerial pesticide applications. .  People who reside in the spray blocks may opt-out of the program, but must do so in a timely fashion, so are encourage to attend the information session..
              > >  
              > > This is an FYI,
              > > ...Veronika
              > > ----- Original Message -----
              > >
              > > From: Veronika Carella
              > > To: Debbie Ritchie - MD PTA President
              > > Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 11:10 AM
              > > Subject: Time Sensitive... Please announce public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program
              > >
              > >
              > > Debbie,
              > >  
              > > REQUEST:
              > > Good Morning.  The MD Department of Agriculture (MDA) will be conducting Public Meetings to answer questions regarding the 2009 Gypsy Moth Cooperative Suppress ion Program.  Please share this information with our locals asap and encourage PTA members to attend and become informed, so as to allow them to take protective actiion at home, at their schools and in their communities.  It is not yet apparent whether Maryland schools will fall into some of the 2009 spray blocks, however, we do know that there will be residential areas sprayed that have children waiting for school buses.  People who reside in the spray blocks may opt-out of the program, but must do so in a timely fashion.  The news of this week's meeting and those in the following weeks was only just received making wide distribution without your assistance difficult.
              > >  
              > > ISSUE:
              > > As you know, Maryland PTA is concerned about the current practices used in our state to control gypsy moths. In addition to concerns related to how and when certain chemicals are used, we have expressed particular ly concern about the impact of those chemicals on children and other sensitive populations, as well as the impact those chemicals have the environment that we live in, including air, water and soil.  We have worked to increase the practice of Integrated Pest Management in home, community, and schools.  PTA believes that pesticides should only be used as a last resort, and only when all other options have been exhausted.  In the case of Gypsy Moth Suppression, we are aware that there are a number of states, including New York, Delaware, Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut, that no longer use chemical means to control gypsy moths.  Maryland continues to spray Btk and Dimilin as well as other chemicals
              > > via private contractors.
              > >
              > >  
              > > The public is often not aware of this of MDA's Cooperative Gypsy Moth Suppression Program nor its impact to their health, homes, communities, land and waterways.  While the MDA has already identified the spray blocks (ie the blocks of land that will be treated with pesticides applied via aerial application from helicopters) - this information about the spray blocks is not yet being made available to the general public.  This is a tremendous and annual concern, as those within a five mile radius of such applications will in all likelihood experience contact with the pesticides applied - and as in the past, may experience adverse health effects especially those with asthma, weakened immune systems and others in the sensitive population (ie infants and the elderly).
              > >  
              > >
              > > At a minimum, people have the right to know that this is taking place, so that they may take steps to protect themselves.  Only those residents in the spray blocks will received notification from the MDA, other Howard County residents will only be notified via our efforts and those of our local schools systems.
              > >  
              > >
              > > BACKGROUND:
              > > As you know the Gypsy Moth Suppression Program is a voluntary program where residents may request to have their property treated via the aerial application of pesticides.  The MDA's priority in making these applications is to control Gypsy Moths.  It has been acknowledged in both public meetings (including the May 28, 2008 Maryland Pesticide Advisory Committee Meeting and others) and confirmed by the Maryland Department of Agriculture in writing that children will continue to be sprayed with pesticides, as they were at Glenelg HS (Howard County) in May 2007 under the current MDA Cooperative Gypsy Moth Suppression Program.  In addition, the health and environmental effects of Bt and Dimilin (the current pesticides of choice) do not take priority over GM eradication under this MDA Cooperative Program.  The following quotes are from the MDA’s written response to the HCPSS Superintendent' s April 16, 2008 letter of concern to MDA; 
              > >     
              > >       1) "We [MDA] cannot always schedule areas near schools and parks for the first thing in the day and, therefore, can make no guarantee that an area will only be treated before 7:00am"
              > >      
              > >       2) "Our [MDA] primary goal is to conduct a safe suppression program that is also efficient and effective to prevent environmenta l damage caused by gypsy moth infestations to forests and landscape trees."
              > >  
              > >  
              > > Thank you for your assistance in increasing public awareness of this issue.
              > > Advocating for Every Child,
              > > ...Veronika 
              > >  
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > http://www.mda. state.md. us/plants- pests/forest_ pest_mgmt/ gypsy_moth/ gypsy_moth_ public_meetings. php
              > >  
              > > 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Public Meetings
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Allegany County
              > >
              > > Date:
              > > March 10, 2009
              > >
              > > Time:
              > > 6:00-7:00pm
              > >
              > > Location:
              > > Allegany College of Maryland
              > > Continuing Education Building, Room 12
              > > Willowbrook Road
              > > Cumberland, MD 21502
              > >
              > > Anne Arundel County
              > >
              > > Date:
              > > March 5, 2009
              > >
              > > Time:
              > > 7:00-8:30 pm
              > >
              > > Location:
              > > Maryland Department of Agriculture
              > > The Wayne A. Cawley Building
              > > Front Lobby
              > > 50 Harry S. Truman Parkway
              > > Annapolis, MD 21401
              > >
              > > Baltimore County
              > >
              > > Date:
              > > March 11, 2009
              > >
              > > Time:
              > > 7:00-8:00 pm
              > >
              > > Location:
              > > Baltimore County Extension Office
              > > 1840 York Road, Suite J
              > > Timonium, MD 21093
              > >
              > > Cecil County
              > >
              > > Date:
              > > March 10, 2009
              > >
              > > Time:
              > > 7:00-8:00 pm
              > >
              > > Location:
              > > Cecil County Extension Office
              > > 126A East High Street
              > > Elkton, MD 21921
              > >
              > > Charles County
              > >
              > > Date:
              > > March 4, 2009
              > >
              > > Time:
              > > 6:30-8:00 pm
              > >
              > > Location:
              > > Hughesville Volunteer EMS and Fire Department
              > > 15245 Prince Frederick Road
              > > Hughesville, MD 20637
              > >
              > > Carroll County
              > >
              > > Date:
              > > March 9, 2009
              > >
              > > Time:
              > > 6:30-8:00 pm
              > >
              > > Location:
              > > Carroll County Extension Office
              > > 700 Agricultural Lane
              > > Westminster, MD 21157
              > >
              > > Frederick County
              > >
              > > Date:
              > > March 12, 2009
              > >
              > > Time:
              > > 6:30-8:00 pm
              > >
              > > Location:
              > > Frederick County Extension Office
              > > 330 Montevue Lane
              > > Frederick, MD 21702
              > >
              > > Garrett County
              > >
              > > Date:
              > > March 2, 2009
              > >
              > > Time:
              > > 6:00-7:00 pm
              > >
              > > Location:
              > > Ruth Enlow Library
              > > 51 Hershberger Lane
              > > Grantsville, MD 21536
              > >
              > > Harford County
              > >
              > > Date:
              > > March 5, 2009
              > >
              > > Time:
              > > 7:00-8:00 pm
              > >
              > > Location:
              > > Harford County Extension Office
              > > 2335 Rock Spring Road
              > > Forest Hill, MD 21050
              > >
              > > Howard County
              > >
              > > Date:
              > > March 5, 2009
              > >
              > > Time:
              > > 6:30-8:00 pm
              > >
              > > Location:
              > > Glenwood Library, Howard County
              > > 2350 Route 97 â€" Meeting Room
              > > Cooksville, MD 21723
              > >
              > > Montgomery County (combined with Howard County)
              > >
              > > Date:
              > > March 5, 2009
              > >
              > > Time:
              > > 6:30-8:00 pm
              > >
              > > Location:
              > > Glenwood Library, Howard County
              > > 2350 Route 97 â€" Meeting Room
              > > Cooksville, MD 21723
              > >
              > > E. Washington County
              > >
              > > Date:
              > > March 4, 2009
              > >
              > > Time:
              > > 6:30-8:00 pm
              > >
              > > Location:
              > > Washington County Cooperative Extension Office
              > > 7303 Sharpsburg Pike
              > > Boonsboro, MD 2171
              > >
              > > W. Washington County
              > >
              > > Date:
              > > March 5, 2009
              > >
              > > Time:
              > > 6:00-7:00 pm
              > >
              > > Location:
              > > Fort Frederick State Park
              > > Conference Room
              > > 11100 Fort Frederick Road
              > > Big Pool, Md. 21711
              > >
              > >
              > > Updated:   February 26, 2009
              > >
              > > If you need further information, please call 410-841-5922.
              > >
              >





              Express your personality in color! Preview and select themes for Hotmail®. See how.



              Windows Live™ Contacts: Organize your contact list. Check it out.




              Windows Live™ Contacts: Organize your contact list. Check it out.

              Windows Live™: Keep your life in sync. Check it out.
            • Cassie Kilroy Thompson
              Thank you Cindy - As a 7-year survivor of breast cancer, I would just like to add some recent indications that arose from the Sisters (of breast cancer
              Message 6 of 15 , Mar 5, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                Thank you Cindy - 
                As a 7-year survivor of breast cancer, I would just like to add some recent indications that arose from the Sisters (of breast cancer patients) study - they have recently added questions pertaining to mosquito spraying exposure that may have occurred when we were all pre-puberty.  While no one has claimed causation yet, the sudden jump in breast cancer rates seems to be related to girls who were exposed to mosquito spraying during the 60's and 70's.  Cases are also clustered in areas where most houses did not have air-conditioning (self-reported, mind you), i.e., increased exposure .  In the (very) small neighborhood where I grew up in Baltimore County, I am the 6th person that I personally know who was diagnosed with breast cancer, including two mother-daughter pairs (not genetic either, I was BRCA1-2 negative, and my next door neighbor was adopted). Please don't anyone tell my children that they will be okay in 30 years even if you are sprayed accidently with a harmless substance - I wouldn't expect them to believe you.
                --
                Cassie 
                ---------




                On Mar 6, 2009, at 1:08 AM, cynthia vaillancourt wrote:

                Chronic small amounts of pesticides don't "cause" changes to the human immune system?  I beg to differ.  Triggers to the immune systems of suseptible individuals cause all sorts of chaos.  Or maybe it is o.k. if it is only a problem for some sensitive individuals?   Darwin must be smiling.  We're just helping natural selection along?

              • pamythompson
                I actually had a bit to say on this subject but I think what I want to say most is that I am glad that the subject was not silenced . Jack
                Message 7 of 15 , Mar 5, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  I actually had a bit to say on this subject but I think what I want to say most is that I am glad that the subject was not silenced .

                  Jack


                  --- In howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com, Cassie Kilroy Thompson <cassiekt@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Thank you Cindy -
                  > As a 7-year survivor of breast cancer, I would just like to add some
                  > recent indications that arose from the Sisters (of breast cancer
                  > patients) study - they have recently added questions pertaining to
                  > mosquito spraying exposure that may have occurred when we were all pre-
                  > puberty. While no one has claimed causation yet, the sudden jump in
                  > breast cancer rates seems to be related to girls who were exposed to
                  > mosquito spraying during the 60's and 70's. Cases are also clustered
                  > in areas where most houses did not have air-conditioning (self-
                  > reported, mind you), i.e., increased exposure . In the (very) small
                  > neighborhood where I grew up in Baltimore County, I am the 6th person
                  > that I personally know who was diagnosed with breast cancer, including
                  > two mother-daughter pairs (not genetic either, I was BRCA1-2 negative,
                  > and my next door neighbor was adopted). Please don't anyone tell my
                  > children that they will be okay in 30 years even if you are sprayed
                  > accidently with a harmless substance - I wouldn't expect them to
                  > believe you.
                  > --
                  > Cassie
                  > ---------
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > On Mar 6, 2009, at 1:08 AM, cynthia vaillancourt wrote:
                  >
                  > > Chronic small amounts of pesticides don't "cause" changes to the
                  > > human immune system? I beg to differ. Triggers to the immune
                  > > systems of suseptible individuals cause all sorts of chaos. Or
                  > > maybe it is o.k. if it is only a problem for some sensitive
                  > > individuals? Darwin must be smiling. We're just helping natural
                  > > selection along?
                  >
                • Cassie Kilroy Thompson
                  And I am glad I am not the only person up this late (or is it early at 2:22am?) LOL -- Cassie
                  Message 8 of 15 , Mar 5, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    And I am glad I am not the only person up this late (or is it early at
                    2:22am?) LOL
                    --
                    Cassie
                    ---------




                    On Mar 6, 2009, at 2:14 AM, pamythompson wrote:

                    > I actually had a bit to say on this subject but I think what I want
                    > to say most is that I am glad that the subject was not silenced .
                    >
                    > Jack
                  • rgoodri973
                    Thank you Cindy, thank you Cassie, but most of all, thank you Veronika, for your untiring effort - for over a decade - to protect our school children from
                    Message 9 of 15 , Mar 6, 2009
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Thank you Cindy, thank you Cassie, but most of all, thank you Veronika, for your untiring effort - for over a decade - to protect our school children from pesticides and other toxins that affect indoor air quality in our public schools.
                       
                      Cindy brings up a good point, with the Darwinian example.  But Cindy, you are too kind to Bruce in comparing him to Darwin.  Perhaps the callous disregard for the precautionary principal, based on the "science" of toxicology, is more akin to the Nazi "medical" experiments during the Holocaust than to Darwin's natural selection.  Except in this case, the guinea pigs are selected based on geographical area (spraying areas) rather than by religion or some other demographic.
                       
                      Bruce, how do you explain the feminization of male fish in the Potomac River?  Please answer at least one of Veronika's questions.
                       
                      Thank you,
                      Diane
                       
                       
                      In a message dated 03/06/09 01:13:02 Eastern Standard Time, CynthiaVaillancourt@... writes:
                      Chronic small amounts of pesticides don't "cause" changes to the human immune system?  I beg to differ.  Triggers to the immune systems of suseptible individuals cause all sorts of chaos.  Or maybe it is o.k. if it is only a problem for some sensitive individuals?   Darwin must be smiling.  We're just helping natural selection along?
                       
                    • Bruce Anderson
                      The question being asked related to gypsy moth control programs. The agents being used for this program have excellent safety records. They haven t been
                      Message 10 of 15 , Mar 6, 2009
                      • 0 Attachment
                        The question being asked related to gypsy moth control programs.  The agents being used for this program have excellent safety records.  They haven't been shown to produce toxic effects in people from minor acute doses.  They haven't been shown to produce toxic effects in people from moderate chronic exposures.  They haven't been shown to produce toxic effects in people from massive acute exposures. These agents have been used throughout the world for decades. 

                        Bruce


                        From: rgoodri973 <rgoodri973@...>
                        To: howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com
                        Sent: Friday, March 6, 2009 7:01:35 AM
                        Subject: Re: FW: [howardpubliced] Precautionary Principle...Re: Time Sensitive...public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program

                        Thank you Cindy, thank you Cassie, but most of all, thank you Veronika, for your untiring effort - for over a decade - to protect our school children from pesticides and other toxins that affect indoor air quality in our public schools.
                         
                        Cindy brings up a good point, with the Darwinian example.  But Cindy, you are too kind to Bruce in comparing him to Darwin.  Perhaps the callous disregard for the precautionary principal, based on the "science" of toxicology, is more akin to the Nazi "medical" experiments during the Holocaust than to Darwin's natural selection.  Except in this case, the guinea pigs are selected based on geographical area (spraying areas) rather than by religion or some other demographic.
                         
                        Bruce, how do you explain the feminization of male fish in the Potomac River?  Please answer at least one of Veronika's questions.
                         
                        Thank you,
                        Diane
                         
                         
                        In a message dated 03/06/09 01:13:02 Eastern Standard Time, CynthiaVaillancourt @... writes:
                        Chronic small amounts of pesticides don't "cause" changes to the human immune system?  I beg to differ.  Triggers to the immune systems of suseptible individuals cause all sorts of chaos.  Or maybe it is o.k. if it is only a problem for some sensitive individuals?   Darwin must be smiling.  We're just helping natural selection along?
                         
                      • cynthia vaillancourt
                        Really? Decades? As long as that? My, my, then it must be true. It is very brave of you to be so certain that it is ok for OTHER people and OTHER people s
                        Message 11 of 15 , Mar 6, 2009
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Really?  Decades? As long as that? 

                          My, my, then it must be true. 

                          It is very brave of you to be so certain that it is ok for OTHER people and OTHER people's children to be unnecessarily doused or directly exposed to these certainly safe chemicals. 

                          In situations like this I have a little mental exercise to test how I prefer to proceed.

                          Even if it turns out that "current thinking" is definitively correct - and these chemicals are perfectly safe in any amount for any and all people who might be doused - what harm is there in taking steps to effectively avoid dousing people with them?  I'd answer - there is no harm in being careful.

                          However, if it turns out that this is actually a more complicated situation which time and knowledge will prove carries some as yet unknown or unproven effect ... and unsuspecting folks were doused and later must suffer the consequences of your "incorrect assumptions" ... what's the harm in that?  Oh ... well, none for those experts who were not inadvertently sprayed, I guess. 

                          Smug and stubborn - and wrong - have brought all kinds of ills to the world. 

                          Cindy Vaillancourt





                          To: howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com
                          From: bda_tox@...
                          Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 06:28:35 -0800
                          Subject: Re: FW: [howardpubliced] Precautionary Principle...Re: Time Sensitive...public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program


                          The question being asked related to gypsy moth control programs.  The agents being used for this program have excellent safety records.  They haven't been shown to produce toxic effects in people from minor acute doses.  They haven't been shown to produce toxic effects in people from moderate chronic exposures.  They haven't been shown to produce toxic effects in people from massive acute exposures. These agents have been used throughout the world for decades. 

                          Bruce


                          From: rgoodri973 <rgoodri973@aol. com>
                          To: howardpubliced@ yahoogroups. com
                          Sent: Friday, March 6, 2009 7:01:35 AM
                          Subject: Re: FW: [howardpubliced] Precautionary Principle... Re: Time Sensitive... public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program


                          Thank you Cindy, thank you Cassie, but most of all, thank you Veronika, for your untiring effort - for over a decade - to protect our school children from pesticides and other toxins that affect indoor air quality in our public schools.
                           
                          Cindy brings up a good point, with the Darwinian example.  But Cindy, you are too kind to Bruce in comparing him to Darwin.  Perhaps the callous disregard for the precautionary principal, based on the "science" of toxicology, is more akin to the Nazi "medical" experiments during the Holocaust than to Darwin's natural selection.  Except in this case, the guinea pigs are selected based on geographical area (spraying areas) rather than by religion or some other demographic.
                           
                          Bruce, how do you explain the feminization of male fish in the Potomac River?  Please answer at least one of Veronika's questions.
                           
                          Thank you,
                          Diane
                           
                           
                          In a message dated 03/06/09 01:13:02 Eastern Standard Time, CynthiaVaillancourt @... writes:
                          Chronic small amounts of pesticides don't "cause" changes to the human immune system?  I beg to differ.  Triggers to the immune systems of suseptible individuals cause all sorts of chaos.  Or maybe it is o.k. if it is only a problem for some sensitive individuals?   Darwin must be smiling.  We're just helping natural selection along?
                           



                          Express your personality in color! Preview and select themes for Hotmail®. See how.
                        • David Thalheimer
                          I believe Veronica said that the supposedly harmless biological agent is combined with chemicals to allow it to stick to the leaves. So, even if the substance
                          Message 12 of 15 , Mar 9, 2009
                          • 0 Attachment
                            I believe Veronica said that the supposedly harmless biological agent is combined with chemicals to allow it to stick to the leaves. So, even if the substance intended to be sprayed is harmless, there may be unintended consequences that have not even been studied. Ask the wrong questions, get the wrong answers. Typical. That's why we often hear that "no toxic effects have been shown...."

                            The real question is what are we going to do about this other than complain? I think we need more public oversight with checks and balances. We need someone other than the MD Dept of Agriculture to be able to make spraying decisions and initiate studies. We need our legislators to listen to us....

                            - David T

                            --- In howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com, cynthia vaillancourt <CynthiaVaillancourt@...> wrote:
                            >
                            >
                            > Really? Decades? As long as that?
                            >
                            > My, my, then it must be true.
                            >
                            > It is very brave of you to be so certain that it is ok for OTHER people and OTHER people's children to be unnecessarily doused or directly exposed to these certainly safe chemicals.
                            >
                            > In situations like this I have a little mental exercise to test how I prefer to proceed.
                            >
                            > Even if it turns out that "current thinking" is definitively correct - and these chemicals are perfectly safe in any amount for any and all people who might be doused - what harm is there in taking steps to effectively avoid dousing people with them? I'd answer - there is no harm in being careful.
                            >
                            > However, if it turns out that this is actually a more complicated situation which time and knowledge will prove carries some as yet unknown or unproven effect ... and unsuspecting folks were doused and later must suffer the consequences of your "incorrect assumptions" ... what's the harm in that? Oh ... well, none for those experts who were not inadvertently sprayed, I guess.
                            >
                            > Smug and stubborn - and wrong - have brought all kinds of ills to the world.
                            >
                            > Cindy Vaillancourt
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > To: howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com
                            > From: bda_tox@...
                            > Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 06:28:35 -0800
                            > Subject: Re: FW: [howardpubliced] Precautionary Principle...Re: Time Sensitive...public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > The question being asked related to gypsy moth control programs. The agents being used for this program have excellent safety records. They haven't been shown to produce toxic effects in people from minor acute doses. They haven't been shown to produce toxic effects in people from moderate chronic exposures. They haven't been shown to produce toxic effects in people from massive acute exposures. These agents have been used throughout the world for decades.
                            >
                            > Bruce
                            >
                            > From: rgoodri973 <rgoodri973@...>
                            > To: howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com
                            > Sent: Friday, March 6, 2009 7:01:35 AM
                            > Subject: Re: FW: [howardpubliced] Precautionary Principle...Re: Time Sensitive...public meetings on 2009 Gypsy Moth Suppression Program
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > Thank you Cindy, thank you Cassie, but most of all, thank you Veronika, for your untiring effort - for over a decade - to protect our school children from pesticides and other toxins that affect indoor air quality in our public schools.
                            >
                            > Cindy brings up a good point, with the Darwinian example. But Cindy, you are too kind to Bruce in comparing him to Darwin. Perhaps the callous disregard for the precautionary principal, based on the "science" of toxicology, is more akin to the Nazi "medical" experiments during the Holocaust than to Darwin's natural selection. Except in this case, the guinea pigs are selected based on geographical area (spraying areas) rather than by religion or some other demographic.
                            >
                            > Bruce, how do you explain the feminization of male fish in the Potomac River? Please answer at least one of Veronika's questions.
                            >
                            > Thank you,
                            > Diane
                            >
                            >
                            > In a message dated 03/06/09 01:13:02 Eastern Standard Time, CynthiaVaillancourt @... writes:
                            >
                            > Chronic small amounts of pesticides don't "cause" changes to the human immune system? I beg to differ. Triggers to the immune systems of suseptible individuals cause all sorts of chaos. Or maybe it is o.k. if it is only a problem for some sensitive individuals? Darwin must be smiling. We're just helping natural selection along?
                            >
                            >
                            > Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the web. Get the Radio Toolbar!
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > _________________________________________________________________
                            > Express your personality in color! Preview and select themes for Hotmail®.
                            > http://www.windowslive-hotmail.com/LearnMore/personalize.aspx?ocid=TXT_MSGTX_WL_HM_express_032009#colortheme
                            >
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.