Emily
Editor, Senior Moderator
http://www.wjla.com/articles/2012/05/maryland-lyme-disease-study-draws-controversy--76452.html
Some neighbors not participating in the study are also concerned about the chemical.
I have to question why this chemical is even being considered for broad usage in residential neighborhoods to prevent a disease that is treatable with antibiotics and preventable in other ways.
And why spend tax dollars researching bifenthrin at all when the CDC website already lists it as an effective tick control product. Why not research safer alternatives?
http://extoxnet.orst.edu/pips/bifenthr.htm
[snip]
Carcinogenic Effects: There was no evidence of cancer in a 2-year study of rats who ate as much as 10 mg/kg/day of bifenthrin. However, an 87 week feeding study of mice with doses of 7, 29, 71, and 86 mg/kg showed a significantly higher, dose related trend of increased tumor incidence in the male urinary bladder (63, 67). The incidence was significantly increased at 86 mg/kg/day. Also, females had higher incidences of lung cancer than the controls at doses of 7 mg/kg and higher (67). The EPA has classified bifenthrin as a class C carcinogen, a possible human carcinogen (11, 63).
[snip]
ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS
ETA:
The information in this next article might offer the rationale for doing the experiments, and preliminary results suggest the pesticide is ineffective in reducing human disease so that could reduce use of the pesticide, but the issue of disclosure to the test subjects is still there.
Lyme disease tick study stirs dispute
Maryland Lyme disease study draws controversy
By Ben Eisler
May 29, 2012 - 05:12 pm
Hundreds of local families volunteered for the government study, but they say they weren't given the full truth about the dangerous effects of pesticides that would be used on their yards.
[snip]
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has classified the pesticide bifenthrin as a possible carcinogen. The European union recently banned it altogether.
" I'm not convinced or satisfied that we've been properly informed of what the full impact is of this pesticide," Carella continues....
Some neighbors not participating in the study are also concerned about the chemical.
I have to question why this chemical is even being considered for broad usage in residential neighborhoods to prevent a disease that is treatable with antibiotics and preventable in other ways.
And why spend tax dollars researching bifenthrin at all when the CDC website already lists it as an effective tick control product. Why not research safer alternatives?
http://extoxnet.orst.edu/pips/bifenthr.htm
[snip]
Carcinogenic Effects: There was no evidence of cancer in a 2-year study of rats who ate as much as 10 mg/kg/day of bifenthrin. However, an 87 week feeding study of mice with doses of 7, 29, 71, and 86 mg/kg showed a significantly higher, dose related trend of increased tumor incidence in the male urinary bladder (63, 67). The incidence was significantly increased at 86 mg/kg/day. Also, females had higher incidences of lung cancer than the controls at doses of 7 mg/kg and higher (67). The EPA has classified bifenthrin as a class C carcinogen, a possible human carcinogen (11, 63).
[snip]
ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS
- Effects on Birds: Bifenthrin is moderately toxic to many species of birds (61). The dietary concentration (8 day) at which half of the test animals die, the LC50, is 1,280 ppm for mallard ducks and 4,450 ppm for bobwhite quail (65). The acute oral LD50 is 1,800 mg/kg for bobwhite quail and 2,150 mg/kg for mallard ducks. There is concern about possible bioaccumulation in birds (63).
- Effects on Aquatic Organisms: Bifenthrin is very highly toxic to fish, crustaceans and aquatic animals (61, 11). The LC50 after a 96-hour exposure is 0.00015 mg/l for rainbow trout, 0.00035 mg/l for bluegill, and 0.0016 mg/l for Daphnia (12, 63). Because of its low water soilubility and high affinity for soil, bifenthrin is not likely to be found in aquatic systems.
- Effects on Other Animals (Nontarget species): Bifenthrin is toxic to bees (62).
ETA:
The information in this next article might offer the rationale for doing the experiments, and preliminary results suggest the pesticide is ineffective in reducing human disease so that could reduce use of the pesticide, but the issue of disclosure to the test subjects is still there.
Lyme disease tick study stirs dispute
Maryland families not fully informed of pesticide risks, critics say
By Timothy B. Wheeler, The Baltimore Sun
11:01 a.m. EDT, May 29, 2012
[snip]
Dr. Robert S. Lawrence, director of the Johns Hopkins University's Center for a Livable Future, disagreed after reviewing the packet of information supplied to prospective volunteers. Lawrence said the fact-sheet should have spelled out more clearly that, while nothing's been proven, questions have been raised about the long-term safety and potential impact on humans of bifenthrin.
Preliminary results for all three states from the first year of the study indicate that the yards treated with pesticide had 62 percent fewer ticks overall than the "control" yards sprayed with water, according to officials.
But the people in the treated households reported finding just as many ticks on their bodies as the residents of untreated properties, and there were basically the same number of Lyme disease cases reported in both groups...
Last edited: