18
Feb
Congressional Reps Want EPA Review of Glyphosate-2,4-D Mixture Enlist Duo
(Beyond Pesticides, February 18, 2016) Last week, 35 members of Congress, led by Representatives Earl Blumenauer (OR-3) and Peter DeFazio (OR-4), signed a letter to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Gina McCarthy, challenging EPA’s review process for the glyphosate and 2,4-D herbicide mixture, known as Enlist Duo. It is produced by Dow AgroSciences for use in genetically engineered crops. The letter requests “more information about EPA’s plan to reevaluate Enlist Duo’s health and environmental risks.” The letter comes just weeks after the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied a request from EPA to vacate its own decision to approve the toxic herbicide cocktail. Because of the court’s decision, EPA is solely responsible for the decision about Enlist Duo’s registration.
“This is part of a vicious cycle that is leading to more potent, dangerous chemicals being widely used on crops across the United States,” said Rep. Blumenauer. He continued, “With the rise of herbicide-resistant genetically modified crops, herbicides are more widely sprayed causing weeds to grow more resistant — ultimately, requiring the application of even stronger herbicides. EPA must take action to make sure products entering the market to be used on our food are safe for human health and the environment.”
In November, 2015, EPA voluntarily revoked the registration of Dow’s Enlist Duo based on new information on the toxic effects associated with the synergistic interactions of the chemical cocktail, including 2,4-D, glyphosate, and other undisclosed ingredients, to plants outside the treated area. In January, 2016, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the revocation in a three-sentence order that gave no reasoning. With EPA facing pressure from environmental groups and Dow’s legal team, it will have to choose whether it will cancel the pesticides, acknowledging the imminent hazard and removing it from the market immediately, or undergo a lengthy cancellation process that may not resolve the issues at hand. Additionally, to protect farmers and dealers, EPA could issue a product notice immediately, identifying new issues and findings that were not available at the time of registration.
Enlist Duo has been marketed as a “solution” for the control of glyphosate-resistant weeds brought on by the widespread use of the chemical on glyphosate-tolerant (Roundup Ready) crops over the last decade. These super weeds now infest tens of millions of acres of U.S. farmland. However, independent and USDA scientists predict that the Enlist Duo “crop system” will only foster resistance to 2,4-D in addition to glyphosate, thus continuing the GE crop pesticide treadmill and escalating the cycle of more toxic pesticides in the environment. Additionally, the health effects of both 2,4-D and glyphosate are well documented. 2,4-D has been linked to soft tissue sarcoma, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL), neurotoxicity, kidney/liver damage, and harm to the reproductive system. Glyphosate has been recently classified as a human carcinogen based on laboratory studies by the World Health Organization (WHO) in March.
In the letter addressed to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, the U.S. Representatives suggest EPA use the “utmost caution in assessing the safety of Enlist Duo before approving it for continued use.” It goes on to cite the concerns of the future analysis process: “We are troubled by reports that the EPA plans to conduct an extremely limited reanalysis of Enlist Duo’s harms, questioning only whether a larger no-spray zone is needed to protect endangered plants that grow close to farm fields.” The legislators suggest that EPA review WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer’s finding that glyphosate is “probably carcinogenic to humans” and investigate studies that indicate Enlist Duo’s fatal effect on the monarch butterfly population.
“The relentless pursuit of herbicide-resistant crops by corporate agriculture has created a toxic treadmill in our food system,” said Rep. DeFazio. “It’s hard to believe that we are now debating whether or not a probable carcinogen such as glyphosate is safe to use on the food that we feed our children. The EPA needs to stand up against the pressures from the pesticide and agriculture industry and thoroughly assess the environmental and health impacts of this toxic chemical and reject it if the science shows there will be harm.”
Beyond Pesticides has long advocated a regulatory approach that prohibits high hazard chemical use and requires alternative assessments. Beyond Pesticides suggests an approach that rejects uses and exposures deemed acceptable under risk assessment calculations filled with uncertainty, and instead focuses on safer alternatives that are proven effective, such as organic agriculture, which prohibits the vast majority of toxic chemicals.
All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.
Source: Rep. Peter DeFazio
