Eleven Ways The EPA Fails to Regulate Pesticides 

The draft of the MAHA Strategy report falls short of delivering what is needed to Make America Healthy Again - and the pesticide companies are celebrating.

While the report raises many excellent points and topics, such as its commitment to researching the "root cause" of autism, air and water quality, and improving data collection and analysis on vaccine injuries, the report's statement on pesticides is profoundly disappointing.  We are thrilled that this administration will create the task force groups - such as new working groups and research into health issues, including a task force focused on chronic disease.

The one sentence on pesticide strategy, which is supposed to support American children to have better health, states: "EPA, partnering with food and and agricultural stakeholders, will work to ensure that the public has awareness and confidence in EPA's robust pesticide review procedures and how that relates to the limiting of risk for users and the general public.“

This means the EPA is going to educate us on their pesticide review process.

That’s beyond laughable. It’s an embarrassment. It's an insult to the intelligence of the American people. A stalling tactic with dangerous and deadly results.

Let’s just say the EPA makes a page on their website to better explain their review process.

The question is, what will the impact be - will our children have better health because the EPA puts words on their website?

No.

Will the amount of pesticides that cause cancer, birth defects, infertility, sterility, mental health issues such as depression and suicide be diminished because the EPA has educated the American public about the "robust pesticide review process“?

No.

Moms Across America (MAA), a group of mothers who were simply tired of seeing their children get sick, has been sharing the facts about the EPA review process for years.

We have met with the EPA five times and have communicated with numerous world-renowned scientists and lawyers about their process. We know.

1. The EPA does not review the final formulation of any pesticide product. They only review ONE ingredient and then issue a blanket approval to all of the pesticide formulations that contain that chemical - no matter what the other ingredients are. This means the full formulas of pesticides (which include herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides) as used on our food crops and approved by the EPA have NEVER actually been proven safe.
   
   
2. They do not review the synergistic effects of the multitude of chemicals in a formulation. Nor do they review the synergistic effects of using multiple pesticide products on one crop or multiple crops.
   
   
3. The EPA pesticide review process does not require any long-term animal studies with blood analysis on the chemicals that they do review. The pesticide review board director admitted this to us, in person; they do not have a single long-term animal study with blood analysis on any formulation of Roundup ( there are hundreds of them, he said). They only require short-term studies.
   
   
4. According to one meeting we had with the EPA, they are not allowed to review studies on pesticides that show multigenerational effects, such as the fourth generation of rats whose mother consumed Roundup being infertile and not viable.
   
   
5. French scientist Seralini has shown that heavy metals are present in Roundup formulations, such as arsenic, coming from petroleum sludge ingredients. Arsenic is a known poison, not permitted for application on food at any level. Therefore, any pesticides with any heavy or toxic metals must not be permitted to be sprayed on food crops.
   
   
6. 100% of the new pesticides approved by this administration contain PFAS, a known “forever chemical” that causes cancer, hormone disruption, liver and thyroid problems, reproductive harm, and abnormal fetal development.
   
   
7. The allowable levels of pesticides that the EPA allows are not based on health or independent science. For instance, the allowable levels of glyphosate residues are 30,000 ppb (30 ppm) on wheat. Levels of 0.1 ppb of glyphosate have been shown to cause liver, kidney, and sex hormone damage. Furthermore, if the allowable levels of glyphosate were based on health, the allowable levels would be the same on every crop, .05 ppb for instance, not 30 ppm on wheat, 13 ppm on corn, and 100 ppm on peppermint. These levels are based on industry USE, not health or safety, not on science.
   
   
8. The allowable levels of pesticides, particularly glyphosate, do not take into account that the crop uptakes glyphosate and higher concentrations are found in the fruit or seed of the plant. The accumulated effect is not considered in the Allowable Daily Intake (ADI) and is thereby faulty. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency halted its reapproval of glyphosate based on this issue. The USA ADI of glyphosate is 3.5 times as high as the European Union.
   
   
9. The EPA determinations of allowable levels of pesticide residues fail to take into account that, according to Kaiser Permanente 33% of Asians, 25% of Hispanics and African Americans, and 15% of Caucasians have the MTFHR gene variant, which impairs their ability to detox chemicals and heavy metals. Therefore, the harmful pesticide residues allowed on our food supply do not account for and will cause harm to a considerable portion of our population at any level.
   
   
10. According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), (link here - 10-year-old data, this number is likely far higher), the EPA has allowed over 4000 pesticides for use under an emergency use authorization process, meaning they have had absolutely no safety testing at all. Many of these pesticides have been allowed for use for 12 years with zero safety studies. That is not a "robust" review process.
    
    
11. 1,157 approved pesticide ingredients are used in 57,331 pesticide branded products for use in our food supply, at least 86 of those chemicals are banned in other countries because they cause serious health effects such as infertility, sterility, birth defects such as micropenis and penis malformation, androgenization of baby girls, neurological damage, nervous system damage, autism symptoms, liver and kidney disease, and cancer. Our research shows that 78% of those 86 cause reproductive damage, the other 22% may cause reproductive harm, but studies simply have not been done to determine their effects one way or another.

If the Trump administration were to ban the 86 pesticides that have been banned in other countries, farmers would have 1,067 pesticide chemicals left in their toolbox that comprise tens of thousands of branded products. And trade agreements would be strengthened; no country wants to import our grains with chemicals such as Atrazine on them that they have banned. Atrazine turned male frogs into hermaphrodites, homosexual, and/or asexual.

This MAHA Commission Report's section on pesticides was clearly influenced by chemical corporations. It is not a depiction of Robert F Kennedy's commitment; it is a display of many people whose names are on the report, pandering to pesticide company profits and catering to the convenience of agrochemical farmers.

All the report had to say was that they would be striving to reduce our children's exposure to pesticides, as Trump said: "We're going to get toxic chemicals out of our environment, and we're going to get them out of our food supply. We're going to get them out of our bodies."

The section on pesticides in the MAHA report is an insult to the American people and our President.

To say that the EPA has a robust pesticide review department is the biggest joke in American history.

And it's not funny. It's deadly.

Now is the time for President Trump to fulfill his promise to the American people to get pesticides out of the food supply.

Trump has stated that "Unlike other administrations, we will not be silenced or intimidated by the corporate lobbyists or special interests.“
He added, regarding the MAHA Commission strategy, "I want this group to do what they have to do." In some cases, it won't be nice, or it won't be pretty, but we have to do it.“

Now is the time for courage.
Now is the time for President Trump to require that the EPA ban the use of the 86 pesticides that have been banned in other countries.
Now is the time for our country to stop using synthetic chemical drying agents on crops that Europe does not allow.
Now is the time to support farmers to switch to regenerative organic farming.

Making bold changes may be "not nice“ or "pretty“, but neither is watching your child have seizures, countless doctor's appointments from autoimmune disease, slip away from you into a void of autism, suffer from cancer, or die.

Our mothers are going to continue to not only raise awareness to combat the influence that the chemical companies continue to exert on this administration, but we are going to put people into office who will put children, health, safety, and America's future first. We will not compromise our children's health. And we will not sit idly by while chemical companies corrupt our democracy and the future of our country.

We are calling on President Trump to be the hero that many of us elected him to be.

At a campaign rally in Arizona, Trump promised to safeguard America’s children from pesticides in food. He said, “Millions and millions of Americans who want clean air, clean water and a healthy nation, have concerns about toxins in our environment and pesticides in our food. That’s why today I am repeating my pledge to establish a panel of top experts working with Bobby to investigate what is causing the decades-long increase in chronic health problems and childhood diseases.”