Atrazine: Why is the EPA protecting a poison?

You know one of my favorite things to do is dig up ignored government documents on everybody's favorite poison, Atrazine. Well I found some damning meeting minutes from a panel reviewing the EPA and they ain't pretty! Apparently Atrazine is just as horrible as we suspected. Who invited this kid to the party, amirate? I'm here to ask a few questions. Why is the EPA still protecting Atrazine? Two years after critical panel review implicating Atrazine with cancer cases, why is Atrazine still on the market? Does the EPA really have the interests of American public health at heart?

Two years ago, in July 2011, an independent panel reviewed the EPA's assessment of Atrazine and its weak conclusion that despite a correlation between Atrazine exposure and cancer, the EPA couldn't definitively say "Atrazine = cancer". Well hoody ho, whatayaknow, the independent panel reviewing the EPA's research disagreed. Here is a screen shot from the minutes of the final meeting, which was released July 28, 2011:

Screen Shot 2013-08-28 at 4.30.33 AM

 

As a matter of fact, the panel was highly critical of the EPA throughout the entire 114 page document. (I'd link it, but it was released as a PDF. If someone internet-smart wants to tell me how to do that, I'd love to give the world a copy. UPDATE! Click here for the PDF file of these minutes and take a gander for yourself!)

TWO YEARS? People, that was two years ago and all the EPA has done about Atrazine is smile weakly and let our water continue to be contaminated.

So, let's review. An independent panel questions the EPA's conclusions about cancer and Atrazine. Also, I posted a few weeks ago that despite the proven risk to human health caused by RoundUp (glyphosate) levels above 20 parts per million, the EPA recently doubled the allowable limit to 40 ppm. Is the EPA really the "environmental protection agency" at all, or is it more of an economic agency interested in the profits of private companies?

What would be interesting is if these public health scandals would be treated with the same media interest as political sexting scandals or raunchy pop star VMA performances. What if EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy's decision about RoundUp were as TMZ-worthy as Miley Cyrus? Maybe we'd, I dunno, care about being poisoned?

Screen Shot 2013-08-28 at 9.20.05 AM

Administrator of the EPA Gina McCarthy, how dare you corrode the moral fiber of the federal agency protecting the environment and human health? Also, cool suit.

----

Jenna Karvunidis has a Facebook page!

Also, sign my petition against the EPA for allowing a harmful herbicide, known to cause the birth defects that claimed my daughter, to continue to contaminate our public water supply. Don't get sick, get MAD!

Type your email address in the box and click the "create subscription" button. My list is completely spam free, and you can opt out at any time.

Filed under: Poison in the well!

Leave a comment