In a "major victory for public health," the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit on Thursday ruled the Trump administration illegally blocked a ban on chlorpyrifos—a pesticide linked to brain development delays in children and nervous systems issues for all people and animals exposed to it—and ordered that it be outlawed within 60 days.
Such products should be tested upon the corporate hierarchy at concentrations directly proportional to compensation–by enema.
Compensation? What is this compensation? My dead friends from The Farm Belt would like to know where they can find this thing you call compensation.
What does this say about the dangers of VACCINES which this government continues
to back and push via our corrupt CDC?
How far is this from also allowing VACCINES to destroy the brains of children – with
learning disabilities and all the way to Autism – ???
And for the elderly, pushing VACCINES which may be killing their brains - Alzheimer’s.
Doesn’t all of this point to a positive answer as to whether this fascist government is willing
to kill citizens to limit the threat to them they may feel from active, intelligent, educated and
healthy, mobile citizens?
The Environmental Protection Agency needs to live up to its name. It is not the Corporate Profits Protection Agency although you would never know it since Trump took office.
Chlorpyrifos is one of the only known causative agents of autism by exposure of the mother while the child is 1st - 2nd trimester in utero. This has been known for years. But only now, with a court action, it’s it not sprayed on food…
The pay and/or stock-option packages of board of directors members, CEOs, and the like.
I am afraid those you wish to test these products on, already have brain development issues.
Now it’s time to ban neonicitinoids, the bee-killing pesticides that are added to the soil for absorption into the root system of crops, greenhouses, and yes, those flowers you get from Home Depot and Loews that will kill the pollinators who depend on them, including bees and butterflies. This evil corporation will make anything that sells, without the slightest care for the environment, much like trump, whose campaign they donated a million or more to.
Pictures of what glyphosate did to farmer’ kids in Colombia, unreal. It was sprayed on coca, but hit the farmers gardens too, maybe, the people too.
The EPA lost sight of its mission shortly after its inception under both D & R administrations. Read EPA whistleblower’s book “Poison Spring”. It’s all there. The D’s have just as much blood on their hands as the R’s.
Maybe their brains are fully developed. Maybe they are just overcharged sociopaths and grifters?
Going after individual toxic chemicals, though worthy, is not going to stop the overall poisoning of the environment, our food, and people.
The thing that needs to be addressed is the regulatory system itself. Currently and as originally intended, the regulatory agencies like the EPA and USDA are just regulating the level of harm, not stopping it. They literally make the harm/poisoning legal by issuing permits or “safe” levels of these poisons on our food, in the water, in our soils and in the environment etc. And those regulations are written by and for the chemical and big ag corporate giants for their financial well being, not for the benefit of the people or the planet.
And unfortunately, the chain of command in the EPA and other cabinets are political appointees like Pruitt and the new guy (I forgot his name). I think what needs to happen is that after a presidential election, a committee of non-partisan top scientists would field the president names of potential candidates to lead the EPA. The president would have to side with science and pick from that list.
I really like this idea of qualified scientists/experts fielding the candidates for positions in ALL of the regulatory agencies! So what do “we the people” have to do to make that happen?
It’s very possible if we elect lots of progressives. It’s impossible if we have another election where the millennials don’t show up to the polls. If enough people vote, we can get rid of the corruption or at least temper it with common sense solutions. The difficult part is convincing young people, who are naturally skeptical of a democracy that seems to have failed them, that their vote does matter.